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

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Oct 1998

  Oct 1:

   Re: DISPATCH # 104 -- the weekly newsletter of - Wendy Christensen [60]
   UFO Sighted Redland Bay area QLD, OZ - Diane Harrison [15]
   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Neil Morris [86]
   Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects - "GT mccoy" [12]
   Astronomers Detect New Star Energy - Rebecca [89]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - Roger Evans [110]
   Georges Interrupts Aliens Search - Steven L. Wilson, Sr [67]
   The New Nazi-ET Lie? - Tim Matthews [130]
   Re: KGB Crashed Disc - Tim Matthews [26]
   Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds - David Rudiak [52]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Marie Ivey [10]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Jerome Clark [31]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #273 - Alfred Lehmberg [97]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Jim Mortellaro [36]
   Stats Needed - "Ben Field" [9]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Serge Salvaille [13]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Ed Stewart [41]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Jerome Clark [4]
   FSG News: Betty Hill Interview Available For - Scott Carr [21]
   Re: MIB Abduction? - Rick Goldsmith [25]
   Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects - Marie Ivey [5]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Bruce Maccabee [8]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Leanne Martin [24]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Alfred Lehmberg [62]
   P-1947: Mysterious Booms in Western Pennsylvania - Stan Gordon [61]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - GT Mccoy [17]
   Spain's Air Force Reveals Secret UFO Files - Roy Hale [37]
   BAR 199809 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [66]
   Echelon Spy Network - Leanne Martin [118]
   Re: Screening and Discussion w/Budd Hopkins - John Velez [27]
   Re: Voreppe UFO - Joachim Koch [10]
   Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie? - "Serge Salvaille" [12]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Jakes Louw [27]
   Re: KGB Crashed Disc - Bob Shell [15]
   Re: KGB Crashed Disc - Steven Kaeser [41]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Jim Mortellaro [10]
   Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds - Dennis [51]
   Re: KGB Crashed Disc - Jim Mortellaro [40]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Jerome Clark [42]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - Bob Shell [49]
   Re: KGB Files Show - Bruce Maccabee [18]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Serge Salvaille [21]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Sheree Cox [22]
   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Stan Friedman [20]
   A Short Review of Ufology in Croatia - John Hayes [214]
   Re: Stats Needed - Stan Friedman [6]

  Oct 2:

   Lyn Buchanan on Jeff Rense 10/5 7PM Pacific - Skye Turell [31]
   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Stan Friedman [21]
   Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update - Nick Balaskas [20]
   Icelandic UFOs? - "P=E9tur =D6rn Gu=F0mundsson" [11]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Ed Stewart [103]
   Newspapers Sue Website For Posting Copies Of - Stig Agermose [37]
   Circle on Prince Edward Island, Canada - 10-01-98 - Paul Anderson [102]
   Filer's Files #39 - George A. Filer [293]
   Re: Mysterious Booms in Pennsylvania - Stig Agermose [66]
   Re: UK Stats Needed - Larry Hatch [12]
   Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie? - Gt Mccoy [12]
   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Neil Morris [25]
   Re: KGB Files Show - Nick Balaskas [43]
   Re: UFO UpDate: Stats Needed - Kevin Randle [21]
   Another Upgrade Of Oberg/Cooper Website - Jerry Cohen [31]
   TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Donnie W. Shevlin [17]
   Laura Lee Show E-News - October 3, 1998 - webmaster@lauralee.com [134]
   Last call for NUFOC Conference - Karl T. Pflock [64]

  Oct 3:

   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: Icelandic UFO - Larry Hatch [56]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Jerome Clark [20]
   UFO Lecture in Rijeka, Croatia - John Hayes [103]
   Ufology - Some Things Never Change - Ed Stewart [318]
   KGB Files Show - Michel M. Deschamps [11]
   BWW Media Alert 19981003 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [105]
   Re: Icelandic UFOs - Philippe Piet van Putten [11]
   {95} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network - Lloyd Bayliss [154]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Roger Evans [46]
   Re: {95} part 4 - United Kingdom UFO Network - Lloyd Bayliss [454]
   Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto - Daev Walsh - Blather [190]
   {95} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network - Lloyd Bayliss [464]
   part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network - Lloyd Bayliss [597]
   Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts - Roger Evans [65]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Greg Sandow [42]
   'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'? - Stig Agermose [76]
   UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman - United Kingdom UFO Network
   [109]
   Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie? - Gt McCoy [31]
   Re: Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update - Jim Deardorff [32]
   Images from TNT KGB UFO Show? - Werner Walter [6]
   KGB Files Show - Nick Balaskas [11]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Jerome Clark [14]
   Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [168]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Sue Strickland [22]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Robert Todd [75]
   Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts - Larry Hatch [22]
   Re: Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto - Don Ecker [26]

  Oct 4:

   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Stan Friedman [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Roger Evans [70]
   Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'? - Kevin Randle [48]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Jerome Clark [26]
   Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts - Dennis Stacy [29]
   Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'? - Donald Ledger [14]
   Listen The BBC World Service - ARUFON - Croatia [50]
   Re: Snipers & Shooters - Donald Ledger [11]
   Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings - Bruce Lanier Wright [9]
   Re: The Fort Worth Photographs - Bob Shell [20]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com
   [129]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [140]

  Oct 5:

   Not 'Links' But People Facts - Larry Hatch [15]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [13]
   Wave of '73 Web-Site - Kenny Young [11]
   Re: Icelandic UFO - A. J. Gevaerd [23]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [37]
   Undocumented Aliens - Rebecca [155]
   Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'? - Stig Agermose [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [162]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - Bob Shell [129]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [16]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - James Bond Johnson [14]
   Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change - Bruce Maccabee [41]
   Re: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show? - Joachim Koch [15]
   Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'? - Donald Ledger [6]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Larry Hatch [7]
   Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site - Michael Christol [10]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - Roger Evans [90]
   Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie! - Max Burns [32]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40 - Joseph Trainor [580]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [192]
   BBC: A Question Of Science - Jimmy Marinkovicc [346]
   Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change - Ed Stewart [22]
   Re: Book Reveals Secret UFO Investigation - Stig Agermose [54]
   Re: Looks Deceiving - Roger Evans [120]

  Oct 6:

   EM Effect Style Technology Sought By Police - Mark Cashman [22]
   Sightings In Mexico (Apizaco, Tlaxcala - Stig Agermose [43]
   Once-In-A-Generation Meteor Shower This November - Stig Agermose [38]
   Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site - Kenny Young [25]
   Re: Icelandic UFO - Leanne Martin [5]
   UFO UpDates Off-Line Till Friday - UFO UpDates - Toronto [6]

  Oct 9:

   Anne Arundel Co., Maryland, USA Seminar Nov 7 '98 - Steven Kaeser [24]
   UFO UpDates Back On Line - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto [14]
   Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference - Jerry Anderson [36]
   Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk - Bob Shell [102]
   Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts - Leanne Martin [9]
   Sighting: Yakima - Stig Agermose [43]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [198]
   Re: Leo(nids) - Greg St. Pierre [14]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Leanne Martin [10]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40 - Leanne Martin [7]
   Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City - Stig Agermose [32]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [66]
   BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers - Philip Mantle [17]
   Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania - Stig Agermose [40]
   CO2 Crystals Helps Study Of Martian Polar Ice - Stig Agermose [138]

  Oct 10:

   Re: BBC: A Question Of Science - Bruce Maccabee [2]
   "Just Because You're Not Paranoid Doesn't Mean - Rebecca [67]
   'Roswell' Technology Featured In New TV-Series - Stig Agermose [17]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Scott Ribordy [22]
   Re: Looks Deceiving - John White [46]
   Spanish Air Force's Declassification Of UFO Files - Stig Agermose [63]
   The Distance Learning UFO Course - Leanne Martin [52]
   UFOs And Hurricanes - Francisco Lopez [16]
   UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist - Alex Hefman [9]
   Re: UFOs in Hurricanes - Francisco Lopez [27]
   DISPATCH # 105 -- the weekly newsletter of - ParaScope@AOL.COM [114]
   Current Status Of John Ford - Elaine M Douglass [109]
   Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants - Doc Barry [74]
   Blather: No Threat Whatsoever - Blather - Daev Walsh [222]
   TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax' - Steven Kaeser [1]
   Re: Anfalov Anton - Philip Mantle [40]
   Re: BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers - Leanne Martin [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [14]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - James Bond Johnson [38]
   Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City - Jerry Anderson
   [12]
   BBC & UFOs - Giuliano [Jimmy] Marinkovicc [47]
   Re-Scheduling of 'IF' November Conference - John Velez [19]
   Re: Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference - David Baker [22]
   UFOs And EBEs: More Insider Evidence (Linda Howe) - Stig Agermose [637]
   Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts - Larry Hatch [25]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #275 - Alfred Lehmberg [84]
   Re: UFOs in Hurricanes - Scott Caput [14]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Stephen MILES Lewis [66]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [54]
   Re: Looks Deceiving - Roger Evans [27]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [90]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [181]
   The Lunar Conspiracy - Jsmortell@aol.com [22]
   Space Coast UFO Conference: NASA And Newsmedia - Stig Agermose [76]
   Re: BBC & UFOs - Kerry Ferrand [4]
   Filer's Files #40 - George A. Filer [284]

  Oct 11:

   Alex Hefman Says KBG UFO Story Is A Hoax - A. J. Gevaerd [10]
   A Simple Quote - Larry Hatch [10]
   Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned - Bruce Maccabee
   [34]
   Re: The Lunar Conspiracy - "Gt Mccoy" [33]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [32]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Edoardo Russo [5]
   Sonoran Crash 1941 (UFO And Secrecy Since 1940) - Stig Agermose [186]

  Oct 12:

   Aliens Exist - Just Ask The Man On The Moon - Stig Agermose [81]
   Ufology: The Good and the Bad - Matt Helbing [33]
   Re: Looks Deceiving - Steven W. Kaeser [10]
   Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants - Joachim Koch [17]
   Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City - Donald Ledger [5]
   Re: BWW Media Alert 19981011 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [130]
   Re: The Lunar Conspiracy - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist - Leanne Martin [8]
   UFOMIND: Bigelow Group Reveals Personnel - Stig Agermose [64]
   Edgar Mitchell On The UFO Cover-Up - Stig Agermose [100]
   Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax' - Sue Kovios [2]
   Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, East London, - Roy Hale [27]
   Re: The Lunar Conspiracy - Leanne Martin [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Nancy White [36]
   Re: Sonoran Crash (UFOs And Secrecy Since 1940) - Stig Agermose [4]
   Abduction To The Far Reaches Of The Mind - Matthew Favaloro [87]
   Help Wanted: UFO Expert - Roger Evans [85]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Donnie W. Shevlin [16]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #274 - Alfred Lehmberg [75]
   Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax' - Steven W. Kaeser [6]
   Re: The Lunar Conspiracy - Donald Ledger [6]
   Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned - Donald Ledger [21]
   Strieber Keynote Speaker In A 3-Day UFO Conference - Ignatius Graffeo
   [192]
   Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist - Jim Mortellaro [28]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [92]
   Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK - Angelo Zammit [9]
   London, UK Crop Circle Lecture - John Hayes [20]
   People Links: SMiles Lewis - Stephen Lewis [120]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 41 - Joseph Trainor [479]

  Oct 13:

   Art Bell 'Quits' - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto [42]
   Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist - Larry Hatch [19]
   Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK - Tony Spurrier [35]
   NIDS Essay On Astronautical UFO Theory - Stephen Lewis [17]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Alfred Lehmberg
   [35]
   Re: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - James Mortellaro
   [14]
   Re: London, UK Crop Circle Lecture - John Hayes [22]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Leanne Martin [10]
   Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania - Josh Goldstein [5]
   Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Josh Goldstein [67]
   Bell: And So It Begins... - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto [46]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38 - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [10]
   The First Transmute Conference - Niklas Rasche [29]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Steven Kaeser [22]
   Re: A Simple Quote - Serge Salvaille [16]

  Oct 14:

   UFO Formations Seen SSW of Nowra, OZ - Diane Harrison [15]
   Re: Bell: And So It Begins... - Jim Mortellaro [11]
   Re: Art Bell 'Quits' - gt mccoy [11]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Dennis Stacy [10]
   Re: Bell: And So It Begins... - Dennis Stacy [8]
   Re: High Heat - Mark Cashman [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [159]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Stephen Lewis [28]
   MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Jim Deardorff [38]
   Re: People Links - Leanne Martin [26]
   Spectacular New Pictures Of Mars, Jupiter And Its - Stig Agermose [15]
   Re: People Links - Jason Martell [14]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [198]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [91]
   'IF' November Conference Rescheduled - John Velez [19]
   Re: A Simple Quote - Larry Hatch [4]
   DISPATCH # 106 -- the weekly newsletter of - ParaScope@AOL.COM [140]
   Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned - Josh Goldstein [2]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [55]
   Explanation For Crop Circle? - Jorma Kosonen [173]
   Australian UFO Reports And Experiences '98 - #8 - Robert Frola [527]
   Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether? - Ignatius Graffeo [120]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [35]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Steven Kaeser [13]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38 - Edoardo Russo [8]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [12]
   Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [194]
   Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania - Joseph Trainor [4]
   New UFO Book - 'Cosmic Test Tube' - Don Altman [46]
   Art Bell - Bob Shell [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [18]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - James Mortellaro [26]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Bob Shell [6]
   Alice Springs 1999 UFO, Red Centre Outback Camping - Diane Harrison"
   [74]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [34]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - James Bond Johnson [92]
   Art Bell - 'Explainations'? - Jeff Rense [16]

  Oct 15:

   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Dennis Stacy [71]
   Odd Rumblings - Greg St. Pierre [24]
   Re: Art Bell - 'Explainations'? - Jeff Rense [6]
   Patented Subcutaneous Programmable Implant - Stephen MILES Lewis [62]
   Debunking The Debunker? - James Mortellaro [45]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee
   [44]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Kevin Randle [33]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #276 - Alfred Lehmberg [86]
   Re: - Skye Turell [59]
   Re: Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether? - Bob Shell [3]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Jim Deardorff [11]
   Ed Dames - Skye Turell [67]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [54]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [97]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Karl T. Pflock [15]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Steven W. Kaeser [31]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - "Donnie W. Shevlin" [9]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Roger Evans [53]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Kevin Randle [71]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - James Mortellaro
   [92]

  Oct 16:

   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Ed Stewart [87]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [13]
   Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - James Easton [90]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Jim Deardorff [10]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276 - Elaine M Douglass [6]
   Re: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo - James Easton [146]
   Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona - Larry Hatch [15]
   In Defense of Michael Wolf - Ed Fouche [111]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Ed Fouche [9]
   Threats Within Ufology - Sue Lawrence [17]
   Re: Odd Rumblings - Jim Mortellaro [29]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [152]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - James Mortellaro
   <Jsmortell@aol.co [12]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Roger R. Prokic [7]
   Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned - Leanne Martin [33]
   -[For The Record]- C-E: Col. Halt Audio CD-ROM Now - Steven W. Kaeser
   [66]
   -[For The Record]- C-E: New FUFOR Publication - Robert Swiatek [8]
   Vadim Chernobrov - "Anatoly Kutovoy" [9]
   Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Roy Hale [44]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [92]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Leanne Martin [19]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Leanne Martin [9]
   Two More Formations in Saskatchewan 10-15-98 - Paul Anderson [39]
   -[For The Record]- C-E: Wave '73 Additions - Kenny Young [28]

  Oct 17:

   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [23]
   Over and out FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATIO - Ignatius Graffeo [45]
   Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf - Doc Barry [31]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [16]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Alfred Lehmberg [13]
   Bell Books & Kindles Speculation - Terry Blanton [4]
   Art Bell To Make Statement Monday, Oct/19 - UFO UpDates - Toronto [19]

  Oct 18:

   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276 - Alfred Lehmberg [18]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Roger Evans [89]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [58]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Jim Deardorff [10]
   Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Kevin Randle [56]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Kevin Randle [56]
   ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 1 - Stephen MILES Lewis [79]
   Re: Odd Rumblings - Nick Balaskas [27]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - James Bond Johnson [18]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Mark Cashman [13]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [375]
   Steven J. Dick [was: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' - Ed Stewart [51]
   Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note - Neil Morris [13]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - neil morris [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [11]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Tony Spurrier [43]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [43]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Gary Alevy [16]
   Re: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version - Roy Hale [131]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [13]
   Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned - Bruce Maccabee
   [20]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee
   [44]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee [7]
   Lecture On UFOs in Brazil - A. J. Gevaerd [19]
   Psychic Predictions for 1999 - Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research
   [124]
   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links' - Stephen Lewis [86]
   Re: Dr. Wolf - Kathleen Andersen [38]
   Re: Earth Microbes On The Moon - Nick Balaskas [8]
   Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs - Ron Jorgenson [22]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [56]
   Hoagland's Conversation With Bell - Leanne Martin
   <leanne_martin@hotmail.com [45]
   BWW Media Alert 19981017 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [226]
   WBAI 'UFO Desk' Audio Files On-Line - Paul Williams [23]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Gt McCoy" [22]
   UFO Hot Line Numbers For Australasia - Diane Harrison [47]
   Maussan Presents New Footage - Stig Agermose [23]
   UFO Videotaped Over Kunming, China - Stig Agermose [26]
   Recent Scotland UFO Photo July 1998 - Dave Ledger [15]
   New On Video: 'X-Files' Movie - Stig Agermose [150]
   Object Was "Half The Size Of The Moon" - Diane Harrison [21]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Joachim Koch [145]
   Re: Threats Within Ufology - Diane Harrison [29]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [25]
   Crypto-Zoology Help... - David Baker [5]
   Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature - Roger Evans [66]
   Chat with Astronaut Edgar Mitchell - Yvonne Hedenland [11]
   Another Ufo Researcher Passes Away - John Hayes [25]
   Roswell in the 1947 Canadian Press - Ed Stewart [140]
   Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes - James S. Mortellaro
   [45]
   Partial Roswell Index - Ed Stewart [268]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Sue Lawrence [10]
   Re: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down - Donald Ledger [18]
   Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Roy Hale [85]
   Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs - Greg St. Pierre [4]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Greg St. Pierre [11]
   Re: Threats Within Ufology - Max Burns [81]
   Re: Threats Within Ufology - Jim Mortellaro [44]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [11]

  Oct 19:

   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Lesley Cluff [31]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Kathleen Andersen [42]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Max Burns [127]
   Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion - Stig Agermose [78]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [62]
   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The - Bruce Maccabee [43]
   Fall 98 UFO*BC Magazine - UFO*BC - David Pengilly [25]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [46]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee
   [23]
   Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs - Ron Jorgenson [17]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts? - Tony Spurrier [25]
   Re: Threats Within Ufology - Steven W. Kaeser [26]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Bob Shell [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [97]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Sue Lawrence [36]
   Re: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version Of - Sue Lawrence [16]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [90]
   Re: Threats Within Ufology - Roger Evans [45]
   Alms For The Poor? - Roger Evans [69]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [18]
   Whole Life Expo/Budd Hopkins, NY Oct/24 - John Velez [31]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Roger Evans [91]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [33]
   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The - John Velez [29]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Roger Evans [19]
   Re: Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion - John Velez [34]
   Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes - Roger Evans [29]
   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The - Jim Deardorff [11]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Alfred Lehmberg [18]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [17]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [42]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Tony Spurrier [79]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Leanne Martin [8]
   Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes - Jim Mortellaro [18]
   UFO On Football Game - Dave Bauer [7]
   Data Recording Starts For Hyperlink Mail To - Stig Agermose [106]

  Oct 20:

   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42 - Joseph Trainor [511]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Greg St. Pierre
   [17]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Greg St. Pierre [18]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Donnie W. Shevlin [28]
   Bell's 10/19/98 On-Air Statement - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [41]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Bruce Maccabee [7]
   Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf - Bruce Maccabee [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee [3]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media - Bruce Maccabee [6]

  Oct 21:

   Re: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation - Bruce Maccabee [3]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Gary Alevy [5]
   Re: Psychic Predictions for 1999 - Bruce Maccabee [4]
   -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' - - Kenny Young [84]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Kathleen Anderson
   <KAnder6444@aol.com [25]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee
   [101]
   1980 Close Encounter Near Fort Sill Army Base, - Stig Agermose [92]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - John Velez [28]
   Re: Public Urged To Attend Area 51 Hearings - Stig Agermose [132]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Max Burns [168]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Bob Shell [11]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [73]
   Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes - Roger Evans [51]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Jim Deardorff [14]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [56]
   Re: Alms For The Poor? - Bruce Maccabee [2]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [5]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [11]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee [6]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Nick Balaskas [32]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [126]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [38]
   NASA's New Ion Propulsion System - Stig Agermose [82]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Su Walker [34]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - bruce maccabee [5]
   Re: Boris Shurinov? - Philip Mantle [8]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Leanne Martin [9]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42 - John Hayes [19]
   Re: NBC-series 'Project UFO' and Col.Coleman - Werner Walter [16]
   'Crescent' Formation In Ontario - Paul Anderson [52]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Geoff Dittman [38]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Tony Spurrier [20]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Roger Evans [26]
   Colleagues - Joachim Koch [35]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Nick Balaskas [34]

  Oct 22:

   'M.E.' & Abductees - Max Burns [43]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [67]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Leanne Martin [10]
   Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' - - Roger Evans [23]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Greg St. Pierre [17]
   Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative - Jim Deardorff [66]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [98]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [50]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Gary Alevy [20]
   Unidentified Flying Hatchets - Roger Evans [42]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [11]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [49]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - James Mortellaro
   [79]
   UFO Name Change? - Leanne Martin [4]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [49]
   Calling Matthew Favaloro - Roy Hale [5]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Gary Alevy [96]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Sue Lawrence [6]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Sue Lawrence [48]
   UFOs Bending Light - Leanne Martin [41]
   -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project UFO' - Bob Durant [51]
   Dreamland Returns - Dennis William Hauck [9]
   UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Tim Matthews [54]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Skye Turell [7]
   Northumberland Group... - Joseph Trainor [11]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Steven Kaeser [19]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Donnie W. Shevlin [9]
   Re: UFOs Bending Light - Mark Cashman [19]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Rob Irving [6]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Rob Irving [6]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Adam Lowe [20]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [8]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [207]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. [13]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [19]
   Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative - Bruce Maccabee [23]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Max Burns [13]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets - Jimmy 'The Doc' Mortellaro [17]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets - Jerome Clark [30]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [81]
   Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' - - Terry Blanton [14]
   Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes - Sheree Cox [7]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Jim Deardorff [8]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - John Velez [139]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Max Burns [20]
   Re: Colleagues - Jim Deardorff [40]
   Art Bell is Back - Stig Agermose [16]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Tony Spurrier [6]
   Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' - - Steven Kaeser [23]
   UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman - United Kingdom UFO Network
   [110]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Sue Lawrence [5]
   MAGONIA ETH Bulletin 8 - Mark Pilkington [282]

  Oct 23:

   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Sue Lawrence [11]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Donald Ledger [3]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Roger Evans [36]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Sue Lawrence [11]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Susan Baldwin [9]
   Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project - Stan Friedman [11]
   Re: Pine Bush Updates - Vinny Polise [9]
   Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project - Jerome Clark [21]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [111]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research [19]
   HOT GOSSIP - OCT - Georgina Bruni [176]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Nancy White [20]
   Re: Colleagues - Dennis Stacy [47]
   Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative - Jim Deardorff [13]
   Re: Colleagues - Kathleen Anderson [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [44]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [59]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Ted Viens [28]
   Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed - Roy Hale [9]
   Victoria Alexander on #Visitations - Angela Shilling [25]
   Re: Laura Lee Show E-News - October 24, 1998 - The Laura Lee Show [138]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [52]
   Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' - - Roger Evans [21]
   Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Tim Matthews [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [109]
   Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - John Velez [30]
   Re: Art Bell is Back - Bob Shell [6]
   Re: Crop Circles and Ley Lines - Larry Hatch [7]
   Arnold, Roswell and US/Nazi/Japanese Tech - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug
   [517]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Marie Ivey [9]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bob Shell [14]
   Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Jan Aldrich [10]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Adam Lowe [53]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Kevin Randle [8]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Ann Mulvey [19]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Nick Balaskas [18]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [71]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [14]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - John Velez [73]
   UpDates Off-line 'til pm Oct/25 - UFO UpDates - Toronto [6]

  Oct 25:

   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets - Roger Evans [47]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Roger Evans moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com> [38]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - "Roger R. Prokic" [7]
   Sony 'Dream Factory' - Terry Blanton [44]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [44]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier -
   moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com [19]
   Re: Colleague - Roger R. Prokic [9]
   Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed - John Hayes [40]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Jim Mortellaro [87]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - James S. Mortellaro [33]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - John Rimmer [20]
   Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Keith Stevens [60]
   Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Keith Stevens [17]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - John Velez [14]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Serge Salvaille [12]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Diane Harrison [17]
   Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Keith Stevens [60]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Greg St. Pierre [25]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Alex Franz [26]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Lesley Cluff [26]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [37]

  Oct 26:

   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Josh Goldstein [15]
   Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed - Sean Jones [13]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - GT McCoy [15]
   {96} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO Network
   [453]
   Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts - Rob Irving [18]
   {96} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO Network
   [428]
   -[For The Record]- [canufo] Alien Craft Crashes in - Chris Rutkowski
   [218]
   Conference - Paranormal and Superstitious Beliefs - Mark Pilkington
   [46]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Keith Stevens [10]
   Re: UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense? - Keith Stevens [10]
   {96} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO Network
   [470]
   Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light - Rob Irving [9]
   BWW Media Alert 19981024 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [150]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #277 - Alfred Lehmberg [61]
   Stealthy - Sean Jones [7]
   Art Bell Back On Wednesday Night - Stig Agermose [39]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Scott Ribordy [25]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Sharon Kardol [19]
   Higher Consciousness - Christine Fernandes [25]
   Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative - Bruce Maccabee [4]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee [6]
   New Roswell Documents? - Stig Agermose [18]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [7]
   Bill Barry? - Karl T. Pflock [14]
   Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell - Stig Agermose [138]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Susan Baldwin [28]
   Blather: Straddling Two Worlds - Daev Walsh - Blather [179]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Sue Kovios [22]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - John Velez [21]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets - James S. Mortellaro [13]
   Re: [CAUS updates] - From Art Bell to CAUS - Pat Parrinello [62]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Peter Brookesmith
   - Mendoza [238]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [9]
   Re: Colleagues - Jakes Louw [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Gildas Bourdais
   [118]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bob Shell [5]
   CFS Newspaper Article - Max Burns [69]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Susan Baldwin [24]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [16]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Donnie W. Shevlin [19]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Max Burns [5]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Sue Lawrence [17]
   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier - Serge Salvaille [39]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets - Jerome Clark [15]
   Re: UFO Name Change - Chris Rutkowski [20]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [28]
   Re: New Roswell Documents? - Tim Matthews [12]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - John Velez [43]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - Ann Mulvey [42]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Serge Salvaille
   >sergesa@connectmmic.net> [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [95]
   Filer's Files #41-1998 - UFO UpDates - Toronto [381]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Stephen G. Bassett [45]
   Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell - Roger Evans [29]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43 - Joseph Trainor [671]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [100]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Michael Christol [15]
   Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?- - Roger Evans [24]
   Re: Higher Consciousness - Michael Christol [8]

  Oct 27:

   'Extraterrestrial' Search Engine - Francisco Lopez [35]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [113]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [15]
   Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell - James S. Mortellaro
   [16]
   SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI? - Stig Agermose [98]
   Re: UFO Name Change - Donald Ledger [5]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - James S.
   Mortellaro [13]
   -[For The Record]- Online Resources For Researchers - Rod Brock [27]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Michel M. Deschamps [7]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Michel M. Deschamps [23]
   Re: Filer's Files #41-1998 - Rebecca [4]
   Music & UFOs - Roy Hale [8]
   Assessing The 'Estimate Of the Situation' - Gary Alevy [231]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Rebecca [19]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Jim Mortellaro [35]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Gary [77]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Mark Cashman [349]
   Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees - John Velez [78]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [30]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bob Shell [4]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bob Shell [5]
   1450 Mhz - Stig Agermose [8]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet - Serge Salvaille [34]
   What'S The Temperature Of The Sand? - James Mortellaro [29]
   Re: Music & UFOs - John Velez [11]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Donald Waldrop [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - "Jerome Clark"
   [47]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Jerome Clark [35]
   Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell - Steven Kaeser [14]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - James Easton [122]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Dennis Stacy [3]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Alex Franz [45]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. [7]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Rebecca [11]

  Oct 28:

   'SETI Signals' - More - Stig Agermose [239]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet - Jean van Gemert [19]
   Re: Music & UFOs - George Barkouris [5]
   BAR 199810 - BufoCalvin@aol.com [182]
   Re: 1450 Mhz - Donnie W. Shevlin [6]
   Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew - James Easton [51]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jerome Clark [20]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Paul Stuart [5]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Donald Ledger [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Stan Friedman [14]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Roger Evans [6]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Stan Friedman [3]
   ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 2 - Stephen MILES Lewis [127]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Jim Mortellaro [6]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43 - Leanne Martin [16]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Sharon Kardol [7]
   Music & UFOs - Larry Hatch [11]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - John Velez [20]
   Re: 1450 Mhz - John Velez [17]
   SETI Email Discussion List - Stig Agermose [78]
   Re: SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI? - John White [14]
   Concern Re. General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message - James Bond Johnson
   [26]
   Re: UFO Name Change - Bruce Maccabee [140]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Bruce Maccabee [6]
   Assessing 'The Estimate Of the Situation' - Bruce Maccabee [107]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee [4]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Roger Evans [10]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bill Weber [5]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet - Serge Salvaille [12]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Steven W. Kaeser [8]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Keith Stevens [40]

  Oct 29:

   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [32]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet - Ed Stewart [87]
   Re: Music & UFOs - John Velez [25]
   Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet - Jean van Gemert [6]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Alex Franz [11]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Tom Carey [14]
   _Proof_ Of Ancient Astronauts - Drew Williamson [4]
   Re: UFO Name Change? - Roger Evans [30]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Stig Agermose [32]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Leanne Martin [2]
   Re: CFS Newspaper Article - Leanne Martin [18]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Donald Ledger [5]
   Re: UFO Name Change - Gary Alevy [20]
   DISPATCH # 107 -- the weekly newsletter of - ParaScope@AOL.COM [101]
   Michael Lindemann's 'MJ-12' Gathering - Skye Turell [19]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Bruce Maccabee [12]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Gary Alevy [26]
   Re: Now that's what I call Music!! - Roy Hale [32]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Cheyne D Conrad [6]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [18]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - RobIrving [3]
   The UFO Anthology Vol.1 CD-ROM - DREAMLAND INTERACTIVE [106]
   Break Open That Bottle Of 'Grange' - Diane Harrison [25]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Stan Friedman [27]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Josh Goldstein [42]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Rogher Evans [5]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Donald Ledger [7]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mh - Donnie W. Shevlin [5]
   Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash - James Bond Johnson [9]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Terry Blanton [7]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Stig Agermose [3]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Bruce Maccabee [13]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Bruce Maccabee [7]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Michael Christol
   [12]
   Re: UFO Name change - Chris Rutkowski [3]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - David Rudiak [78]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Sean Jones [16]
   Re: UFO Name Change - James Mortellaro [10]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Beverly Trout [20]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Tim Matthews [7]
   Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew - Serge Salvaille [3]
   'The UFO Evidence' - Philip Mantle [8]
   Sighting In Virginia? - Michael Hodges [18]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Donald Ledger [4]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Ted Viens [17]
   Re: UFO Name Change - Doc Barry [3]

  Oct 30:

   Re: Michael Lindemann's Gathering - Michael Lindemann [22]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Roger Evans [28]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Roger Evans [18]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Stefan Duncan [10]
   Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax - Stig Agermose [52]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Stan Friedman [4]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Stan Friedman [4]
   BBC: SETI Hoaxster Identified - Stig Agermose [74]
   Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash - Leanne Martin [10]
   Re: Sighting In Virginia? - Keith Woodard [7]
   Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI - Stig Agermose [48]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [59]
   CPR-Canada Update (10/29/98 - Paul Anderson [46]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Alex Franz [11]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Jim Mortellaro
   [26]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [18]
   Re: Sighting In Virginia? - Josh Goldstein [5]
   Re: UFO Video Technique - Greg St Pierre [15]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Stan Friedman [37]
   Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax - Serge Salvaille
   [12]
   Re: The Ed Stewart Show - Roger Evans [47]
   Re: - Roger Evans [28]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Marie Ivey [18]
   Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI - Donald Ledger [22]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Mark Cashman [17]
   Re: Adamski's 'Scout Ship' UFO Photo - Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug [165]

  Oct 31:

   Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash - Kevin Randle [4]
   Re: Now that's what I call Music!! - Marie Ivey [5]
   Re: HOT GOSSIP UK - November - Georgina Bruni [270]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - "Roger R. Prokic"
   [2]
   Re: Now that's what I call Music!! - Bruce Maccabee [3]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Bruce Maccabee
   [92]
   Re: Phoenix Lights - Bruce Maccabee [9]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Jim Mortellaro [13]
   North Carolina UFO Hot Spot On TV News - Stefan Duncan [15]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [144]
   Re: Propasals for M.E /Abduction Scenario - Max Burns [186]
   Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking - Ed Stewart [43]
   Re: Sighting In Virginia? - Nick Balaskas [11]
   Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz - Stig Agermose [9]
   Universal Quotes - Brian Cuthbertson [45]
   Roswell UFO Museum Fires Dennis Balthaser - John Hayes [53]
   Re: Music & UFOs - Donald Ledger [5]
   Re: Virginia Sighting? - Michael Hodges [11]
   Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax - John White [8]
   MUFON New Hampshire Lecture - A Review - Greg St. Pierre [40]
   The Estimate of the Situation - As A Ticking Bomb - Gary Alevy [92]
   Copyright [was: Concern re General Ramey's... ] - Alex Franz [33]

   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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

               Re: DISPATCH # 104 -- the weekly newsletter of

From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 22:59:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:36:18 -0400
Subject: Re: DISPATCH # 104 -- the weekly newsletter of

For your information, the "Kenneth Starr on 60 Minutes" quote is
a hoax. Starr has NEVER appeared on "60 Minutes" (confirmed by
CBS). It never happened

>From the WASHINGTON POST, 9/25/98; P. A23
(Read down to Paragraph 8)

                Another White House Tale

By Al Kamen

Friday, September 25, 1998; Page A23

Good news for President Clinton! There's clear evidence that the
ship of state is not sinking. Not yet, anyway.

Seems Peter Maer, a CBS White House correspondent, arrived at
the press briefing room yesterday around 6:10 a.m. to do the
early morning news reports. He opened the door and "this rather
large rat, 8 to 10 inches long not counting the tail, scampered
from the last few rows of seats into a bundle of wires where the
cameras are set up."

It's not surprising, Maer said. "It's a big city. There are lots
of rats in the ivy outside the White House" and in the buildings
on Jackson Place N.W. "There's a lot of food around during the
day, pizza boxes, sandwiches," and such in the briefing room.

Press secretary Michael McCurry, apprised of the situation, said
the General Services Administration, which has gotten the rat
problem under control for the most part, had "assured the White
House press staff that they have put out the necessary traps to
capture and exterminate the remaining rat lingering" in the
briefing room.

"Apparently they have been aware of him for some time," he said.
"Rats here in the press briefing room . . . is a problem they
are very familiar with. . . . We have rats, dirty rats."

As for "having an encounter with a rat here in the press
briefing room," McCurry said, "I know the feeling."

Well, at least the four-legged ones are not abandoning the
building. But whatever happened to Socks?

What Starr Didn't Say

And now, a Loop Public Service Announcement. The Internet has
been awash this week with a wonderful quote that purports to be
from independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr. Starr, supposedly
interviewed by Diane Sawyer on "60 Minutes" back in 1987, is
quoted as saying "public media should not contain explicit or
implied descriptions of sex acts," and denouncing "perverts who
provide the media with pornographic material while pretending it
has some redeeming social value under the public's 'right to
know.' "

Gleeful Democratic operatives and random folks, noting the
X-rated Starr report, forwarded the item around the Internet.
Small problem: It's bogus.

CBS said it searched and countersearched its archives but could
find no record that Starr had ever appeared on the show. Sawyer
"has absolutely no memory of anything remotely like this," said
a spokeswoman at ABC, where Sawyer now works. And a database
search of Starr's 212 opinions, dissents or concurrences while
on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit revealed
nothing resembling the quote.

On its face, the quote is suspect. First, anyone who knows Starr
knows he doesn't talk that way. appeals court judges tend not to
pontificate on matters that might come before them, at least not
on television. Third, why would "60 Minutes" care what a young,
unknown appeals judge thought? And last, if you say the quote
out loud, you sound like Daffy Duck.


See "Washington Post" web site:
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-09/25/080l-092598-idx.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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                    UFO Sighted Redland Bay area QLD, OZ

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Wed, 30
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:38:07 -0400
Subject: UFO Sighted Redland Bay area QLD, OZ

Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au

*******************************************

Beautiful UFO Sighted Redland Bay area QLD

Time 6.30pm Monday 28th 1998

Miss K, 24yrs was on her way to work when see saw what she
thought to be 2 very bright lights in the sky she stopped her car
to get a better look.

The 2 bright lights stayed stationary, then to her surprise,
another 1 appeared and joined the 2.  She watched them for a few
minutes then the 3 lights formed a circle and put on the best
light display, she said, it was like Christmas lights. The
strangest think was she thought she heard beautiful music in her
heard, she said it was amazing to watch then suddenly they
disappeared.

Regards 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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 19:35:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:33:41 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

>
>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The Fort Worth Photographs
>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 20:59:59 PDT

>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 07:58:18 +0100
>>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>>To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>Dear All,

>>A selection of new images from James Bond Johnsons Fort Worth
>>photographs. It is hoped these highlight the very many anomalies
>>to be found in theses images. Please be patient with this site if
>>it's slow, it's running as a background job on my own
>>workstation.
>
>>Included in the selection is the Ramey Paper with my own "make"
>>on it's content, check it out an image is there to download.


>>Follow the RPIT item link from:

>>http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/

>>Neil.

>Neil & List,

>I fail to see any great reason for analysing these photos, save
>proving that it is/isn't Mogul wreckage. After all, if it was such a
>top secret project I am sure they wouldn't allow photos of Mogul to
>be taken in this manner - so they throw in some old baloon scraps and
>say "Sorry, we slipped up."

>Obviously the material in the photos can't even support its own
>weight let alone encased passengers. The truth lies elsewhere.

>Regards,
>Leanne


My Friend,
It is just your attitude that has allowed these incredible historical
documents to lie languishing in the archives of first the
Star-Telegraph and then the UTA Libraries for the last 50 yrs. By
the way NOT ALL the FWST Archives were handed over to the UTA it
could be the other 2 pics might still be at the FWST, lost.

Lets just think what these pictures represent.

They are the only "public" photographic record that says The Roswell
Event ever took place, other than these photographs all we have are
peoples "memories" and a few "dodgy" telegrams, we don't even have
a copy of the news release from RAAF that started the whole thing.


Plus...Photographs (if well processed) don't fade like memories.


Encapsulated in these 4 photographs is all we still have of that
afternoon back in 47, FROZEN IN TIME.

Have you taken in just what they say on the surface?, look at Jesse
Snr, he's in the office of the General of the 8th Air Force and
guess what, he's wearing his "B" grade uniform, it has dirt marks,
his boots are scuffed and dusty, he's taken off his tie, it's on
the radiator at the back of the room, he's a man who has arrived in
a hurry.

Yet Ramey, is in full dress uniform including his hat, indoors?.
These days we'd say he looks like a man ready for a photo-oportunity?.

And you say we shouldn't even bother looking at them!.


While I'm on my Hobby-horse, can I also slay the MOGUL dragon
before it raises it head.

MOGUL was the alledged classified code name for the balloon
project that Charles Moore et al were involved with, working
out of Alamagordo AND working in close contact with the RAAF!.
HIS project did not use the name MOGUL, the first time
Moore heard it was in connection with the 94 AF report.
The balloon trains he and his collegues were launching used
NO out of the ordinary components, even the Sonobuoy was
standard Navy issue and used common electrical components.
Marcel, I think suspected this and even ask his son if he could spot
any known components when he had some of the debris in his kitchen.
NOTE Marcel Snr had been a Radio Ham for many years AND BUILT
HIS OWN GEAR, he new electrical parts.
He also knew RADAR, in the 2 years before 47 he spent
extended period on RADAR training courses AND got good grades.
HE KNEW FOIL, the USAF dumped hundreds of tons of the stuff
all through the latter stages of WWII in their daylight bombing
raides as a radar counter measure, it was know as "chaff", we
(the UK) were still using it in the South Atlantic a few years back
in our scrap over the Falklands to divert the other sides air
launched missiles away from our ships, I gather it saved quite a
few lives.
So...guess what was one of the topics of Jesse Snr's radar courses
                  "radar counter measures",
Believe me he would know all about foil and it's uses with radar.

Any balloon train, be it weather or NYU project would be using
standard identifiable components, even the vacuum tubes use in the
Sonobouy would have been military spec and made of metal NOT glass,
you could drop the things from on high and they'd dent a bit but
still work, they'd also have a military id number etched on them,
Jesse Snr would have spotted these without any problem at all, same
goes for any other standard resistors, capacitors and coils that
might have been used, don't forget the batteries too, we're talking
pre semiconductor days here, vacuum tubes take lots of juice to
keep them going.

We have two conclusions I guess, he and the rest of the 8th airforce
were total nurdes and failed to identify said debris,

or

He,though a highly observant and technically qualified idividual
together with the other staff at RAAF thought the debris was of
a highly unusual nature and nothing that he and they could id as
our's.

Was the debris in the pictures the debris that was collect on the
Foster Ranch?, I've know idea, but if it was then maybe a few bits
of plants etc might have got collected too, well there are a couple
of bits of plant stems in the pictures, draw your own conclusions.

Neil.

PS. Sorry if this is long and rambling but I'm in the throws of
a stinker of a cold.<BG>



--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects

From: "GT mccoy" <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 20:27:36 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:00:51 -0400
Subject: Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects


>From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:48:09 -0500
>>Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:48:09 -0500
>>Subject: U-Haul's 'UFO' Trucks

>>From: http://www.uhaul.com/html/honors_nm.htm

>>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

>>U-HAUL HONORS NEW MEXICO WITH TRUCK GRAPHIC IMAGE TO BE UNVEILED
>>AT INT'L. UFO MUSEUM IN ROSWELL

>>ROSWELL, N.M.  (Jan. 5, 1998) U-Haul=AE International, Inc., in
>>conjunctionwith the International UFO Museum & Research Center
>>(IUFOMRC) will unveil to the public a spectacular new U-Haul
>>Super Graphics(SM) truck image promoting the State of New Mexico
>>on Roswell=92s Main Street, in front of the IUFOMRC, 114 N. Main
>>St., on Monday, Jan. 12, 1998 at 10 a.m. Local, state and
>>national dignitaries have been invited, to be addressed by
>>Roswell Mayor Tom Jennings, IUFOMRC Director Deon Crosby and
>>representatives from U-Haul International's headquarters in
>>Phoenix.

<snip>

>>Copyright 1998 U-Haul International, Inc.
>>All rights reserved.

>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 21:29:59 PDT
>From: Rod Brock <rodbrock@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: U-Haul Corp. Roswell Graphic Found
>To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>I was hoping it was just a false rumor.  But view, and weep, or laugh,
>or whatever...

>http://www.uhaul.inter.net/supergraphics/sg_nm_alien.htm

>Rod

Hello, to all,

I can confirm this. I must have gotten one of the first vans
issued, as this thing had been around the Southern Oregon Coast.
I rented it in Bandon, Ore. back in the middle of August for a
final assault on moving two households over a period of 3
hellish months.

It is a rather garish shceme the "Alien" is a chartruse green
with as I recall, a wrecked saucer in a smoking hole in the
ground, behind 'it' Also the van had been around for months,
possibly into the first part of February.

GT McCoy





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

                     Astronomers Detect New Star Energy

From: Rebecca <RSchatte@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 01:53:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:03:11 -0400
Subject: Astronomers Detect New Star Energy


From: AOLNews@aol.com
Subject: Astronomers Detect New Star Energy
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 01:47:39 EDT


Astronomers Detect New Star Energy

.c The Associated Press

 By PAUL RECER

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An immense wave of radiation from a bizarre
star smashed into the upper atmosphere of the Earth last month
with enough energy to power civilization for a billion years,
researchers report.

Astronomers said at a news conference Tuesday that the eruption
was the most powerful burst of X-rays and gamma rays from beyond
the sun ever recorded and caused at least two satellites to shut
down briefly.

On the Earth's surface, however, there is almost no effect from
the invisible radiation. Experts said energy equal only to a
typical, single dental X-ray could have penetrated the
atmosphere.

"We've been monitoring things like this for 30 years and we've
never seen anything like this before," Kevin Hurley, a research
physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, said
Tuesday at a NASA news conference.

The burst of gamma and X-ray radiation struck the Earth over the
Pacific Ocean at night on Aug. 27 and was so powerful that it
temporarily ionized the upper atmosphere just as the sun does in
the daytime, Hurley said.

Seven scientific satellites, five orbiting the Earth, one
approaching an asteroid far beyond, and one near the orbit of
Jupiter, all detected the massive eruption. Hurley said the
burst was so intense that two of the satellites were forced to
shut down to protect their electronics.

However, the energy was largely absorbed by the upper atmosphere
and only a minuscule amount of radiation reached the Earth's
surface. It posed no hazard to life, Hurley said.

The eruption came from a neutron star, called SGR1900+14 in the
constellation Aquila some 20,000 light years away. A neutron
star is the collapsed core left after a massive star explodes. A
light year is about 6 trillion miles.

Astronomers said it is extremely rare for such a distant stellar
explosion to have any effect on the Earth, attesting to the
immensity of the energy release.

They estimated that the energy, if captured and put to use,
could power all of the Earth's energy needs for a billion years
-- that is one billion periods of one billion years each.

"In this five-minute long flash we saw as much energy as there
will be coming from the sun for the next 300 years," Hurley
said. "If we could harness this energy we would have enough
power to power every city, every village, every light bulb until
the end of the universe and far beyond."

The source star already was being studied because it is one of
four known members of a class of stellar objects called "soft
gamma ray repeaters." These are neutron stars that put out
steady flashes of gamma rays.

But the extreme energy burst last month also suggests that the
object is a magnetar, a weird type of star first suggested by
astrophysicists Robert Duncan of the University of Texas,
Austin, and Christopher Thompson of the University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill.

The dramatic proof of the star's existence, said Cornell
University astronomer Jim Cordes, "is a triumph for theoretical
astrophysics.

"This is the Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire of astrophysics,"
Cordes added. "It is that big a deal."

Duncan said at the news conference that magnetars are rapidly
spinning neutron stars that have created a magnetic field far
greater than any other known.

He said the magnetic field around the star is so powerful that
from more than 100,000 miles away "it could erase the magnetic
strip on your credit card and suck the keys out of your pocket."

Duncan said the energy burst probably occurred when the magnetic
field ripped apart the one-mile thick metal crust of the star,
releasing an immense eruption of X-rays and gamma rays. This
radiation is not optically visible, but it can be detected by
instruments on satellites.

Magnetars are extremely dense objects, containing one and a half
times the mass of the sun in an area just 12 miles across, he
said.

"A tablespoon of material from this star would weigh as much as
an aircraft carrier," said Duncan.

Approaching a magnetar would not be healthy, the astronomer
noted.

X-rays erupting from the star would kill from a distance. As it
got closer, there would be lethal levels of electrons and
anti-electrons, in addition to immense heat.

It is not, said Duncan, "a good place to go."

AP-NY-09-30-98 0141EDT

 Copyright 1998 The Associated Press.  The information  contained in the AP
news report may not be published,  broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
distributed without  prior written authority of The Associated Press.







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

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 21:11:51 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:44:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk


>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 10:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk


Bob,

Boy, do you get emotional fast!

Yes I know what a C-mount is. Yes, you CAN put any lens you want
to on almost any 16mm camera. But according to the camera man,
he was concerned about a lack of light as well as the
constraints of the suit he was required to wear which made
proper framing difficult. Under these conditions, anyone working
with a non-reflex camera (like the Bell & Howell he claims to
have used) would be a fool to work with anything other than a
wide angle lens. This would be ESPECIALLY true if he is really
concerned about things like "depth of field" or "proper
framing".

I never implied that a 10mm lens was considered "normal" for the
16mm format. I said that the standard lens for these non-reflex
cameras was a fixed 10mm wide angle lens and I stand by that
statement. By "fixed" I mean "fixed focus", not "unremovable".
My apologies to the readers if that caused any real confusion
(which I doubt).

However, this is all merely a distinction without any difference
to the point at hand. After all, you wisely pointed out that he
probably had a turret mount with at least 3 lenses to choose
from (wide, normal, telephoto). If true, WHY pick a lens that
would cause him so much grief when a wide angle lens would help
his situation tremendously by maintaining deep focus while wide
open?

And even if he did use a "normal" lens of 25mm, depth of field
would hardly be a problem. True, 25mm is a "longer" lens than
10mm and longer lenses generally sacrifice depth of field.

But 25mm is only "longer" on a 16mm camera!

To illustrate what I mean, consider the same 25mm lens on a
Nikon 35mm camera. Such a lens would appear very wide angle,
with depth of field characteristics from a few inches in front
of the camera to infinity. Still photographers around the world
know that the wider the lens, the deeper the focus and a 25mm
lens is a VERY wide angle lens on a Nikon. Placing that same
25mm lens on the Bell & Howell changes nothing other than
perspective. After all, depth of field accompanies the lens,
independent of whether there's even a camera attached! So, even
at 25mm, he still should have been able to keep the image in
focus with very little, if any, difficulty. At 10mm, it would
have been virtually impossible to rack the image out of focus
without really working at it! (and totally impossible if the
lens were fixed focus)

More to the point, the fact that you _Could_ put a lens on the
camera to produce an out of focus image would be of no obvious
value to any cinematographer other than one working for Santilli
to create a fake "documentary" look.

Regarding the issue of push-processing:

I agree that the film being used was reversal B&W.
I never made an issue of that.

However, I've heard several explanations regarding the washed
out and grainy look of the film. One is that the film was
push-processed. Another is that the film was 'light blasted' by
Santilli. Another is that it was both push-processed AND 'light
blasted'! And according to you, the cameraman only pushed one
roll but still processed the others by hand, as well.

However, it's really academic whether all or only one roll was
push processed. The question is, "Why bother?"

Having worked in operating rooms for many years, as both a
medical illustrator and a cinematographer documenting surgical
procedures, I can assure you that doctors like a LOT of light to
work by. Even if documentation wasn't the main concern, the room
was small with white walls; a few 60 watt bulbs would provide
enough fill to do the trick and I can't imagine that the doctors
would complain about having TOO much light. So WHY NOT use an
additional lamp and an extension cord? It's a lot simpler than
push processing! And, again, processing is one thing. Drying is
something else. Push-processed or not, where is he going to dry
2,500 feet of film in the field?

In summary:

_Could_ he have shot the film out of focus?
Only if he tried.

_Could_ he have push-processed 100 to 2,500 feet of film in the
field? Sure. But why bring everything necessary to push the film
when shooting it correctly exposed would have been easier and
would _not_ have interfered with the procedure at hand.

_Could_ he have dried 2,500 feet of film in the field? Not
without a LOT of space and precautions to contain dirt & dust.

In all, it doesn't make sense.

Of course, this is my opinion based on my experience and a
comparison of the cameraman's claims to the results on display.
I would be interested in your complete interpretation of the
same data based on your skills as a cinematographer.

You _are_ a cinematographer, aren't you?

Finally, Bob, you wrote:

"I don't know who this Roger Evans is, but..."

Who am I?

Apparently, I'm someone that DARED to have an informed opinion
about the subject of photography; an area, I take it, you claim
as your personal domain.

Lighten up!

Rather than worry about who's going to "steal your thunder"
while you're away in Germany, why don't you just accept the idea
that there are OTHER well educated people in the world with
interesting ideas. Perhaps they aren't as well known as you, but
their opinions are just as valid.

Or are they?

Comments like, "Do you even know what a C mount is, Roger?" are
arrogant and uncalled for. I recently posted a listing
condemning what I call "personal slams" such as this. (see
"Snipers & Shooters") I suggest you read it. I think you'll find
that your readers don't enjoy such juvenile behavior, no matter
how "famous" you are. A "celebrity status", and I use that term
very loosely here, is no excuse for rude behavior.

Relax, Bob.
I come in peace.

Later, all.....
Roger Evans
Producer/Director
MovieStuff  Houston, Texas   www.cyberjunkie.com/moviestuff






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

                      Georges Interrupts Aliens Search

From: Steven L. Wilson, Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 23:18:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:55:39 -0400
Subject: Georges Interrupts Aliens Search


Georges Interrupts Aliens Search

.c The Associated Press

By CHRIS HAWLEY

 SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) -- When Hurricane Georges snapped
telephone lines and bent satellite dishes in Puerto Rico, it may
have left more than earthlings incommunicado.

 Scientists listening for life on other planets at the enormous
Arecibo Observatory radio telescope lost their connection with
the stars because of a computer link downed by the storm. They
hoped to reconnect by the end of the week.

 Hurricane Georges tore through Puerto Rico last week, killing
three, destroying thousands of homes and leaving millions of
people without power.

 The radio telescope's 1000-foot-wide main dish, made famous by
the movie ``Contact,'' lost its connection with the Jodrell Bank
Observatory in Manchester, England, which was comparing data to
help filter out static from outer space, said John Harmon,
assistant director at Arecibo.

 Harmon said Tuesday the Arecibo observatory was mostly
undamaged by the storm and was being used by scientists working
on other projects. But radio astronomers with the privately
funded Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence project said
they have lost valuable time.

 ``It's been a real problem for the SETI people,'' Harmon said.
``They haven't been able to do anything.''

 Scientists did not have telephone service until Tuesday
afternoon, he added.

 Arecibo's main dish is built inside a sinkhole and was
protected from the storm's 110-mph winds. However, the hurricane
knocked a reflecting plate out of alignment in a dome-shaped
signal receiver that hangs 450 feet above the dish.

 Technicians on Tuesday were straightening the plate and
replacing about a dozen of the 32,000 aluminum plates that make
up the ground dish. The radio telescope was running on a diesel
generator.

 Harmon said workers also were reinstalling antennas for the
telescope's powerful interplanetary radar, which scientists plan
to point next week at Titan, Saturn's largest moon.

 Arecibo Observatory is operated by Cornell University's
National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center for the National
Science Foundation.

 In other hurricane developments Tuesday:

 Cuban President Fidel Castro said that Hurricane Georges helped
Cuba overcome its worst drought in four decades, but also caused
serious damage to developing crops.

 Castro said 40,000 homes were damaged, 2,100 of them destroyed.
The government planned to provide mattresses and other household
goods to people whose homes were damaged. Castro said the
government will also grant extra food rations to people living
in affected areas.

 Officials in the Dominican Republic said that deadly hurricane
flooding in San Juan de la Maguana could not have been avoided.
The government disputed reports that workers at the nearby
Sabaneta dam opened floodgates to relieve pressure on the dam
when Georges struck Sept. 22, sending water into the town.

 The dam has no floodgates, and water that reached San Juan de
la Maguana escaped through emergency sluices that cannot be
controlled by reservoir workers, the government said in a
statement.

 The Red Cross says at least 76 people died in San Juan de la
Maguana, a town of about 20,000 people 75 miles west of Santo
Domingo, the Dominican capital.

 AP-NY-09-29-98 2042EDT

  Copyright 1998 The Associated Press.  The information
contained in the AP news report may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without  prior
written authority of The Associated Press.









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

                            The New Nazi-ET Lie?

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 09:46:11 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:33:43 -0400
Subject: The New Nazi-ET Lie?


Perhaps the most dangerous and insidious development in
modern-day UFO research are the attempts currently being
undertaken by a small group of researchers to shore up the
extra-terrestrial hypothesis by invoking a number of dangerous
right-wing and occult theories.

These relate to the supposed activities of the "Vril" society
who, it is claimed, were responsible for imparting secret and
magical knowledge to the Nazis from the late 1930s onwards. This
made its' way into a number of secret technologies including the
flying saucer. The occultists also appear to be claiming that
extra-terrestrial knowledge was imparted to this group of Nazi
losers...a worrying claim to say the least...

A forthcoming edition of 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is set to present
'evidence' that an ET craft crashed in Poland and was
subsequently recovered by the Nazis and back-engineered no doubt
into 'foo fighters' and hypersonic saucers. There appears to be
no substantiation at all to support any of this evidence whereas
both myself and other researchers approaching this question from
an entirely factual and documentary basis have discovered the
actual truth of the matter;

 - German circular wing aircraft were under development although
not advanced in any accepted meaning of the word by 1945.

 - They were tested and flown at a BMW facility near Breslau in
early 1945 (the date 14th Feb is often give but there seems to
be little evidence to support this claim) and film was taken of
the test flight where the 'saucer' lifted off the ground and
flew for a few minutes before landing safely.

 - It was flown by Flugkapitan Rudolph Schriever who
subsequently claimed in newspaper interviews to have been
involved in this fledgling German project. Schriever worked for
the Heinkel company and developed an interest in Vertical
Take-Off and Landing technology from 1940. The first
test-flight, of the "V3" was in 1943.

 - The designation "V" refers to "Versuchs" which translates
into "experimental". V has NOTHING to do with Vril!

 - The most intriguing part of this project was the development
of the radial-flow engine featured in the USAF-ATIC-WADC
Technical Document dated 15th Feb.1955 relating to 'Project
Silver Bug' - the real AVRO disc and not to be confused with the
miserable Avrocar.

(We have at least two other schematics of this disc in its'
earlier version - 1951 and 1952.)

 - Dr. Richard Walter Miethe and many other German technical
specialists - whose work was entirely unrelated to any supposed
'occult' nonsense - were transported to the USA under the terms
of Operation Paperclip in 1945/6. Secretary to the USAF
Alexander Flax admitted that Miethe had worked in the USA.

 - The discs that Miethe subsequently worked on and influenced
used muffled jet engines and were able to hover as well as reach
high speeds.

 - Although much of the contractor work was undertaken in Canada
at AV Roe and Company the testing and evaluation was undertaken
at Papoose Lake until at least the 1970s. There is little
evidence to suggest that the work continued at this facility
although we understand that the programme was also situated at
Holloman AFB for a while.

 - The construction of this new Nazi-ET myth is ultimately
impossible to disprove because there is no evidence - if you see
what I mean. A writer, one Robert Konstanty (does anyone know
who this is) is making totally unverifiable claims.

 - Most interestingly, one version of this nazi-ET myth featured
in an article written by a Mr. Bolnar for 'Alien Encounters'
magazine provided no evidence beyond unnamed sources and
speculation.

He and other seem to be claiming that the 'alien craft' (?)
'crashed' in Poland in 1938. The Germans didn't invade until
1939 so why and how did they have the good fortune to get hold
of it....?

What does this tell us about some elements of the UFO community?

 - they will believe almost anything as long as it supports
their ET contact beliefs and wishes.

 - they are propping up a dangerous Nazi occult myth most likely
to encourage right-wing extremism within Ufology (Ernst Zundel
alias 'Christof/Mattern Friedrich' is the obvious example of a
Nazi who made a great deal of money from the sales of this nazi
saucer book in the late 1970s and early 1980s).

 - it says something about the 'death of Roswell' and the many
questions and problems related to it that  pretty much rule out
an ET crash retrieval - and look how 'witnesses' suddenly
appeared (and remembered what they were doing in July 1947 in
great detail) on the scene when the media became interested....

 I suggest that we must try and expose this kind of propaganda
for that is what it is - at all costs.

My colleague Bill Rose spoke to people formerly involved in the
German disc programme and there is no suggestion that any high
performance craft was built or flown even though there were
tremendous advances in all manner of aviation made by German
scientists.

(It was not until much later on that a German influence was felt
in terms of advanced technology aircraft which is what we might
expect. One of the reasons that we cannot learn more about
Miethe and co is not, as one UK skeptic has suggested , because
they 'didn't exist' but entirely because they did and that
certain of them had been involved in horrific war
crimes.....This dirty little secret has yet to be realised by
the public and their governments appear to want to do very
little to educate them on the subject of the wheeling and
dealing that took place in order to gain Nazi technological
assets after 1945....)

In the USA at the time the V-173 that became the XF5U-1 was
apparently more successful than it's German counterparts and in
fact Schriever was influence by Zimmerman (not an alien nor an
occultists!!) who worked closely with the US Navy and
Chance-Vought during the war to get this advanced STOL fighter
in the air with much success.

All the evidence that I have got strongly suggests to both
myself, Bill Rose and the others associated with our research
that it was indeed the US Navy (Engineering Division) who were
most responsible for the early postwar sightings of metallic
discs which, in most cases, were operating well within the
boundaries of terrestrial technology. A gas turbine powered
XF5U-1, that AIR 100-203-79 suggest was operational in 1947/8,
would, according to several aviation  writers have been able to
fly at very low speeds and would have had a flight envelope of
between 0-550mph....

A 'Project Sign' document in my possession indicates that the
USAF Intelligence people knew about tests of low aspect ratio
aircraft involved in 'boundary layer experiments' and that the
aircraft as built by none other than Chance-Vought.

Occasionally, new information on classified aircraft forces the
UFO community to look again at it's underlying raison d'=EAtre -
the theory of ET-human contact.

In order to shore this theory up some researchers have reached
and are reaching into the depths of Twentieth Century horror to
create a nazi-ET lie.......

For a much more factual version of flying disc reality please
see jeff Rense's site; www.sightings.com or download the real
audio archived interview with me that went out live to the USA
on Sunday 27th September - again available at that site.

Tim Matthews








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

                            Re: KGB Crashed Disc

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 07:58:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:30:58 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disc


>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:52:10 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 22:07:32 PDT

>>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:43:07 +0100
>>>From: "A.U.R.A." <aura@telekabel2.nl>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc

>>>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>>>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:34:18 PDT

>>>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>>>>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 13:00:44 EDT
>>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>>Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disk

>>>><XL-snip>

>>>>You don't think it at all 'convenient' that footage of the rear
>>>>was not shown? C'mon , Jim, a little lateral thinking here,
>>>>please. Go to the UFOKGB web site mentioned in the earlier post
>>>>and have a close look at image 'front6.jpg' and call it up for a
>>>>close look. You will see what appears to bracing behing the prop
>>>>wreck.

>>>Leanne,

>>>Like you suggested I took a look at "front6.jpg" , I blew it up
>>>in Photo shop...but...where do you see bracing? Maybe I'm
>>>looking at the wrong spot or just lookin' over it the same way
>>>I'm regularly lookin' over my keys ;-) Could you be a little
>>>more specific, please?

>>Andy & List,

>>I have attached a jpeg of the right side of the photo image in
>>question. Clealy visible is the 'box-like' effect directly
>>behind the magazine of (Kalishnikov?) rifle.

>>Note the 'box-like' structure is extremely square looking and
>>has uniform colour as interpreted by my Coreldraw5 photo
>>software indicative of no curvature at all.

>>Note too, that if the line of 'box' is followed upwards it ends
>>abruptly behind the guard's arm.

>>Also, does anyone know whether the rifles are of the correct
>>vintage?


>Hi list:

>The answer to the question regarding the AK's is YES.
>I have a good deal of reference material on weaponry,
>despite my being unable to hit anything as I admitted in
>a prior posting.

>I checked those references and the rifles, sights and
>other accouterments appear to be correct vintage.

When I was on holiday in Spain you could buy perfect replicas of
the AK-47 for =A340. I couldn't tell the difference...

On holiday in the USA a few years ago I could have bought an
AK-47 and Russian uniform - if was sad enough to do so - for a
few hundred quid. A job lot for the whole film would not cost as
much as the producer was/is likely to make from future sales.

Wasn't this shown on TNT? 'WCW Wrestling' is on TNT and that
looks real too doesn't it?

Whether real or replica AK-47s are not difficult to come by -
even in pubs in Manchester England!

Therefore, I'm not sure that your post has much bearing on the
film, which is quite obviously a fake - although one which
attempted to learn from the Roswell Autopsy scam - despite your
noble efforts to move the research forward....

In any case, as I pointed out on Jeff Renses' 'Sightings' radio
show last Sunday, flying discs are entirely terrestrial in
origin and any attempt to pass them off as ET is highly
questionable and almost certainly profitable.

There is considerable evidence to support my case - and not just
stories from unnamed soldiers and 'informed' sources.....

I'd like to know about the provenance of this film; in other
words, what is its real source and who made it. Hats off to
them I say!! Better luck next time....

Any half decent studio could have put this together. At a
glance, the whole film looks too modern....

Tim  Matthews





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

              Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:12:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:06:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds


>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 11:24:23 -0500 (CDT)
>Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 14:41:51 -0400
>Subject: Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds


David,

>I sent Kent Kimball the following post by you. In its entirety,
>unedited. Don't be so paranoid -- if you can help it.

>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 00:59:39 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Evidence for Rudiak Et Al

I wrote two posts, not one. There were points that I had already
addressed, yet Kimball didn't seem to be aware of them. So I
wondered out loud in my response to him whether you had sent him
everything. Apparently not, if you sent him only one post. In
your book this seems to make me "paranoid" for even asking.

Funny, didn't Kal Korff just smear me as a "paranoid" only two
days ago? But I guess it makes me "paranoid" to even point out
that both of you simultaneously started using the same slur term
against me -- right Dennis?

>Are you still suggesting that bodies were involved at one or
>more crash sites

Where did this come from? What does this have to do with
Kimball? Just Dennis Stacy off to the races again, going off in
one hundred different directions at once.

Read the top of Ramey's message Dennis. One of the clearest
words on the page is **VICTIMS**. It's unmistakable. Right after
that is language to the effect that they were forwarded to Fort
Worth. "Victims," Dennis, "victims." Does that sound like a
Mogul balloon crash?

> and that the flight line was put on alert but not the hospital?

Yes, some part of the flight line could be involved and not the
hospital. E.g., would they bring crash wreckage to the hospital
for medical care? And the "victims," if all stone cold dead,
could be popped into refrigerated crates and shipped to Fort
Worth for further processing, leaving the base hospital
completely out of the loop.

>That a cook and a pilot were pressed into recovery duties,

More of Stacy's shotgun approach, mixing up everything together.
The pilot is Oliver Henderson who told friends and family he had
flown wreckage and alien bodies to Wright Field. Of course a
pilot is going to be involved if you are flying something from
point A to point B. Who are you going to use -- the cook? The
medical supply officer? If Henderson had been out at a site
already (according to his wife), for whatever reason, and he was
the base senior pilot, why unnecessarily involve another pilot
who didn't know anything?

>an ambulance was sent out, but the hospital wasn't put on
>standy notice at the very least.

When have I mentioned an ambulance? Bodies and wreckage can be
transported in all sorts of things, like trucks. In fact, your
"camp cook," Sgt. Melvin Brown, said they used ordinary trucks
to transport the bodies from whatever site he was at (according
to his daughter).

>That the camp
>cook -- I don't care how good a shot he was -- had a need to
>know but that the third ranking medical officer didn't?

Why would the third ranking medical officer, who in this case
said he was the medical supply officer, have to be involved at
all? To pilot a plane? To stand guard? To load bodies into a
crate?

And notice how Stacy doesn't deal with the points I raised.
Besides Melvin Brown having an official job speciality of
"cook," he was fully qualified to stand guard, being a decorated
WII combat veteran and an expert marksman. His daughter Beverley
Bean says he told her that they grabbed everybody available at
the moment and brought them out to the site in the desert, where
he stood guard.

>Nope, nothing inconsistent there.

Absolutely, just Dennis Stacy up to his usual scattershot
antics.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:46:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:08:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:42:07 -0700
>From: jerry anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>I'm gonna give it another month, and if I still keep reading
>what is sometimes no more than 'Hate Mail', I'm packing the
>Updates in. Which is a shame, as quite often there is decent
>unbiased information posted. Let's pull together. Is it too much
>trouble to listen to other peoples theories and thoughts on the
>UFO subject. Why can't we all just GROW UP? Jerry Anderson
>UFOMEK

>Working for a united UFO community

Don't cash it in just yet. Use your delete button. After a while
you get to know which posts to read and which ones to delete.
There are some highly respected folks who post to this list and
their opinions, though they may differ, are worth seeking. This
list is the best we've got.

I, for one, am glad you expressed your opinion. I can only speak
for myself but I, too, am provoked by the bickering and name
calling and gross speculation, however, I would be lost without
the list.

Best regards, Marie







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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:11:38 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:13:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:42:07 -0700
> From: jerry anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

> >From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
> >Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Can't we all just get along?

> So you've noticed all the slanging? So have I. That makes two of
> us. You are quite right, and I agree whole-heartedly with your
> comments. We are all wanting an answer on this subject. Surely
> it's not too much to ask that we should work together!

> I'm gonna give it another month, and if I still keep reading
> what is sometimes no more than 'Hate Mail', I'm packing the
> Updates in. Which is a shame, as quite often there is decent
> unbiased information posted. Let's pull together. Is it too much
> trouble to listen to other peoples theories and thoughts on the
> UFO subject. Why can't we all just GROW UP? Jerry Anderson
> UFOMEK

> Working for a united UFO community


Postings like this always puzzle me.  Though I do not doubt for a
moment the poster's good intentions, it's never clear whether he
or she objects to _all_ disagreement or simply to the sort of
dissent that sinks to slurs and ad hominems.
It's not even clear, since typically the distinction is not made,
whether the poster recognizes such a distinction even exists.

Vigorous debate within ufology  is as essential and necessary as
it is in any field of inquiry.  If the poster thinks
disagreement, including strongly expressed disagreement, is
unique to ufology, he or she ought to get out of the house once
in a while -- or read something besides UFO literature, where the
battles are fast and furious.  (Just look, as Greg Sandow
observed recently, at a typical "Letters" section of the New York
Review of Books.) I can't imagine anything duller than the
"unified UFO community" the correspondent above claims to
desire.

Our state of knowledge about the phenomenon does not justify such
uniformity of opinion; we simply don't know enough about UFOs to
nod all our heads in unison about their nature and meaning.  Nor
do we know enough about them to agree on what methodologies and
approaches are most usefully applied to their study.  These are
all legitimate subjects of debate.  Thoughtful debate, which
clarifies issues, has nothing to do with "hate mail,"  even when
conducted at full volume.

What is not legitimate, in my judgment, is the personal slur.
But the slur is not synonymous with the dissent, and we'd be
fools if we demanded consensus (or, worse, silence) in our ranks
when there is in fact plenty of room for reasonable persons to
see things differently and to say so.  I cast my vote for
continuing -- and, if need be, loud -- debate.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #273

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 04:56:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:57:52 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #273

Apology to MW #273 (For September 30, 1998)


We need to be _rich_; we need the _reward_; to drive toward
_wonder_ -- not feather dark lords! We need a cold challenge not
over protective, a goal that is real that achieves an objective.
Some call it science, but *science* has masters. These Masters
are jealous, insuring disaster. Who are these *masters* that
keep us in caves? Who are these *jealous* that keep us enslaved?
Who are these shadows, and demons, et al.? I think I know one --
call him un-silent Kal.

Un-silent Kal is rife with inflection. He fans at our hatred,
imposes projection. He works as a shill for a shadowed unknown?
He's all proclamation as Stanton intones. His research is all
spin, and he makes grand assumptions: that *records* are
truthful -- that *bunk* is presumptive -- that Jesse's a liar,
and Todd's a truth fountain -- that nothing has happened! That
he's BEEN to the mountain. That he has the answers elusive and
wane, that Stanton is crooked, and David's in fane. That Kevin's
deluded, and Jean's unimpressive. That Brian, and Jerry are
*lost* and *obsessive*.

Now what is his purpose. What's his agenda? I'll bet it's
abstruse. I'd bet it offends ya' <g>. I'll bet that its effort,
at best, will deride. At worst it'll sicken, and hurt our
insides. I'll bet it's a challenge he knows he can win.
Ufology's weakest, where proof is _made_ thin. I'll bet that
it's mocking, and smeared with a sneer, a smirk that he musters
that's smoke up the rear! I'll bet it's distracting. I'll bet it
supports . . . conservative leanings that pay his reports? I'll
bet it's fallacious, and filled with distortion. I'll bet that
his logic is twisted contortion. I'll bet disingenuous, a
prevaricated story, he screws up on the evidence to support the
shadows glory.

I say this despite that he writes me *kind* notes. He'd play to
be rational -- like it's _me_ that's the joke! But I'm the one
laughing -- it's him would go private -- _I've_ truly seen them,
and _I'm_ not a pirate. His view is right canted, but cloaked
with the opposite. His take is *convenient* and sullenly
obstinate. He's grossly one sided, and won't take the dare that
Rudiak laid at his cave mouth last year! He fronts for
digression, his aim is off task, so giving him credit _is_ sweat
off our ass!

Don't _bother_ with Roswell -- cause that's not the issue!
Assume that it's specious and all that he said. Assume that
Marcel is a thief and a liar, his son a bad apple and probably
Red? Friedman's a fool? And Randle's moronic? Jean's self
absorbed? Dave needs a tonic? That _nothing_ is dancing in all
kinds of skies? That nothing's engaged in a cover of lies?
There's nothing's in evidence -- no smoking gun that warrants a
look (where we don't look!) for _fun_?

Then, what have _I_ seen? What's the stuff in _my_ sky? Pictures
from shuttles are _not_ telling lies. There's stuff more than
Roswell, and Roswell's still true! Exception was rampant, Kal
misconstrues! _Something_ occurred in the desert that day . . .
something peculiar -- and we are _betrayed_! Why aren't we
looking? Why don't we care? And, have a close look to find _Kal_
standing there."

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Him and those like him that break into a practiced, too casual
laughter at the mention of a ubiquitous conspiracy?  These are
the living reasons for retreat, failure and despair. It's not
Roswell, it's what Roswell represents -- an efficacious
potential of free energy and living _off_ the meter; it's
everyone achieving and maintaining more _autonomy_ in a
*utopian* world dreamed of now _only_ in the purest fantasy that
_might_ be a reality (see #116). A wonderfully satisfying world
where _individuality_ actually counts for something honorable
and is not restricting, exclusive, disrespecting, or harmful to
the environment. The bunch that opposes the preceding -- the
ones that would pay the up-keep on an unjust and world
destroying meter, that's the bunch that Kal fronts for -- IMTHO
<g>.

Something really momentous is shaping up in the air around us,
and I _don't_ mean millennial fabrication! Everyone knows it,
metaphorically -- but Kal! Kal would re-glue charmless scales
_back_ to our eyes. Kal would retreat, for _all_ his
protestations that he is a humble revealer of truth, further
into the danker recesses of our cultural cave. Kal _welcomes_
the dying of the investigators light.

Kal would argue that _I_ was the zealot clouded by passion, and
compromised by unsupported belief . . . but only a zealot could
discount the _obvious anomalous_ for a mediocre muck raking romp
at Roswell -- a truly _bizarre_ occurrence jerked back and forth
across the line of credulity so often that it has been rendered
into the status of an urban legend! Disprove the urban legend,
and all the _less_ famous anomalous can recede further into the
Kal induced shadows.

Just a _position_, adjustable with the arrival of new evidence
(any other way engages sheer stupidity I'm thinking), but that's
the way it appears
to me.

Restore John Ford!


--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 13:12:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:23:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:42:07 -0700
>From: jerry anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>>Hello all,

>>I'm rather new to the list, having only participated for a
>>little over a week or so....

>>Boy, what a week!

>>I had heard much about the listing from another source and
>>thought I might try wading into the torrent of observations and
>>technical data to see if I might learn something or, perhaps,
>>offer my own insight into the subject of UFOs. I'm hardly
>>keeping a direct count but the vast majority of listings seem to
>>have very little, if nothing, to do with discussions about real
>>evidence or technical data.

><snip>

>Dear Roger,

>So you've noticed all the slanging? So have I. That makes two of
>us.

I tend to dissagree. Doesn't make "two of us." How many are on the
list? It makes nearly that many of us.

>You are quite right, and I agree whole-heartedly with your
>comments. We are all wanting an answer on this subject.

Don't hold your breath

> Surely it's not too much to ask that we should work together!

Yes it is, and don't call me Shirley!

>I'm gonna give it another month, and if I still keep reading
>what is sometimes no more than 'Hate Mail', I'm packing the
>Updates in. Which is a shame, as quite often there is decent
>unbiased information posted.

Dear List:

Forgive the sneering, but.....

Me thinks thou protesteth too much. In one breath (make that one
sentence) you say that there is " ... quite often ... decent,
unbiased information posted."

In the first breath you declare that there is often " hate
mail." Uh, am I the only one, or are there others recognizing
that this list is composed of human beings? Frankly, anyone who
cannot engage, accept or otherwise, tolerate the emotions this
subject elicits is just as biased as those being accused of
harboring the bias. Of course everyone is biased.

Bias is to emotion as UFOs are to bias. Which sounds like a good
book title!

As I said in previous posts, money is sometimes the guiding
light here, which is to say "this subject." And we all know how
people react to "the guiding light" when faced with death (or
dimunition) of income, don't we?

Duh!

We "Head Towards The Light"! I read that someplace.

>Let's pull together. Is it too much
>trouble to listen to other peoples theories and thoughts on the
>UFO subject.

Of course not. So, uh, why can't you?

> Why can't we all just GROW UP? Jerry Anderson
>UFOMEK

You are asking humans guided by the light of
emotion (and often, - money) to grow up?

Puleeze, grow up!

>Working for a united UFO community

My humble opine, this is the best place for information. Use
your intellect and sift thru the BS. That's what it's for (the
intellect).

No offense meant, but a critique of the content herein is merely
a critique of the species. If one is unhappy here, one will be
unhappy everywhere.  New York, New York, it's a hell of a town.

Will somebody please retrieve my soapbox? I think I left it here
last week. It's my favorite one, too.

Jim Mortellaro







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

                                Stats Needed

From: "Ben Field" <ben@abcfield.force9.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:24:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:24:40 -0400
Subject: Stats Needed


Dear List

Would anyone happen to know anywhere I could get some facts and
figures on UFO observations/abductions/experiences?

Figures about the UK would be preferable on any subjects relating
to UFOs (I'm thinking of 45% of people claim to have seen a UFO,
for example-does this seem feasible?).

By Friday if possible

All the best

Ben Field







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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 13:03:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:10:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

At 09:30 AM 9/30/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:42:07 -0700
>From: jerry anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

<snip>

>>I had heard much about the listing from another source and
>>thought I might try wading into the torrent of observations and
>>technical data to see if I might learn something or, perhaps,
>>offer my own insight into the subject of UFOs. I'm hardly
>>keeping a direct count but the vast majority of listings seem to
>>have very little, if nothing, to do with discussions about real
>>evidence or technical data.

<snip>

>I'm gonna give it another month, and if I still keep reading
>what is sometimes no more than 'Hate Mail', I'm packing the
>Updates in. Which is a shame, as quite often there is decent
>unbiased information posted. Let's pull together. Is it too much
>trouble to listen to other peoples theories and thoughts on the
>UFO subject. Why can't we all just GROW UP? Jerry Anderson
>UFOMEK

>Working for a united UFO community

Jerry and Roger,

The term 'hate mail' is an overstatement. Hard discussions: sure.
Hate mail? Geez...

Understanding problems, facing them and trying to find solutions
is the essential of growing up.  Not turning your back on them.


Sometimes people have a bad day, or a bad year, or a bad karma.
If you find there are bullies around the block, you have the
right to stand up and tell him you know.

The List is not PG-rated.  You're on your own.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:43:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:30:32 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

>I can't thank Greg Sandow enough for opening my eyes to what an
>obstacle I've been for the last twenty-six years to the UFO
>field's gaining the level of "respectability" it so richly
>deserves. Gee, if I'd only known!

Not only that, the practice of ufology is protected under the
first amendment: i.e. the free exercise of religion. Your past
actions have been precariously close to being unconstitutional.

>By all means, stick with the Robert O. Deans, the Kevin Randles,
>the Stanton Friedmans, the David Rudiaks, the Don Schmitts, the
>Phillip Corsos, the Don Berliners, the Jerome Clucks, the Mark
>Rodeghiers, the Michael Swords', the Mark Cashmans, the Steven
>Greers, the Clifford Stones, and let's not forget the oh-so
>pious Greg Sandows, and all the other ufological elite who have
>made the UFO field what it is today.

They are all keepers of the 'Word', tolerant of fellow prophets
and respectful of each others individual ufological beliefs,
especially when unsupported by data and evidence. It is
ufologically and politically incorrect to argue against a fellow
ufologist's position on ufological beliefs as long as they are a
keeper of the 'Word'. You, Robert Todd, are not a keeper of the
'Word'. This makes you an infidel and a threat to the stability
of the faith, obviously someone that needs to be demonized.

>In ufology, as in politics, you get the leaders you deserve. And
>for my money, you're more than welcome to every last one of
>them. Enjoy!

Popular consent determines the wellbeing of ufology. The more
people that believe, the more popular that ufology gets. Somehow
or other, that growing popularity, also known as the UFO
movement, is seen by some of the keepers of the 'Word' as the
force that will ultimately thrust ufology to the forefront of
universal acceptance and respectability.

>Remove me from the list, please. Obviously, I'm not worthy.

Obviously not, you have been previously officially
ex-communicated from the history of ufology by the exclusion of
even a mention in Jerome Clark's three volume encyclopedia,
louded by the publisher and author as the reference to be for
future generations and by a majority of the UFO community as a
prime example of objectivism in the field.

>[Made so - after the posting of this message to the List -
> perhaps now that he's left the building, some subscribers
> can key their _real_ feelings regarding Bob Todd! --ebk]

On one ufological hand (Greg Sandow's), you are demonized for
your irrelevance to the 'Word' and in another ufological hand
(Jerome Cluck's), your research contributions are completely
ignored and unofficially rendered non-existant while the keepers
of the 'Word' loud Jerome Cluck as the "true" ufological
historian.

No need to fret. Soon the keepers of the 'Word' will need to
find someone else to demonize and blame for the sorry position
ufology is in today and it won't be directed at any of the
keepers of the 'Word'.

>Robert Todd
>Waterboy
>Debunker >Liar
>Illegal Procurer of Government Personnel Files
>Defamer of Righteous Roswell Whistleblowers
>Roadblock to the UFO Field's "Respectability"
>General Blight on the Face of Ufology -- if not
>All of Humanity

Thank you for your unnamed contributions. Sorry to see you are
leaving.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:44:06 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:00:47 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

><snip>

>>Korff's message about Rudiak and Todd's last explosion are the
>>saddest things I've ever seen on this list. Both gentlemen make
>>scathing complaints about the state of ufology -- while
>>remaining childishly unaware that their own attacks are part of
>>the problem, and that such things would never be tolerated in
>>any established field.

>>Greg Sandow

>In ufology, as in politics, you get the leaders you deserve. And
>for my money, you're more than welcome to every last one of
>them. Enjoy!

>Remove me from the list, please. Obviously, I'm not worthy.


So Bob Todd has taken his marbles and gone home with
them. I guess the moral of the story is that some people
can dish it out but they can't take it.

Jerry Clark









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

                FSG News: Betty Hill Interview Available For

From: Scott Carr <sardonica@erols.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 14:23:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:07:03 -0400
Subject: FSG News: Betty Hill Interview Available For


Dear FSG Reader,

Betty Hill's recent interview on the 'UFO Desk' 99.5 FM WBAI, NY
radio show produced by FSG Editor, Scott C. Carr, and Paul
Williams is now available for download in RealAudio format.

Hear Ms. Hill recount her famous 1961 abduction, and the less
than famous events which she has continued to experience since
then.

Please visit the Flying Saucer Gazette homepage 'What's New'
section, to find a link to this RealAudio file.

And be sure to scroll down to the bottom of the page to see the
latest happenings and future guests on 'UFO Desk'. As Paul
Williams and Scott Carr work double time to bring you the most
intriguing and enlightening news from the UFO Culture.

Check back often, as we will be offerring many more 'UFO Desk'
episodes and interviews for download!

Enjoy!

-Scott C. Carr
Editor, The Flying Saucer Gazette
http://www.erols.com/sardonica

Producer, "UFO Desk"
99.5 FM WBAI, NY






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

                             Re: MIB Abduction?

From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:49:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:15:15 -0400
Subject: Re: MIB Abduction?


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto [mailto:updates@globalserve.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 1998 5:32 PM
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: MIB Abduction?

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MIB Abduction?
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 98 11:44:06 PDT

>>From: Robert Earle <Robert_Earle/UT/ASP@autolivasp.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:34:43 -0600
>>Subject: MIB abductions?

>>I wanted to ask the list if they have ever heard of abduction
>>or contact encounters involving MIB type entities?

<snip>


>Robert and list,

>This sounds in most particulars like a classic "Old Hag"
>sleep-paralysis/hallucination experience.  I urge interested
>persons to read David J. Hufford's classic work on the
>subject, The Terror That Comes in the Night (University of
>Pennsylvania Press, 1982).

>Hufford, I should add, is commendably open-minded about
>anomalous experiences and articulately critical of reductionist
>attempts to explain them (or explain them away).  Still, he
>provides a useful perspective, telling us what is understood and
>what is not understood about experiences like the one described
>here.

>Jerry Clark


Sounds like a classic "ghost story" or haunting to me. That, I'm
afraid, is beyond the scope of this list but, if I may, here is
a simple test; go to sleep with a rock in your hand, tape it
there if you have to.

When the visitor appears, (regain your composure?) toss the rock
at him. If the rock passes through the guy, it's a ghost. Run
like hell for the nearest exit or attempt to communicate,
depending on your own inclinations. If the rock bounces off,
something or someone is really there. Maybe a MIB or just some
incredibly bizarre person. I suggest a bigger rock at this
point!

A MIB may actually try to eat the rock or thank-you for it but a
bizarre enough person may do the same things.

Finally, if the rock you taped to your hand is not there when
you need it and you told know one of your plans, you are almost
certainly dreaming the whole thing. Wake up or see where it
takes you.

I realize this sounds a little (lot?) tongue-in-cheek and
admittedly, it is. That point put aside, I would handle the
situation in exactly this manner if I could maintain my
composure enough to do so. Personally, I'm putting my money on
the ghost, if there is such a thing.

Cheers,

R. 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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 14:15:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:02:44 -0400
Subject: Re: For Collectors Of 'Alien' Art-effects


>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:48:09 -0500
>>Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:48:09 -0500
>>Subject: U-Haul's 'UFO' Trucks

>>From: http://www.uhaul.com/html/honors_nm.htm

>>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

>>U-HAUL HONORS NEW MEXICO WITH TRUCK GRAPHIC IMAGE TO BE UNVEILED
>>AT INT'L. UFO MUSEUM IN ROSWELL

<snip>

>>Decals for at least 300 moving vans will be produced at Kar-Go
>>Decal Company in Ivyland, Pa., and will be promptly shipped to
>>production facilities in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. There,
>>the 3M decal material featuring IUFOMRC images promoting the
>>State of New Mexico will be attached to U-Haul van boxes,
>>installed on chassis and will be moving families one-way or
>>locally across America by the end of January.

<snip>

>I was hoping it was just a false rumor.  But view, and weep, or laugh,
>or whatever...

>http://www.uhaul.inter.net/supergraphics/sg_nm_alien.htm

>Rod

Yep!! I saw a U-Haul Van parked with the decal at a U-Haul rental
and service station in Ellsworth, ME last week. Really weird.

Marie






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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:13:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:09:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters



>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 11:43:41 EDT
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>>Hello all,

>>I'm rather new to the list, having only participated for a
>>little over a week or so....

>>Boy, what a week!

<snip>
>>UFOs are REAL, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>>either a Fed or a cynic or, or... just plain stupid!

>>-OR-

>>UFOs are FAKE, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>>either a nut or a fraud or, or... just plain stupid!

SNIP
>>I have no fear of the truth.

>>But those that do would be doing us all favor by keeping their
>>heavily biased slams to themselves and spend more time looking
>>for factual information to talk about.

>>Later,

>>Roger Evans

>I am relatively new also. I've only been around for a month or
>so. At first I felt similarly over the constant bickering. As a
>matter of fact, I am old enough to remember the 'Bickersons'.
>That was an old radio show in the forties. Some of us remember
>amplitude modulation, but not many. It's a curse.

You remember AM? I thought only the President knew about
modulating the amplitude.

>If you are waiting for a "BUT!" then wait no longer. UFOs and
>related issues elicit a strong emotional response. It appears to
>be a knee jerk response. I am sure you agree.

Yes, sometime with the emphasis on "jerk"/

>When emotion comes into conflict with reason, guess who wins?

>But if you sift thru the BS and get into the beef (where's the
>beef? It's in there somewhere, trust me.) you can get some good
>G2 and a good education on the subjects of UFO's, psychology and
>a little philosophy thrown in for good measure.

<snip>

>Enjoy, learn and get ticked off. It's good for the arteries.>

>And remember what Confuscious said, "Wet bird never fry at
>night."

>Jim Mortellaro

Glad you stuck around long enough to find some gold buried in
the mud.






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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:49:32 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:23:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>Hello all,

>I'm rather new to the list, having only participated for a
>little over a week or so....

>Boy, what a week!

>I had heard much about the listing from another source and
>thought I might try wading into the torrent of observations and
>technical data to see if I might learn something or, perhaps,
>offer my own insight into the subject of UFOs. I'm hardly
>keeping a direct count but the vast majority of listings seem to
>have very little, if nothing, to do with discussions about real
>evidence or technical data.

>Instead there seems to be an emphasis on "beating each other
>up".

>One person slams another. Then someone writes in to take revenge
>on the original slammer. Then, yet, someone ELSE writes in to
>slam THAT person. It seems to be an endless cyber-gang war with
>drive by cyber hits rattling all around us....
>
>Granted, there's freedom of speech; that's hardly an issue and I
>think everyone knows that. But there is a difference, I think,
>between a healthy discussion of a particular topic and an almost
>religious mantra that seems to go like this:
>
>UFOs are REAL, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>either a Fed or a cynic or, or... just plain stupid!
>
>-OR-
>
>UFOs are FAKE, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>either a nut or a fraud or, or... just plain stupid!
>
>I mean, is this all really necessary?
<snip>
>I have no fear of the truth.
>
>But those that do would be doing us all favor by keeping their
>heavily biased slams to themselves and spend more time looking
>for factual information to talk about.
>
>Later,
>
>Roger Evans

Roger,

When I first joined the list a few months I had the same
reaction as your good self. I found I was aghast at the amount
of personal abuse and invective that was bouncing around -
seemed at the time to be mostly of British origin.

I had seriously considered leaving the list as I did not want my
in tray cluttered with such a waste of energy (my having to wade
thru it) and space on my pc. It was a relief when it finally
died down as I didn't want to leave the list. What you are
reading in the list of late is relatively very tame in
comparison.

Anyway, I'm glad I persevered as I have enjoyed many of the
posts and the responses generated by them. Also, the links that
have been shared have been of great interest for the most part,
and the ability to contribute to the discussions is a plus.

I do find some contributions way too airy-fairy for credulity's
sake but, hey, that's freedom of speech even for those posts
that have been nothing at all to with UFO arguments.

Stick to it, Roger, for in every bucket of muck there is the odd
gem well worth the find.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 17:50:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:20:50 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

><snip>

>>Korff's message about Rudiak and Todd's last explosion are the
>>saddest things I've ever seen on this list. Both gentlemen make
>>scathing complaints about the state of ufology -- while
>>remaining childishly unaware that their own attacks are part of
>>the problem, and that such things would never be tolerated in
>>any established field.

>>Greg Sandow

>I can't thank Greg Sandow enough for opening my eyes to what an
>obstacle I've been for the last twenty-six years to the UFO
>field's gaining the level of "respectability" it so richly
>deserves.  Gee, if I'd only known!

Bad sarcasm -- a richer irony... Mr. Sandow was tightly on the
beam, while you only _quash_ an investigation with your inflated
and too tightly interpreted bits of *evidence* -- others enrich
it.

>By all means, stick with the Robert O. Deans

Hey -- who's to say. He certainly froths a lot less than you do.
Besides, his version is more in line with a world view that fits
the facts -- your's just dismisses them. Bottom line -- Marcel
was a trusted company man with an eye to detail, and respected
competence -- there is just _no_ way that he was the liar that
you and scurrilous others make him out to be.

>, the Kevin Randles,

... Way off here -- this guy wants to be rational though the
heavens fall. Heh! _You_ follow his investigations!

>the Stanton Friedmans

Back off -- you're not fit to shine this guy's shoes! You've
lanquished in his solid shadow for years -- step out!

>, the David Rudiaks,

... and _He_ speaks so highly of you! Again, his take on the
situation fit's the facts better than yours does because you
don't cop to the facts! What about all the _other_ anomalous
stuff -- Bob! Screw Roswell!

>the Don Schmitts,

Hey -- an open mind!

>the
>Phillip Corsos

A real late comer to the game -- left field grey basket stuff,
not germane.

>, the Don Berliners,

Showed courage _early_ in my estimation -- you don't show it
_yet_.

>the Jerome Clucks,

What body of work will YOU leave?!

>the Mark
>Rodeghiers, the Michael Swords',

I've not heard the names -- but if they're irritating you they
can't be half bad! <g>.

>the Mark Cashmans,

... this is baffling.

>the Steven
>Greers,

A leap to the absurd!

>the Clifford Stones,

<Heavy sigh... >

>and let's not forget the oh-so
>pious Greg Sandows, and all the other ufological elite who have
>made the UFO field what it is today.

Yeah -- God bless 'em every one! <poking my finger into Bob's
hairy belly>

>In ufology, as in politics, you get the leaders you deserve.

And in that statment show every card you've got -- Bob! Fold and
wait for the next deal.

>And
>for my money, you're more than welcome to every last one of
>them.  Enjoy!

But Bob -- you left out Sitchin, Hancock, Bauval, Velikovsky,
Marrs, Stone, Sheldon, Haines, Kasher, Howe, Vallee -- Jean Van
Gemert -- and the ubiqitous Joe Fabeetzi!!! Enjoy them I will!

>Remove me from the list, please.

Quitting only demonstates _weakness_ my friend! Consider how you
may _still_ be the best -- lacking conviction, while the worst
-- Us -- works with passionate intensity at whatever it is you
think we do ... ha ha ha!

>Obviously, I'm not worthy.

_Your_ words! I for one wished you would stay around as a _good_
example of how _not_ to work and play well with others ...

>[Made so - after the posting of this message to the List -
> perhaps now that he's left the building, some subscribers
> can key their _real_ feelings regarding Bob Todd! --ebk]

>Robert Todd

Mr. Toad! "Death" in German -- any irony there? <g>.

>Waterboy

Gunga Din!

>Debunker

Bunkie!

>Liar

Yeah -- no way to really sugar coat it... but you _meant_ well!
It was those tight inflexible little foci that you strained your
assumptions through... You almost dared Heisenburg to pervert
whatever results you obtained. Some of your assumptions, namely
the veracity of government documents is an example of this. No
-- it not the way _they_ tell ya' it is -- Bob. Not every time
-- not much of the time ...  damn too little of the time!

>Illegal Procurer of Government Personnel Files
>Defamer of Righteous Roswell Whistleblowers
>Roadblock to the UFO Field's "Respectability"
>General Blight on the Face of Ufology -- if not
>All of Humanity

Well -- _I_ would say "all of humanity"... but everyone knows I
paint with a broad brush <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

              P-1947: Mysterious Booms in Western Pennsylvania

From: Stan Gordon <PAUFO@WESTOL.COM>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:01:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:34:19 -0400
Subject: P-1947: Mysterious Booms in Western Pennsylvania

Mysterious Booms reported in Western Pennsylvania

At approximately 8:30 P.M. on September 27, 1998 a loud boom
was reported from Brownsville, PA in Fayette County, and was
heard into Washington County as well, covering approximately a
15 mile area.

While no source of the sound has been determined, some
possibilities are that it was associated with a distant
thunderstorm, a sonic boom, or detonated explosives. One source
has told me that a family in California Boro said their glass
curio cabinet "was rocked with glassware inside, falling and
breaking." Another person this source knew in West Brownsville,
said the blast jolted her out of bed.

One of my associates, Jim Brown who lives in Fayette County has
been following up on the incident as well, and has submitted
this initial report:

Reports were received by Brownsville Police around 8:30 P.M. on
September 27, 1998 regarding a loud boom.  The boom was heard as
far away as Smock, PA and also into Washington County.

I contacted Brownsville Police and spoke with one of the
officers on duty at the time. (Name witheld pending clearance to
publish) He states he heard the boom and describes it as a
concussion. When asked he said it definitely was not thunder,
but more like an explosion. Another officer also on duty reports
he heard what he describes as a fizz just before the boom.  He
compared it to a "launching."  He agrees it was a concussion
sound. Both investigated the area along with fire department
personnel but no physical evidence of any explosion was found.

They believe the boom was centered on or over the river,
directly behind the fire department. Neither witness saw
anything visual at the time of the boom, and of the numerous
reports received only one claims to have seem a flash of light.
(I have not been able to contact this person as of this date.)
The weather at the time had a storm cell just North of
Brownsville, but it was not storming in the immediate area.
There have been no other reports received by Brownsville police
of any other phenomena as of this date (9-29-98)

Jim Brown

Another Boom reportedly occurred in Indiana County on September
25, 1998

I have received information that a similar occurence took place
around 2 P.M. on September 25, 1998 near Saltsburg, PA in
Indiana County. A resident told me he heard what sounded like a
huge explosion. It started out as a very low pitched explosion
followed by a long rumble of a higher pitch. The rumble
continued for 15-30 seconds after the blast, and decreased
steadily in intensity. This person says he has talked with
others who heard it 15 miles away. I am trying to confirm
information on this at this time. Brownsville and Saltsburg are
about 40 miles distance apart.

FYI

Similar mysterious blasts have been reported from around the
country. Some of you will recognize the terms Skyquakes or
Airquakes that are sometimes associated with these reports. As
with cases of UFO's, quite often a natural or man-made
explanation can be found for these blasts, yet some are never
solved.

If you have any info on these reports or others in PA please let
me know.

Stan Gordon
UFO Hotline (24 hrs.) 724-838-7768
website: www.westol.com/~paufo






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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: GT Mccoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 20:35:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:42:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
To: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 11:03 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>From: Moderator UFO UFO UpDates - Toronto

>A Re-post.....

>ebk
>_____________________________________________________


>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Sharolyn Stenger <stenger@spindle.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New and Wondering
>>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:01:23 -0500

>>>From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford]
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000
>>>Subject: New and Wondering

>>>Dear Friends,

>>>I'm new to this list and wondering about all of the negative posts.
>>>Would someone be willing to give me a nutshell version of what the
>>>raging battle is about? It seems, to my newbie eyes,  primarily
>>>focused on a conflict of personalities. I'm sure the current fuss has
>>>it's root in some specific question. Just curious....

>>>Thanks,
>>>Mark

>>Dear Mark and Friends,

>>Amen!  I have so often wondered the same thing.  One would think
>>that a subscription list with the name, 'UFO Updates', would be
>>exactly that - updated news of UFO sightings, activity, etc.

>No. You might expect a list with the name 'UFO _News_ UpDates' to
>be such. 'UpDates' allows for re-hashing, possible trashing,
>peer-bashing and above all (as is quite apparent) forthright,
>informed 'discussion' - all without bothersome, uninformed
>'civilians' of the news.group type. All with a soupcon of
>'personality manifestation'.

>>And, to be fair, there IS some good information shared.  But you
>>have to wade through a tremendous amount of spleen-venting to
>>find it.

>What UpDates _does_ do is to allow those of us who are: informed,
>un-informed, fence-sitters, eager to learn, sharers, or quibblers,
>a forum to either voice or merely read without too much 'noise'.

>While there are those who take offence at the 'noise' that
>sometimes rises to an annoying level, others will observe the
>'loud-speakers' and either have their suspicions confirmed,
>change their minds about those individuals or simply  Cuss/grin
>and trash.

>Let's continue with some further observations.....

>There's a certain degree of difficulty in moderating a forum such
>as this List. 99% of posts to this address actually make it to
>your mailbox, almost all of it intact. Yes, some editing _is_
>done - on occasion 'nasties' are removed. Less frequently, one is
>missed and there ensues the reason for removing those 'nasties'.
>I'm sure you're aware of what I'm referring to.

><snip>

>The amount of crap that comes in this direction has to be seen
>to be believed. Plus, just because someone _has_ subscribed
>doesn't guarantee access to other subscriber's mailboxes.
>Filtering of "I believes", 'phenomenal theories', breathless
>observations, Channelers, blatant commercialism happens at
>this end. Everyone has a trash can and having to read
>everything is not a subscription-prerequisite. I've found
>that 'filter' settings are an inordinately useful piece of
>coding.

>Failing that, a simple one word 'Subject' line to this
>address - 'Un-Subscribe' will solve the problem if not the
>mystery.

>ebk


Hello  all,

Right on ,ebk, right on. I shudder to think of what you have to
put up with in the way of trash, I will admit that I have
exercised my right to 'trash' certain threads, and comments. To
those of you who are new, like my own lurking self for many
years, I love the debate, the fight for ideas.My Irish side
loves it!

The nature to quarrel is inherently human , and to do it with
word is much better than going to total war over mere words. and
yes,forums like UpDates allow people to vent and allow Ideas to
flow. Even if you had your own ideas about a certain subject,
you can always have the satisfaction of using 'Delete'.

GT McCoy





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

                 Spain's Air Force Reveals Secret UFO Files

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 21:46:05 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:45:12 -0400
Subject: Spain's Air Force Reveals Secret UFO Files


Hi All,

Fresh in from my contact in the Grand Canaria Islands, I thought
this might interest some of you.

The following appeared in this months English speaking newspaper
on the Island called "The Sun" no relation to the murdoch tabloid
I must add.

The Spanish Air Force, has lifted its secrecy concerning dozens
of enquiries into sightings of unidentified flying objects (UFOs)
registered in Spain over the last three decades.

Vicente-Juan Ballester, head of investigations at the Fundacion n
Anomallia, a foundation dedicated to the investigation of this
type of phenomena, announced that the general public can now
consult 83 of these 'X Files' in the general Air library.

These reports, classified as secret until now, concern anomalous
sightings of UFOs by Spanish aviation personel between 1962 and
1995."The revelation of these reports is the final stage of a
process of declassification of the Air Force's secret UFO
information which began in 1992 after a military committee made a
brave decision on the subject, pointed out professor Ballester
Olmos".

The expert indicated that some of these files had been handed
over at the start of 1992 by the General Air Headquarters, where
they had been kept for around thirty years, to the Air Operative
Commander (MOA) in charge of the management of UFO information at
the Torrejon Air Base near Madrid.

This move has led to the MOA rescuing another 20 UFO reports over
the last year a half from other military installations all over
Spain, through an intensive document search.

The 83 UFO reports which have finally been made available to the
general public amount to 2,000 pages about seemingly anomalous
events occurring between 1962 and 1995.

Hope this is of some use to anyone, but maybe some of our Spanish
colleagues, might be able to enlighten us some more.

Kindest Regards.

Roy..  (ELUFON) Essex & London UFO Network

                {Proof By Perseverance}
                   Watch The Skies







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

                                 BAR 199809

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 00:54:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:45:50 -0400
Subject: BAR 199809

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).

September, 1998 (Vol 1, #9)

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: Recent Additions only.  As those of you getting the Media Alert
can tell, I'm very busy this month.  I have been sent a book which I am
reading and intend  to do as the Feature Title next month.  For now, something
brief so you get something in September.

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571741135/bufosweirdworld">A
1-900 Psychic Speaks</A>

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1561706213/bufosweirdworld">
Adventures of a Psychic</A>
by Sylvia Browne

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0713727322/bufosweirdworld">
Alien Intent</A>

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1862043531/bufosweirdworld">
Arrival of the Gods</A>
by Erich Von Daniken

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/189213800X/bufosweirdworld">
The Chinese Roswell</A>
Featured in FATE!

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0713727195/bufosweirdworld">
Destination Earth</A>

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0964809028/bufosweirdworld">
Eagles Disobey: The Case for Inca City, Mars</A>

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0440226120/bufosweirdworld">
Fairies (Bord)</A>
Now in paperback!

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0932813534/bufosweirdworld">
HAARP (Smith)</A>

 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/070060930X/bufosweirdworld">
Haunted Kansas</A>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                             Echelon Spy Network

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:06:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:26:47 -0400
Subject: Echelon Spy Network


G'day List,

I thought that the following article copied from the 'Hotwired'
news service may be of interest as ECHELON has cropped up on
this list in the past.

Checkout the report at
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/15295.html
for the active links.

As an Oz citizen I would be mightily disgusted if Oz was using
the ECHELON system to gain unfair commercial advantage - however
I fully expect that this posting is targeted by the very mention
of the word ECHELON.

Regards, Leanne


Eavesdropping on Europe by Niall McKay

4:00 a.m.  30.Sep.98.PDT If the European Parliament has its way,
the lid is about to come off what is reputedly one of the most
powerful, secretive, and extensive spy networks in history --
if, in fact, it really exists. In October, Europe's governing
body will commission a full report into the workings of Echelon,
a global network of highly sensitive listening posts operated in
part by America's most clandestine intelligence organization,
the National Security Agency.

"Frankly, the only people who have any doubt about the existence
of Echelon are in the United States," said Glyn Ford, a British
member of the European Parliament and a director of Scientific
and Technical Options Assessment, or STOA, a technology advisory
committee to the parliament.

Echelon is reportedly able to intercept, record, and translate
any electronic communication -- telephone, data, cellular, fax,
email, telex -- sent anywhere in the world. The parliamentary
report will focus on concerns that the system has expanded and
is now zeroed in on the secrets of European companies and
elected officials.

The parliament is alarmed at reports of Echelon's impressive
capabilities, and during a debate on 19 September, the European
Union called for accountability. The parliament stressed that
the NSA and the Government Communications Headquarters, which
jointly operate Echelon, must adopt measures to guard against
the system's abuse.

International cooperation on law enforcement is important, Ford
said, but there are limits. "We want to establish a code of
conduct for the systems to protect EU citizens and governments."

Across the Atlantic, Patrick Poole, deputy director for the Free
Congress Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank, is
preparing a report on Echelon to present to Republican members
of Congress. "I believe it's time we start to bring this matter
to our elected officials," he said.

Poole and Ford have their work cut out for them: Neither Britain
nor the United States will admit that Echelon even exists. The
NSA declined any comment on a series of faxed questions for this
story.

Keyword: Bomb

Over the years, enough information has leaked to suggest that
the spy network is more than science fiction. Echelon came to
the attention of the EU Parliament following a report
commissioned by STOA last year.

"Unlike many of the electronic spy systems developed during the
Cold War, Echelon is designed for primarily non-military
targets: governments, organizations, and businesses in virtually
every country," the report said.

According to the STOA report and stories in The New York Times,
The Daily Telegraph, and The Guardian, Echelon consists of a
network of listening posts, antenna fields, and radar stations.
The system is backed by computers that use language translation,
speech recognition, and keyword searching to automatically sift
through telephone, email,  fax, and telex traffic.

The system is principally operated by the NSA and the GCHQ, but
reportedly also relies on cooperation with "signals
intelligence" operations in other countries, including the
Communications Security Establishment of Canada, Australia's
Defense Signals Directorate, and New Zealand's Government
Communications Security Bureau.

John Pike, a security analyst for the Federation of American
Scientists,said each of the five government agencies takes
responsibility for its own geographical region.

Each agency reportedly maintains a glossary of keywords. If
Echelon intercepts a transmission containing a word or phrase
contained in the glossary -- bomb, for example -- the full
conversation, email, or fax is recorded and shared among the
agencies.

"Echelon intercepts Internet traffic at the transport layer,
such as the TCP/IP layer, so the system doesn't care too much
what it is or where it came from," said Pike. "For analog
traffic, such as telephone conversations, it uses automatic
voice-recognition technology to scan the conversations."

Abuses of Power?

While the EU is aware that Echelon may be a useful tool for
tracking down global terrorists, drug barons, and international
criminals, Ford said the parliament is concerned that the system
may also be used for espionage, spying on peaceful nations, or
gaining unfair economic advantage over non-member nations.

Indeed, there are many reported instances of the British and US
intelligence agencies working together to gather information in
a questionable manner.

A 1993 BBC documentary about NSA's Menwith Hill facility in
England revealed that peace protestors had broken into the
installation and stolen part of this glossary, known as "the
Dictionary." The documentary alleged that Menwith Hill -- a
sprawling installation covering 560 acres and employing more
than 1,200 people -- was Echelon's nerve center.

Further evidence emerged last year, when British Telecom told a
court that it provides high-bandwidth telecommunications into
the Menwith Hill facility and from the facility to the United
States, using a transatlantic fiber-optic network.

"I believe that these five intelligence agencies are working
from a single plan," said Pike.

British investigative journalist Duncan Campbell was the first
to report about Echelon in a 1988 article in The New Statesman.
He believes that there is a very thin line between intelligence
gathering and commercial espionage.

Pike, of the Federation of American Scientists, believes the
intelligence agencies operate in a gray area of international
law. For example, there is no law prohibiting the NSA from
intercepting telecommunications and data traffic in the United
Kingdom and no law prohibiting GCHQ from doing the same thing in
the United States.

"The view by the NSA seems to be anything that can be
intercepted is fair game," said Pike. "And it's very hard to
find out what, if any, restraints can be employed."







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

                 Re: Screening and Discussion w/Budd Hopkins

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 01:57:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:09:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Screening and Discussion w/Budd Hopkins


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Screening and Discussion w/Budd Hopkins
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 98 15:47:55 PDT

>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 12:40:41 -0500
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Screening and Discussion w/Budd Hopkins

>>Look for further news about our planned November 14th

>>"New York UFO/Abduction Conference"

>>Featured Speakers will be:

>>Budd Hopkins, Author/Researcher ("Witnessed; The True
>>Story of the Brooklyn Bridge Abduction")

>>Dr.David Jacobs, Author/Researcher ("The Threat: The
>>Secret Agenda")

>>Jerome Clarke, Author/Researcher ("UFO Encyclopedia")

>Hey, John,

>I thought I was gonna speak at this thing.  Who's this
>"Clarke" guy, anyway?  Never heard of him, but if he's
>claiming to have written The UFO Encyclopedia, I'll sic
>my attorney after the SOB!

>Cheers,

>Jerome Clark, Author/Researcher ("UFO Encyclopedia")
===================================================

Hi Jerry,

Sorry about the extra 'e' but I had one (1) left over after
I wrote the post. I 'generously' gave it to you and now
you threaten to sic one of those unholy creatures that
was born into the world without a soul on me! (Lawyers)

Actually, if you write your name while standing at a
location on or near 19.5 degrees North latitude as
you face in the direction of the Pyramids (or Stonehenge
depending on whether you're coming or going) it _will_
have an 'e' at the end of it! You'll have to take my word
for it, as I have no hard evidence to back up my
[admittedly] outrageous claims.

Look forward to seeing you here in November. Spoke
with Budd, expect a call shortly. We've arranged to get
you here by camel. Is that ok with you? We need to know,
. . .which do you prefer, one hump or two? And Abdulla
over at the rental outfit needs to know (in advance)
if you prefer to ride 'side saddle!'

<Hee-Haw>

Seee youe soone!

Peacee,

Johne Veleze  :-D
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                               Re: Voreppe UFO

From: Joachim Koch <JKoch1@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 03:04:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:40:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Voreppe UFO


>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 23:51:53 +0200
>From: Bourdais Gildas <gildas.bourdais@hol.fr>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Voreppe UFO

>On another French case,
>the recent observation of a luminous UFO near Le Havre,
>I don't believe the explanation of Velasco, that the
>gendarmes  and police saw the planet Jupiter and its
>three satellites !<

Thank you for clearing things up re Voreppe.

Re Le Havre: no French gendarme is able to distinguish
Jupiter and three of its Satellites with the naked eye.
You need at least a binocular with 50 mm objective
lenses.

And if  you see the Satellites with the binocular
(four are possible at its best)they apparently don't
move (of  course, they do but distinguishably only
in the course of hours).

Joachim Koch, Berlin






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

                          Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?

From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:59:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:22:55 -0400
Subject: Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: The New Nazi-ET Lie!
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 09:46:11 +0100

<snip>

>All the evidence that I have got strongly suggests to both
>myself, Bill Rose and the others associated with our research
>that it was indeed the US Navy (Engineering Division) who were
>most responsible for the early postwar sightings of metallic
>discs which, in most cases, were operating well within the
>boundaries of terrestrial technology. A gas turbine powered
>XF5U-1, that AIR 100-203-79 suggest was operational in 1947/8,
>would, according to several aviation  writers have been able to
>fly at very low speeds and would have had a flight envelope of
>between 0-550mph....

>A 'Project Sign' document in my possession indicates that the
>USAF Intelligence people knew about tests of low aspect ratio
>aircraft involved in 'boundary layer experiments' and that the
>aircraft as built by none other than Chance-Vought.

>Occasionally, new information on classified aircraft forces the
>UFO community to look again at it's underlying raison d'=EAtre -
>the theory of ET-human contact.

<Snip>


Tim,

What I can't figure out is how come silent-running vehicles,
invisible to radar, designed for atmospheric and space flight,
capable of hovering and stationary and vertical flight, that
reach tremendous speeds and acceleration (from 0 to 1500 knots in
seconds), are able to outpace any known conventional craft and
are almost invulnerable to enemy attacks have been kept in the
cupboard for more than 50 years ?

Do you have any incentive on that ?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:32:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:43:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

I think that everybody has overlooked the following facts:

- This is not a "free-speech" forum: it's moderated

- This list is not always a true reflection of the state of Ufology (or
  is it?)

- Poor Errol has to read *every* diatribe, petty or relevant, posted
  here.

If any subscriber has a problem with the content, then there are
several courses of action:

- Unsubscribe, as Errol mentioned

- Join in the fray

- High-light and delete

I usually realise after a couple of postings where the issue is
going, so I simply sort and delete in advance. I might miss
something occasionally, but I doubt if it's that important.

If anybody is looking for info, or wishes to start a new thread,
then a simple posting usually gets you all the attention you
want, from arguably some of the most informed people associated
with the genre.

I also know now who I can treat with credibility, and who I
can't. Needless to say, I won't differentiate in detail, but any
new members can email me privately, and I'll give my list of
"good guys", and they can assume the rest.....

regards

Jakes E. Louw
louwje@telkom.co.za
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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            Re: KGB Crashed Disc

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:20:54 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:00:32 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disc


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 07:58:15 +0100

>When I was on holiday in Spain you could buy perfect replicas of
>the AK-47 for =A340. I couldn't tell the difference...

>On holiday in the USA a few years ago I could have bought an
>AK-47 and Russian uniform - if was sad enough to do so - for a
>few hundred quid. A job lot for the whole film would not cost as
>much as the producer was/is likely to make from future sales.

>Wasn't this shown on TNT? 'WCW Wrestling' is on TNT and that
>looks real too doesn't it?

>Whether real or replica AK-47s are not difficult to come by -
>even in pubs in Manchester England!

>Therefore, I'm not sure that your post has much bearing on the
>film, which is quite obviously a fake - although one which
>attempted to learn from the Roswell Autopsy scam - despite your
>noble efforts to move the research forward....

>In any case, as I pointed out on Jeff Renses' 'Sightings' radio
>show last Sunday, flying discs are entirely terrestrial in
>origin and any attempt to pass them off as ET is highly
>questionable and almost certainly profitable.

>There is considerable evidence to support my case - and not just
>stories from unnamed soldiers and 'informed' sources.....

>I'd like to know about the provenance of this film; in other
>words, what is its real source and who made it. Hats off to
>them I say!! Better luck next time....

>Any half decent studio could have put this together. At a
>glance, the whole film looks too modern....

>Tim Matthews


This whole thing smells to high heaven. First of all, they show
the Russians shooting with 16 mm cameras. Then they show film
cans and make a big deal that the marking on the film edge match
the cans. But the cans are for 35 mm motion picture film, and
the film strips they show are 16 mm. This set off my alarms
immediately.

You can buy anything seen in the film easily. Check out

http://www.sovietski.com

for one source of props. You may even note that the wool winter
topcoats are only available in small, which may account for
using such young actors to play the soldiers!

The image quality looks much better than old Russian 16 mm film
that I have seen. It looks like it was filmed last week, and
probably was.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            Re: KGB Crashed Disc

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:22:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disc


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 07:58:15 +0100

>On holiday in the USA a few years ago I could have bought an
>AK-47 and Russian uniform - if was sad enough to do so - for a
>few hundred quid. A job lot for the whole film would not cost as
>much as the producer was/is likely to make from future sales.

>Wasn't this shown on TNT? 'WCW Wrestling' is on TNT and that
>looks real too doesn't it?

Tim, let's not make broad assumptions without some foundation of
fact. You're indicating that since "WCW Wrestlin" is shown on
TNT, and is known to be fake, then everything shown on that
network is suspect. Nonsense.

I could point out that that kind of logic is commonly used by
debunkers, so obviously you must be a debunker. (again, I think
that's nonsense as well . ... or at least I hope that's
nonsense)... <g>)

>Whether real or replica AK-47s are not difficult to come by -
>even in pubs in Manchester England!

>Therefore, I'm not sure that your post has much bearing on the
>film, which is quite obviously a fake - although one which
>attempted to learn from the Roswell Autopsy scam - despite your
>noble efforts to move the research forward....

>In any case, as I pointed out on Jeff Renses' 'Sightings' radio
>show last Sunday, flying discs are entirely terrestrial in
>origin and any attempt to pass them off as ET is highly
>questionable and almost certainly profitable.

>There is considerable evidence to support my case - and not just
>stories from unnamed soldiers and 'informed' sources.....

Obviously, one can't tell from the program whether or not the
AK-47s were real or fake. The issue being raised is whether or
not the film can quickly be discounted as a fraud because of
some obvious error. The point is, as some have indicated, that
if this is a fake then those who put it together did their
homework. Of course the uniforms and weaponry are readily
available, so the fact that they are included is no proof that
it's authentic.

In the last several weeks your theory that "flying discs are
entirely terrestrial" has been made clear on this "list" and
others. The jury is still out on that issue, and I would suspect
it may never come back with a unified verdict, but keep the
information coming and we'll take a look at it.

>I'd like to know about the provenance of this film; in other
>words, what is its real source and who made it. Hats off to
>them I say!! Better luck next time....

>Any half decent studio could have put this together. At a
>glance, the whole film looks too modern....

>Tim Matthews

Your reaction is similar to mine, but the fact that it "looks
too modern" is a gut reaction unless you have some evidence to
support it.

Have you seen the entire program? Or, are you reacting to the
web site information that's been posted?

This program was not produced by TNT, but was aired by that
network after they bought it from another Production Company.
While it is possible they worked together on the project, that
would not normally be the case, and I suspect that it was a
program concept that was offered to a number of networks and TNT
was simply the highest (or only) bidder.

Any half decent studio could have indeed put this together, but
without learning more about the provenance of the film we are
left with only our current belief systems to guide us. The
veracity of the "experts" in the program has not been confirmed,
and until the actual film can be independantly verified and
tested, we'll have little in the way of evidence to guide us.
And even with that evidence, the veracity of the incident being
shown would still remain questionable.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:42:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:18:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:13:06 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 11:43:41 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>>>Hello all,

>>>I'm rather new to the list, having only participated for a
>>>little over a week or so....

>>>Boy, what a week!

><snip>

>>>UFOs are REAL, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>>>either a Fed or a cynic or, or... just plain stupid!

>>>-OR-

>>>UFOs are FAKE, man, and if you disagree with me then you're
>>>either a nut or a fraud or, or... just plain stupid!

<snip>

>>>I have no fear of the truth.

>>>But those that do would be doing us all favor by keeping their
>>>heavily biased slams to themselves and spend more time looking
>>>for factual information to talk about.

>>>Later,

>>>Roger Evans

>>I am relatively new also. I've only been around for a month or
>>so. At first I felt similarly over the constant bickering. As a
>>matter of fact, I am old enough to remember the 'Bickersons'.
>>That was an old radio show in the forties. Some of us remember
>>amplitude modulation, but not many. It's a curse.

>You remember AM? I thought only the President knew about
>modulating the amplitude.

Nope, Slick knows about the angle of the amplitude but the
modulation is definitely by frequency.

>>If you are waiting for a "BUT!" then wait no longer. UFOs and
>>related issues elicit a strong emotional response. It appears to
>>be a knee jerk response. I am sure you agree.

>Yes, sometime with the emphasis on "jerk"/

>>When emotion comes into conflict with reason, guess who wins?

>>But if you sift thru the BS and get into the beef (where's the
>>beef? It's in there somewhere, trust me.) you can get some good
>>G2 and a good education on the subjects of UFO's, psychology and
>>a little philosophy thrown in for good measure.

><snip>
>
>>Enjoy, learn and get ticked off. It's good for the arteries.>

>>And remember what Confuscious said, "Wet bird never fry at
>>night."

>>Jim Mortellaro

>Glad you stuck around long enough to find some gold buried in
>the mud.

Actually, sticking around here is definitely an education in
mud, slinging, that is. However my most intense joy is in the
act of demonstrating or at least reading about the demonstration
of the temperature of the sand.

The sand some folks seem to have their heads burried in.

Illigitimum non carborundum, Bruce. It's how I get thru life.

Jim






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

              Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:43:22 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:21:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds


>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:12:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds

>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 11:24:23 -0500 (CDT)
>>Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 14:41:51 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Rudiak On Roswell' - Lorenzo Kimball Responds

>David,

>>I sent Kent Kimball the following post by you. In its entirety,
>>unedited. Don't be so paranoid -- if you can help it.

>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 00:59:39 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Evidence for Rudiak Et Al

>I wrote two posts, not one. There were points that I had already
>addressed, yet Kimball didn't seem to be aware of them. So I
>wondered out loud in my response to him whether you had sent him
>everything. Apparently not, if you sent him only one post. In
>your book this seems to make me "paranoid" for even asking.

You're right, David. I also sent him the following post.
Unedited. I didn't know I was going to have to document
everything for you:

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 03:45:07 EDT
To: updates@globalserve.net
Subject: Re: Evidence for Rudiak Et Al


>Funny, didn't Kal Korff just smear me as a "paranoid" only two
>days ago? But I guess it makes me "paranoid" to even point out
>that both of you simultaneously started using the same slur term
>against me -- right Dennis?


Careful, David, you're coming close to making my point.

>>Are you still suggesting that bodies were involved at one or
>>more crash sites

>Where did this come from? What does this have to do with
>Kimball? Just Dennis Stacy off to the races again, going off in
>one hundred different directions at once.

Why do things have to be spelled out time and time again for
you? You say there were bodies, Kimball says there weren't. You
also say Hendersoon was at the "main" site, which indicates a
lesser site. I'm just trying to find out -- from you, since you
know everything else about Roswell -- how many crash sites you
think there were, how many craft were involved, and which site
(or sites) had bodies?

>Read the top of Ramey's message Dennis. One of the clearest
>words on the page is **VICTIMS**. It's unmistakable. Right after
>that is language to the effect that they were forwarded to Fort
>Worth. "Victims," Dennis, "victims." Does that sound like a
>Mogul balloon crash?

Believe it or not, but I'm as intrigued by the possibility that
we may ultimately be able to read the message in Ramey's hand as
anyone. If for no other reason than the irony of the whole
thing. Here McAndrew and the AF are messing around with stick
lengths, and they left the smoking gun in full view all these
years! Some cover up artists!

>> and that the flight line was put on alert but not the hospital?

>Yes, some part of the flight line could be involved and not the
>hospital. E.g., would they bring crash wreckage to the hospital
>for medical care? And the "victims," if all stone cold dead,
>could be popped into refrigerated crates and shipped to Fort
>Worth for further processing, leaving the base hospital
>completely out of the loop.

Don't ask me. But have you forgotten Dennis seeing wreckage in
the back of an _ambulance_ parked outside the hospital?

>>That a cook and a pilot were pressed into recovery duties,

>More of Stacy's shotgun approach, mixing up everything together.
>The pilot is Oliver Henderson who told friends and family he had
>flown wreckage and alien bodies to Wright Field. Of course a
>pilot is going to be involved if you are flying something from
>point A to point B. Who are you going to use -- the cook? The
>medical supply officer? If Henderson had been out at a site
>already (according to his wife), for whatever reason, and he was
>the base senior pilot, why unnecessarily involve another pilot
>who didn't know anything?

If Henderson had been out to the crash site for your "whatever
reason," then that would seem to indicate that he had been
pressed into recovery duty, wouldn't it? Unless he had stumbled
on it by accident. My question was, why send a pilot to the
recovery scene?

>>an ambulance was sent out, but the hospital wasn't put on
>>standy notice at the very least.

>When have I mentioned an ambulance? Bodies and wreckage can be
>transported in all sorts of things, like trucks. In fact, your
>"camp cook," Sgt. Melvin Brown, said they used ordinary trucks
>to transport the bodies from whatever site he was at (according
>to his daughter).
>

Again, you seem to have forgotten Glenn Dennis and the ambulance
he said he saw wreckage in.

Here's what Randle & Schmitt had to say in The Truth About the
UFO Crash at Roswell, p. 11:

"We had a special group come in who were well covered,"
explained MacKenzie (ie., Frank Kaufmann). "[They wore] rubber
gloves...[They] put them in body bags."[37] The bodies were
placed in the rear of old box-type _ambulances_ to be driven to
the base hospital. [My emphasis -- note use of plural.] Sergeant
Melvin E. brown was ordered to climb into one of the ambulances
but to leave the body bags alone. [38]

End of quote.

>>That the camp
>>cook -- I don't care how good a shot he was -- had a need to
>>know but that the third ranking medical officer didn't?

>Why would the third ranking medical officer, who in this case
>said he was the medical supply officer, have to be involved at
>all? To pilot a plane? To stand guard? To load bodies into a
>crate?

Maybe to break out the full body coverings, gloves, and body
bags mentioned above, or does that sound inconsistent to you?
Note also in the above quote that it was said that the bodies
were "to be driven to the base hospital." Another reason for the
third-ranking medical officer to be involved.

>And notice how Stacy doesn't deal with the points I raised.
>Besides Melvin Brown having an official job speciality of
>"cook," he was fully qualified to stand guard, being a decorated
>WII combat veteran and an expert marksman. His daughter Beverley
>Bean says he told her that they grabbed everybody available at
>the moment and brought them out to the site in the desert, where
>he stood guard.

"Everybody available at the moment" is a far cry from your
earlier theoretical number of 100. My point was, they _had_
guards, so why the need to use a cook and a pilot? I'm sure most
of the MPs had military experience, too.

>>Nope, nothing inconsistent there.

>Absolutely, just Dennis Stacy up to his usual scattershot
>antics.

>David Rudiak


Ditto David.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            Re: KGB Crashed Disc

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:16:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:56:49 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disc


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 07:58:15 +0100

>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:52:10 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc

<snip>

>>Hi list:

>>The answer to the question regarding the AK's is YES.
>>I have a good deal of reference material on weaponry,
>>despite my being unable to hit anything as I admitted in
>>a prior posting.

>>I checked those references and the rifles, sights and
>>other accouterments appear to be correct vintage.

>When I was on holiday in Spain you could buy perfect replicas of
>the AK-47 for =A340. I couldn't tell the difference...

>On holiday in the USA a few years ago I could have bought an
>AK-47 and Russian uniform - if was sad enough to do so - for a
>few hundred quid. A job lot for the whole film would not cost as
>much as the producer was/is likely to make from future sales.

>Wasn't this shown on TNT? 'WCW Wrestling' is on TNT and that
>looks real too doesn't it?

>Whether real or replica AK-47s are not difficult to come by -
>even in pubs in Manchester England!

>Therefore, I'm not sure that your post has much bearing on the
>film, which is quite obviously a fake - although one which
>attempted to learn from the Roswell Autopsy scam - despite your
>noble efforts to move the research forward....

>In any case, as I pointed out on Jeff Renses' 'Sightings' radio
>show last Sunday, flying discs are entirely terrestrial in
>origin and any attempt to pass them off as ET is highly
>questionable and almost certainly profitable.

>There is considerable evidence to support my case - and not just
>stories from unnamed soldiers and 'informed' sources.....

>I'd like to know about the provenance of this film; in other
>words, what is its real source and who made it. Hats off to
>them I say!! Better luck next time....

>Any half decent studio could have put this together. At a
>glance, the whole film looks too modern....

>Tim Matthews


Tim, your post requires a response, at least on my part. I am
not a researcher. I am not an expert. In fact, I wrote to Jeff
the other night giving my definition of expert...

"An Ex-Spurt is a has-been drip." :)

I wrote this referring to me, because I gave my "opinion"
regarding the AK's in the film. But I am far from being a
weapons ex-purt or even an expert. I do not wish to be
represented as having _the_ answer. I do have an opinion however
and sometimes a belief!

Anyway, despite the erudition of many of the list members,
and I mean that sincerely, I still cannot accept as gospel,
the word of anyone who says that he or she "has the answer"
with such certainty.

You wrote:

>In any case, as I pointed out on Jeff Renses' 'Sightings' radio
>show last Sunday, flying discs are entirely terrestrial in
>origin and any attempt to pass them off as ET is highly
>questionable and almost certainly profitable.

Tim, please. Are you listening to yourself? How can anyone
"point out" his or her "truth" as fact and in the same breath,
pass other theories off as questionable and profitable? Most
especially from someone who does just that, "almost certainly
... " profitably the author himself!

I have no problem with the words, "in my opinion," or it is my
considered opinion" or even "it is my belief." But what you
wrote above as accusatory is exactly what you did yourself.

There is nothing wrong with debating, researching, analyzing et
al. this subject, because it is too important to the human race.
The implications are literally earth-shattering if indeed we
have been visited by ET's.

But for anyone who states his theory as truth, is acting in a
patently ridiculous manner, in my opinion at least. By Webster,
belief is:

"A state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed
in some person or thing."

Which is fine! But with all due respect, and I do respect you by
virtue of having read some of your work, you do not have the
answer to this question, merely a good theory. There are, to use
the Carl Sagan phrase, "Billions and billions..." of theories.
And a good deal of them have merit. So do yours. But you've
proven nothing.

But then, neither has anyone else.

Jim Mortellaro







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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 98 12:32:45 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:25:09 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:43:08 -0700
> From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

> >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> >Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

> >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
> >>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
> >>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

> Not only that, the practice of ufology is protected under the
> first amendment: i.e. the free exercise of religion. Your past
> actions have been precariously close to being unconstitutional.

Huh? Can anybody explain to me what Ed is trying to say here?

 >By all means, stick with the Robert O. Deans, the Kevin Randles,
> >the Stanton Friedmans, the David Rudiaks, the Don Schmitts, the
> >Phillip Corsos, the Don Berliners, the Jerome Clucks, the Mark
> >Rodeghiers, the Michael Swords', the Mark Cashmans, the Steven
> >Greers, the Clifford Stones, and let's not forget the oh-so
> >pious Greg Sandows, and all the other ufological elite who have
> >made the UFO field what it is today.

> They are all keepers of the 'Word', tolerant of fellow prophets
> and respectful of each others individual ufological beliefs,
> especially when unsupported by data and evidence. It is
> ufologically and politically incorrect to argue against a fellow
> ufologist's position on ufological beliefs as long as they are a
> keeper of the 'Word'. You, Robert Todd, are not a keeper of the
> 'Word'. This makes you an infidel and a threat to the stability
> of the faith, obviously someone that needs to be demonized.

Uh huh. Exactly. You must have telepathic powers, dude. Or,
anyway, you think you do, and that's all that matters, right? I
must say, though, that it would take someone as far removed from
ufological reality as a Todd or an Ed to draw all of these
people, of widely varying approaches, views, and reputations,
into the same rant. But of course the point is not to offer any
insights but to smear by association, isn't it?


> Popular consent determines the wellbeing of ufology. The more
> people that believe, the more popular that ufology gets. Somehow
> or other, that growing popularity, also known as the UFO
> movement, is seen by some of the keepers of the 'Word' as the
> force that will ultimately thrust ufology to the forefront of
> universal acceptance and respectability.

Not my position at all (as Dennis Stacy, with whom I've been
discussing the very topic of late, will testify), but hey, why
let the facts get in the way of self-righteous posturing? You've
never let them do it before, so why start now?

> >Remove me from the list, please. Obviously, I'm not worthy.

Translation from Toddese into ordinary English: If you won't
play the game exactly as I want it to be played, and if you're
unwilling to listen in silence as I call you a liar, a bunkum
artist, a religious zealot, a Nazi clone, a jackass, or a
charlatan, I am going to take my marbles, go home, and have
myself a good snit.

> Obviously not, you have been previously officially
> ex-communicated from the history of ufology by the exclusion of
> even a mention in Jerome Clark's three volume encyclopedia,
> louded by the publisher and author as the reference to be for
> future generations and by a majority of the UFO community as a
> prime example of objectivism in the field.

I'm not sure what "louded by the publisher and author" means
here. Is "louded" a word? In any case, on the assumption that
our good-humored friend here means "lauded," I can't say that I
have done any of that about my own encyclopedia, though I
certainly did try to write the best possible book of which I am
capable (and I leave it to others to decide how well, or how
poorly, I succeeded). But since our good friend here brings up
the subject, those interested in recent examples of UFO
Encyclopedia-lauding are directed to reviews appearing in the
current issues of Journal of Scientific Exploration, UFO
Magazine, and Fortean Times. And thanks, Ed, for giving me the
opportunity to slip in this shameless plug. Keep up the good
work!

Incidentally, Bob Todd is mentioned in the Encyclopedia (pp. 188
and 606). And Ed Stewart's splendid FSR index is cited also.

> On one ufological hand (Greg Sandow's), you are demonized for
> your irrelevance to the 'Word' and in another ufological hand
> (Jerome Cluck's), your research contributions are completely
> ignored and unofficially rendered non-existant while the keepers
> of the 'Word' loud Jerome Cluck as the "true" ufological
> historian.

A wonderfully perceptive observation, as usual. Whatever it
means. You're badly in need of the services of a translator, my
friend, not to mention a dictionary which will inform you of the
difference between "loud" and "laud" and tell you how to spell
"non-existent."

And while I'm at it, don't you _ever_ have a good day?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:14:09 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:51:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 21:11:51 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 10:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>Bob,

>Boy, do you get emotional fast!

Hardly. I've been in the thick of this from near the beginning
and have made a number of trips to London to see Santilli, as
well as a lengthy trip to New Mexico to check out the
cameraman's story. I'm just damned tired of people coming into
this new and throwing out commentary which does nothing but
muddy already dark waters.

>Yes I know what a C-mount is. Yes, you CAN put any lens you want
>to on almost any 16mm camera. But according to the camera man,
>he was concerned about a lack of light as well as the
>constraints of the suit he was required to wear which made
>proper framing difficult. Under these conditions, anyone working
>with a non-reflex camera (like the Bell & Howell he claims to
>have used) would be a fool to work with anything other than a
>wide angle lens. This would be ESPECIALLY true if he is really
>concerned about things like "depth of field" or "proper
>framing".

He was following recommendations in the standard manuals of the
time to shoot medical procedures and autopsies with Super XX
film and with 25 mm and longer lenses to minimize distortion.
The wide angle would have introduced distortion, and was also
slower, so not ideal for indoor shooting.

>I never implied that a 10mm lens was considered "normal" for the
>16mm format. I said that the standard lens for these non-reflex
>cameras was a fixed 10mm wide angle lens and I stand by that
>statement. By "fixed" I mean "fixed focus", not "unremovable".
>My apologies to the readers if that caused any real confusion
>(which I doubt).

If you mean fixed focus, say so. You said fixed lens which means
a lens which can not be interchanged.

>However, this is all merely a distinction without any difference
>to the point at hand. After all, you wisely pointed out that he
>probably had a turret mount with at least 3 lenses to choose
>from (wide, normal, telephoto). If true, WHY pick a lens that
>would cause him so much grief when a wide angle lens would help
>his situation tremendously by maintaining deep focus while wide
>open?


Why pick the normal lens? Less distortion and a faster maximum
aperture.

>And even if he did use a "normal" lens of 25mm, depth of field
>would hardly be a problem. True, 25mm is a "longer" lens than
>10mm and longer lenses generally sacrifice depth of field.

Depth of field as seen in the film is accurate for a 25 mm lens
used wide open. We went through all of this four years ago.

>But 25mm is only "longer" on a 16mm camera!

>To illustrate what I mean, consider the same 25mm lens on a
>Nikon 35mm camera. Such a lens would appear very wide angle,
>with depth of field characteristics from a few inches in front
>of the camera to infinity. Still photographers around the world
>know that the wider the lens, the deeper the focus and a 25mm
>lens is a VERY wide angle lens on a Nikon. Placing that same
>25mm lens on the Bell & Howell changes nothing other than
>perspective. After all, depth of field accompanies the lens,
>independent of whether there's even a camera attached! So, even
>at 25mm, he still should have been able to keep the image in
>focus with very little, if any, difficulty. At 10mm, it would
>have been virtually impossible to rack the image out of focus
>without really working at it! (and totally impossible if the
>lens were fixed focus)

Are you really a cinematographer? You sure throw technical terms
around without seeming to know what they mean. Putting a 25 mm
lens from a 35 mm camera onto a 16 mm camera changes
perspective? Really? Since when? It changes the angle of view
and the size of the image area, sure, but perspective is one of
the things that _does_not_ change. BTW, depth of focus and depth
of field are not the same and the terms are not interchangeable.

>More to the point, the fact that you _could_ put a lens on the
>camera to produce an out of focus image would be of no obvious
>value to any cinematographer other than one working for Santilli
>to create a fake "documentary" look.

>Regarding the issue of push-processing:

>I agree that the film being used was reversal B&W.
>I never made an issue of that.

>However, I've heard several explanations regarding the washed
>out and grainy look of the film. One is that the film was
>push-processed. Another is that the film was 'light blasted' by
>Santilli. Another is that it was both push-processed AND 'light
>blasted'! And according to you, the cameraman only pushed one
>roll but still processed the others by hand, as well.

That is not what I said. We have only photo copies of three of
the film labels. Only one mentions push processing. That does
not mean that it was the only roll which was pushed, just that
it is the only roll for which this is indicated.

>However, it's really academic whether all or only one roll was
>push processed. The question is, "Why bother?"

Because the one roll on which push processing is indicated is
one which was shot OUTDOORS early in the morning.

>Having worked in operating rooms for many years, as both a
>medical illustrator and a cinematographer documenting surgical
>procedures, I can assure you that doctors like a LOT of light to
>work by. Even if documentation wasn't the main concern, the room
>was small with white walls; a few 60 watt bulbs would provide
>enough fill to do the trick and I can't imagine that the doctors
>would complain about having TOO much light. So WHY NOT use an
>additional lamp and an extension cord? It's a lot simpler than
>push processing! And, again, processing is one thing. Drying is
>something else. Push-processed or not, where is he going to dry
>2,500 feet of film in the field?

>In summary:

>_Could_ he have shot the film out of focus?
>Only if he tried.

Not true.

>_Could_ he have push-processed 100 to 2,500 feet of film in the
>field? Sure. But why bring everything necessary to push the film
>when shooting it correctly exposed would have been easier and
>would _not_ have interfered with the procedure at hand.

Push processing is a red herring.

>_Could_ he have dried 2,500 feet of film in the field? Not
>without a LOT of space and precautions to contain dirt & dust.

Sure he could. I have pages from a manual of the day which gives
detailed instructions on how to process film in the field in
buckets.

>In all, it doesn't make sense.

Sure it does. He processed the film himself for security
reasons.

>Of course, this is my opinion based on my experience and a
>comparison of the cameraman's claims to the results on display.
>I would be interested in your complete interpretation of the
>same data based on your skills as a cinematographer.

>You _are_ a cinematographer, aren't you?


While I am primarily a still photographer, I have done
cinematography on a professional level. I am also a designer of
photographic equipment, consultant to top companies in the photo
industry, author of 16 books on photography, Editor of the
world's third largest photography magazine, member of the
technical staff of Germany's top photography magazine, court
certified as a photographic expert, etc. etc. etc.

>Finally, Bob, you wrote:

>"I don't know who this Roger Evans is, but..."

>Who am I?

>Apparently, I'm someone that DARED to have an informed opinion
>about the subject of photography; an area, I take it, you claim
>as your personal domain.

No. An uninformed opinion of a newcomer who has not been up to
his keister in this from the beginning.

>Lighten up!

>Rather than worry about who's going to "steal your thunder"
>while you're away in Germany, why don't you just accept the idea
>that there are OTHER well educated people in the world with
>interesting ideas. Perhaps they aren't as well known as you, but
>their opinions are just as valid.

>Or are they?


They can be if they inform themselves fully of the whole story.

>Comments like, "Do you even know what a C mount is, Roger?" are
>arrogant and uncalled for. I recently posted a listing
>condemning what I call "personal slams" such as this. (see
>"Snipers & Shooters") I suggest you read it. I think you'll find
>that your readers don't enjoy such juvenile behavior, no matter
>how "famous" you are. A "celebrity status", and I use that term
>very loosely here, is no excuse for rude behavior.

Yep, I'm one rude, arrogant, SOB, as everyone here can tell you!

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                             Re: KGB Files Show

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:20:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 22:42:02 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Files Show


>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 21:41:39 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Files Show


>>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 19:17:19 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

><snip>

>>Anyway, I am aware of a specific example of a Soviet "hoax" on
>>the American people.

>>In the winter or spring of 1969, I believe, while I was at
>>American University at Washington, DC.,. an international "fair"
>>or exposition was held. Many of the embassies most of which are
>>within a few miles of American University) had displays. The
>>lander. For those of you less than 40 years old, the '60's was
>the tme of the space race.... who could get to the moon first.
>>After our astronauts orbited the moon in Dec\ 1968, while the
>>Russians failed to achieve a comparable result, it became
>>apparent who was going to get there first.

>>So, as I was walking around looking at all the good stuff I
>>spotted te Russian exhibit with it's "moon lander." It had a
>>definitely recognizable appearance, despite the large letters
>>USSR across its surface and other Soviet markings. >

>>Then it came to me: The Russians had made a model of the US moon
>>lander (which was an distinctively ugly, ungodly looking
>>device!) and had labelled it "Soviet Moon Lander.">

<snip>

>Maybe it was not an intentional "hoax" Bruce...

>The British Interplanetary Society's magazine Spaceflight has
>published many photos and sketches of previously secret Soviet
>manned lunar spacecraft hardware. Included was the Soviet L-3
>lunar lander which was even tested unmanned in Earth orbit. It
>does resemble the American Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) or
>lunar lander in some ways.

My recollection (now over 30 years old!) is that, once I
realized what I was looking at I realized it was identical to
the US lander. What they had done was simply make a small model
of the US lander and label it Soviet. (Probably the Soviet
Embassy people didn't know what the Soviet lander looked like
anyway.)

<snip>

>I also recall seeing Russian pictures of what was said to be a
>landed UFO that also closely resembled the American lunar
>lander. The witnesses who approached this landed UFO landing are
>said to have become ill or died shortly afterwards. Would you
>recall which publication(s) these pictures can be found in?
>Could this be evidence that some extraterrestrial spacecraft are
>based on "alien" American technology? ;o).


Nick Balaskas

This sounds like a crock to me.  There have been so many screwy
photos of UFOs in space that I have lost track. I know of only
two guaranteed unknowns (there may be more) photograped during
Gemini 11 (Sept. 1966) and Skylab 3 (I think, 1973). At any
rate, I don' know where the picture you mention is published. If
I cared to look it up (which I don't) I would look in one of the
'tabloid' UFO magazines publlished 10 to 20 years ago. A number
of articles on supposed UFOs photographed by astronauts, US and
USSR, have been published in those magazines.






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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:54:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 22:53:05 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:43:08 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

<sniff snip>

>Obviously not, you have been previously officially
>ex-communicated from the history of ufology by the exclusion of
>even a mention in Jerome Clark's three volume encyclopedia,
>louded by the publisher and author as the reference to be for
>future generations and by a majority of the UFO community as a
>prime example of objectivism in the field.

<eary snip>

>No need to fret. Soon the keepers of the 'Word' will need to
>find someone else to demonize and blame for the sorry position
>ufology is in today and it won't be directed at any of the
>keepers of the 'Word'.

<merciful snip>


Ed,

The thread went this way:

It started with (I guess)...

"Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo"

went on with (I guess)...

"[For The Record]- P-1947: Death of Roswell"

And just as Dennis Stacy and David Rudiak had come to some
agreement that facts - not personalities - should be discussed,
Kal K. Korff panicked and tried to bring things on his own
level: below the belt blows. Not that Korff has any balls.
Headvertised it in his post:

"David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings"

Clark jumped in, so did Sandow - both with a keyboard - then
Todd, then you -  both with a 3 foot 2 by 4 with 6 inch nails at
one end  claiming holy war.

Please correct me if I have the story wrong.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Sheree Cox <cox@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:37:25 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 22:47:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:11:38 PDT

>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:42:07 -0700
>>From: jerry anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Snipers & Shooters

>>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:11:05 +0000
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Can't we all just get along?

>>So you've noticed all the slanging? So have I. That makes two of
>>us. You are quite right, and I agree whole-heartedly with your
>>comments. We are all wanting an answer on this subject. Surely
>>it's not too much to ask that we should work together!

<snip>

>Postings like this always puzzle me. Though I do not doubt for a
>moment the poster's good intentions, it's never clear whether he
>or she objects to _all_ disagreement or simply to the sort of
>dissent that sinks to slurs and ad hominems.

>It's not even clear, since typically the distinction is not made,
>whether the poster recognizes such a distinction even exists.

>Vigorous debate within ufology is as essential and necessary as
>it is in any field of inquiry.>If the poster thinks
>disagreement, including strongly expressed disagreement, is
>unique to ufology, he or she ought to get out of the house once
>in a while -- or read something besides UFO literature, where the
>battles are fast and furious.>(Just look, as Greg Sandow
>observed recently, at a typical "Letters" section of the New York
>Review of Books.) I can't imagine anything duller than the
>"unified UFO community" the correspondent above claims to
>desire.

>Our state of knowledge about the phenomenon does not justify such
>uniformity of opinion; we simply don't know enough about UFOs to
>nod all our heads in unison about their nature and meaning.>Nor
>do we know enough about them to agree on what methodologies and
>approaches are most usefully applied to their study.>These are
>all legitimate subjects of debate.>Thoughtful debate, which
>clarifies issues, has nothing to do with "hate mail,">even when
>conducted at full volume.

>What is not legitimate, in my judgment, is the personal slur.
>But the slur is not synonymous with the dissent, and we'd be
>fools if we demanded consensus (or, worse, silence) in our ranks
>when there is in fact plenty of room for reasonable persons to
>see things differently and to say so.>I cast my vote for
>continuing -- and, if need be, loud -- debate.

>Jerry Clark


Hi List!

I agree with Mr. Clark.

I see nothing wrong with strong debate. We need to search out
the truth and clarify the issues and we need to question all the
time in order to find this truth.

But personal slur? I don't think so. It's not necessary and it
undermines the UFO community.

If we are to be taken seriously by the public, we need to
respect each other, regardless of our different viewpoints
(which I believe there are some small truths to each one). I'm
fairly new to the list and I know I'm learning alot. Some things
that I thought might be real have been pointed out as hoaxes or
honest mistakes or even lack of good research.

Getting a little bit off the subject here, a few weeks ago, an
UpDate was sent out regarding the best times of the day/week to
watch for UFOs.

If anyone still has that, could they send it to me. I would
really appreciate it.

Thanks in advance.

S.C.

cox@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.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 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 22:58:00 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 19:35:38 +0100
>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The Fort Worth Photographs
>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 20:59:59 PDT

>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 07:58:18 +0100
>>>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>>>To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>>Dear All,

>>>A selection of new images from James Bond Johnsons Fort Worth
>>>photographs. It is hoped these highlight the very many anomalies
>>>to be found in theses images. Please be patient with this site if
>>>it's slow, it's running as a background job on my own
>>>workstation.

>>>Included in the selection is the Ramey Paper with my own "make"
>>>on it's content, check it out an image is there to download.

>>>Follow the RPIT item link from:

>>>http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/

>>>Neil.

>>Neil & List,

>>I fail to see any great reason for analysing these photos, save
>>proving that it is/isn't Mogul wreckage. After all, if it was such a
>>top secret project I am sure they wouldn't allow photos of Mogul to
>>be taken in this manner - so they throw in some old baloon scraps and
>>say "Sorry, we slipped up."

>>Obviously the material in the photos can't even support its own
>>weight let alone encased passengers. The truth lies elsewhere.

>>Regards,
>>Leanne


>My Friend,
>It is just your attitude that has allowed these incredible historical
>documents to lie languishing in the archives of first the
>Star-Telegraph and then the UTA Libraries for the last 50 yrs. By
>the way NOT ALL the FWST Archives were handed over to the UTA it
>could be the other 2 pics might still be at the FWST, lost.

>Lets just think what these pictures represent.

>They are the only "public" photographic record that says The Roswell
>Event ever took place, other than these photographs all we have are
>peoples "memories" and a few "dodgy" telegrams, we don't even have
>a copy of the news release from RAAF that started the whole thing.

>Plus...Photographs (if well processed) don't fade like memories.

>Encapsulated in these 4 photographs is all we still have of that
>afternoon back in 47, FROZEN IN TIME.

>Have you taken in just what they say on the surface?, look at Jesse
>Snr, he's in the office of the General of the 8th Air Force and
>guess what, he's wearing his "B" grade uniform, it has dirt marks,
>his boots are scuffed and dusty, he's taken off his tie, it's on
>the radiator at the back of the room, he's a man who has arrived in
>a hurry.

>Yet Ramey, is in full dress uniform including his hat, indoors?.
>These days we'd say he looks like a man ready for a photo-oportunity?.

>And you say we shouldn't even bother looking at them!.

>While I'm on my Hobby-horse, can I also slay the MOGUL dragon
>before it raises it head.

>MOGUL was the alledged classified code name for the balloon
>project that Charles Moore et al were involved with, working
>out of Alamagordo AND working in close contact with the RAAF!.
>HIS project did not use the name MOGUL, the first time
>Moore heard it was in connection with the 94 AF report.
>The balloon trains he and his collegues were launching used
>NO out of the ordinary components, even the Sonobuoy was
>standard Navy issue and used common electrical components.
>Marcel, I think suspected this and even ask his son if he could spot
>any known components when he had some of the debris in his kitchen.
>NOTE Marcel Snr had been a Radio Ham for many years AND BUILT
>HIS OWN GEAR, he new electrical parts.
>He also knew RADAR, in the 2 years before 47 he spent
>extended period on RADAR training courses AND got good grades.
>HE KNEW FOIL, the USAF dumped hundreds of tons of the stuff
>all through the latter stages of WWII in their daylight bombing
>raides as a radar counter measure, it was know as "chaff", we
>(the UK) were still using it in the South Atlantic a few years back
>in our scrap over the Falklands to divert the other sides air
>launched missiles away from our ships, I gather it saved quite a
>few lives.

>So...guess what was one of the topics of Jesse Snr's radar courses
>"radar counter measures",

>Believe me he would know all about foil and it's uses with radar.

>Any balloon train, be it weather or NYU project would be using
>standard identifiable components, even the vacuum tubes use in the
>Sonobouy would have been military spec and made of metal NOT glass,
>you could drop the things from on high and they'd dent a bit but
>still work, they'd also have a military id number etched on them,
>Jesse Snr would have spotted these without any problem at all, same
>goes for any other standard resistors, capacitors and coils that
>might have been used, don't forget the batteries too, we're talking
>pre semiconductor days here, vacuum tubes take lots of juice to
>keep them going.

>We have two conclusions I guess, he and the rest of the 8th airforce
>were total nurdes and failed to identify said debris,

>or

>He,though a highly observant and technically qualified idividual
>together with the other staff at RAAF thought the debris was of
>a highly unusual nature and nothing that he and they could id as
>our's.

>Was the debris in the pictures the debris that was collect on the
>Foster Ranch?, I've know idea, but if it was then maybe a few bits
>of plants etc might have got collected too, well there are a couple
>of bits of plant stems in the pictures, draw your own conclusions.

>Neil.

>PS. Sorry if this is long and rambling but I'm in the throws of
>a stinker of a cold.<BG>


I think a few corrections are in order here, Neil and Leanne

l. I first found the pictures taken in Ramey's office in about 1979 and had
prints made then by the Ft.W ST.
so it really isn't correct to say they have been languishing for 51
years.Check the Roswell Incident by Moore and Berlitz.

2. There were many front page newspaper articles on July 8,
l947, in Evening papers from Chicago West. There was a very
large article in the Los Angeles Herald Express which even had
Ramey's explanation. Journalists were calling Roswell from all
over the country and expanding the story with new input such as
names etc.

3. There is a video Recollections of Roswell which has testimony
from about 27 witnesses some of whom are dead. 105minutes long

4. There is an RAAF base yearbook which allows us to verify many
positions at the base.

Don't be fooled by the attacks by the debunkers and other arm
chair theorists.They tend to ignore testimony they can't deal
with as the USAF did.

I personally believe that being able to read the memo in Ramey's
hand would be a very imprtant breakthrough.





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

                    A Short Review of Ufology in Croatia

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 19:02:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 22:36:36 -0400
Subject: A Short Review of Ufology in Croatia

Dear Errol,

You might be interested in this message from Giuliano Marinkovicc in
Croatia. Giuliano is from the

http://ufoinfo.com/organizations/org_croatia.html

AGETI (Analytical Group for Extra-Terrestrial Information)
Organization who have just had an entry placed on UFOINFO. (The
only alteration I have made is to the formatting.)

From the information sent to me "AGETI is a world wide group of
radio amateurs with a mission to monitor extra-terrestrial
information all over and above the planet Earth!!!"

AGETI co-operate with the ARUFON and (US Amateur Radio Group)
and GAUFORA (Grupo Argentino UFO de Radio Aficionados - Amateur
Radio UFO group from Argentina). AGETI is also conducting ground
investigations and interviews with persons who were involved in
the UFO incidents in the past and present time (from civilians
towards ex military persons) and welcome contact from people
around the world.

There is some old news (quotes from UFO Roundup) but later on
there are references to events on the island of Pag from 13th of
December 1997 to 03rd of February 1998.

It should also be noted that Guiliano is accessing the Internet
'via a Telnet browser.'

This report will be placed on the website and also passed on to
UFO Roundup and the UFO UpDates list for those wishing to
contact Giuliano.

Hoping this is of some interest to you.

John Hayes.


From: 9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 98 23:36:55 +0200
To: jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
Subject: Short Review Of Ufology


Hello John! This is some of my old stuff that I have sent around for
people who wanted to get some picture about thing around here. So
here comes a copy for you:


I will give you short representation of recent UFO events in Croatia.

START OF QUOTE:

Well, let's start with event in Pisarovina which was happened at 20th
of October 1996. The witnesses have claimed that they have seen
strange lights in the sky at that evening. Our investigation has show
us that the reason for those strange lights were in fact lights from
ground reflectors.

The other case has happened in Zagorje which was also presented in
UFO ROUNDUP at the time. I will give you a clip from that:


>  UFO ROUNDUP

>    Volume 2, Number 17 April 27, 1997
>    Editor: Joseph Trainor

>       Thanks to Paul Burrell and the Midohio Research Group

>  UFO LEAVES CROP CIRCLES IN NORTHERN CROATIA

>On Wednesday, April 16, 1997, at 8:15 p.m., the Croatian national TV
>aired a strange report during the show Ziva Istina (The Living
>Truth). According to the announcer, a UFO appeared over the town of
>Zagorje in northern Croatia. He said, "It seemed like a giant
>cigar."

>A Zagorje man was watching TV at 6:45 p.m. that evening when he
>suddenly noticed "red light streaming through the window." He left
>his chair, got dressed and went out in the yard to see what the
>disturbance was all about. About 160 meters (530 feet) away, in a
>farm field, a "fireball" hovered just above the ground. The witness
>described the UFO as a black sphere surrounded by a fiery red glow,
>approximately 12 meters high and 15 meters in diameter, with "three
>holes like windows."

>After the UFO flew away, the man went to the field and discovered a
>crop circle measuring 28 meters (92 feet) in diameter. He also found
>a few strange footprints "larger than his own." The prints were
>Croatian shoe size #43 (Size 9 U.S.)

>This is Croatia's second UFO incident of 1997. On February 20, Damir
>Nozica spotted "three orange fireballs" flying over Lokrum Island in
>the Adriatic Sea, about 8 kilometers (5 miles) south of Dubrovnik.

>       (Many thanks to Berislav Kucan for this story.)

That is the event about witness Ljubomir Salajec who lives in place
Koprivnichi Ivanec (near city Koprivnica in North Croatia) who was a
witness of a strange fireball.

Well the information in Ufology community in Croatia are next...
Section "NETFORCE" (Nautilus Expert Team For Observing And
Recording Celestial Extraordinaries - the founder is Goran
Ergovicc) of the Croatian national group "POLARIS" has been on
the field and they have done the Investigation of that event...

The conclusion is:

On 27th of April 1997. on Radio Rijeka in the show about ufology
the guest in live program was Goran Ergovicc and he has explanin
all the paragraphs of that event. The conclusion of "NETFORCE"
was that the story of that man don't have credibility... He also
says that the witness Salajec changes his story from time to
time and that his explanations of the fireball and the diametars
are ridicioulus... Also the Goran has give his reports before on
the same show (he was a guest by telephone) at the 20th of March
1997. in Radio Rijeka about the resulst of investigation
(Investigation has took place around 15th of March 1997). Also
besides THE LIVING TRUTH the witness Salajec with a Goran was a
guest in the TV show "PARLAONICA" (PARLAMENTARY MEETING) and I
can say also that his story is weak. That show was aired at 22th
of March. (I have recorded all the material). Well for the now,
Solajec is very popular man as a guest witness inside TV
programs. He was also the guest in TV programs "LATIN SHOW" and
in program "CLOSE ENCOUNTERS" so altough the scientific analysis
has show us that we can't give any schred of evidence to his
story, UFO folklore about this man is still strong.

The 3rd events is the most interesting. At 13th of December
1997. something definelty strange has happened above the island
Pag (Unfortunately those epic events are not published at any
Internet media. I was very busy at the time inside ground
investigations. I must also say that investigation about this
case is still in progress). My "AGETI Section for searching and
intercepting" has intercepted that same night that strange
events has started at island Pag. Many civilian witnesses
together with police has monitored for 4 days (during the night)
strange light which is falling from sky, then stops and then
again start to fall. Then it dissapears and later light becomes
visible again. First official explenation was that the reason
for sighting is weather ballon but that story couldn't last long
(I guess that weather ballon explenations are too old for our
time - weather ballon stories are used too many times sinse
Roswell / ha ha).

Second explanation was that the reason for UFO was planet Venus.
Our investigation has concluded that in this case we can't speak
about object. It was a strange light form which is based on a
results of our analysis unexplained. It was a close encounter of
1st kind. I will give you the whole media report about it:


****************************************************************

Monitoring Of The Croatian Media Connected With Stories About
Ufo Sightings Above Island Pag (from 13th of December 1997. to
03th of February 1998.)

****************************************************************

13th of December 1997.

On the area of island Pag inside Adriatic sea many witnesses
with police are calling the regional Center for informations
that they have seen a UFO. They are describing that they have
seen read light ball who is moving towards sea, then stops and
then again moves.

----------------------------------------------------------------

15th of December 1997.

At Monday in the morning inside newspapers 'Free Dalmatia' and
on Radio 057 the article about 'UFO Above Pag' has been
published. The author of article is Josip Portada.

Radio 057 is sending his press team to Pag and at 19:00 hours at
the same radio the program about those events has been started.
Telephone guest is Josip Portada (the author of article "UFO
above Pag") and live guests inside studio are Ivan Staglichicc
(the president of Astro-antropological society Zadar) and Ivo
Dijan (secretary of Astronomy society Zadar). During the
program, the telephones are open for listeners also who are
giving their comments.

----------------------------------------------------------------

16th of December 1997.

'Free Dalmatia' has published article about UFO above pag with
subject 'He Is The Most Beautiful When He Is Moving Around'.

Inside 'Zadar Week' the article of Josip Portada has been
published with chronology of UFO movement. The subject of
article is: 'Greetings To Ship Crew'.

Inside television program "County day" at 2nd channel of HTV at
19:20 there was suplement about UFO above Pag where there was
statements from some witnesses and other officials.

----------------------------------------------------------------

17th of December 1997.

Inside 'Free Dalmatia' the article called 'UFO Has Returned' has
published. The author of the article is Lada Kalmeta and the
subject is sightings of police-man Branko Jezzicc from police
station Karlobag.

Polaris goes to investigate the case on the ground.

----------------------------------------------------------------

18th of December 1997.

In 'People's Paper' the article of Ivana Markovicc is published
with name 'Nobody Will Sell Us A Trick That There Was A Polar
Light', and in 'Night Paper' the article of Ivana is also
published with name 'UFO Or Weather Balloon?'.

In 'Free Dalmatia', the article of Lada Kalmeta is published
with name 'Why The Police Are Silent And Why Are The Pictures
Hidden?'.

----------------------------------------------------------------

19th of December 1997.

In 'Night Paper', the interview with Korado Korlevicc (guider of
the observatory in Vissnjan) is published where Korado says that
UFO above Pag was probably planet Venus with strong light. The
author of article is Vesna Brnabicc i Sassa Miljevicc.

----------------------------------------------------------------

20th of December 1997.

Inside radio program 'Superstar' on Radio Zadar, one part of the
subject has been devoted to UFO sightings above Pag based on
articles from newspapers. Guider and the editor of the show is
Marica Rumora.

----------------------------------------------------------------

24th of December 1997.

Josip Portada strikes back. In 'Zadar Week' the article called
'What Was In Fact Seen Above Pag?' Portada gives the arguments
why the UFO above Pag isn't weather ballon, planet Venus or
light ball.

----------------------------------------------------------------

25th of December 1997.

In 'Arena', article 'Space People Above Pag' has been published.
The author is Damir Konestra and the camera man is Tea Cimass).
'Arena' gives the chronology of the whole case.

----------------------------------------------------------------

20th of January 1998.

In radio program 'Anromeda' which was broadcasted at Radio
Zagreb (from 20:35 to 21:25), Ante Radonicc (the guider of
planetary in Technical museum in Zagreb) has stated that the
reason for UFO sightings above island Pag was planet Venus.

----------------------------------------------------------------

03th of February 1998.

In radio program 'Stargate' which was broadcasted at Radio
Split, around 20:30, Goran Ergovicc (founder of NETFORCE) speaks
about the lates analysis about UFO above Pag whit a conclusion
that the reason for sightings definetly wasn't planet Venus.

NOTE: There were also few more stories about PAG at media in
later months, but media report for 1998. will be sent at the end
of the year.
----------------------------------------------------------------


Well the saga hasn't stoped there. After that the story about
Jakov Vranchicc has started to emerge. It was also presented in
ROUNDUP so I will give you short clip:

>Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 15:03:23 -0500 (EST)
>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP
>  UFO ROUNDUP
>Volume 3, Number 3
>January 18, 1998
>Editor: Joseph Trainor

>ALIENS LAND IN CROATIA

> A newspaper in Croatia reported last week that
>four aliens had landed at a farm just outside the
>city of Sibenik.
>Sibenik is a port on the Adriatic Sea about
>225 kilometers (140 miles) south of Zagreb.
>According to the newspaper Vercernji List, a
>farmer named Jako Vrancic was herding his cattle
>on his farm north of Sibenik when a UFO landed
>soundlessly in the pasture. He described the
>object as looking like a household flatiron.
>Vercernji List described the event as "a close
>encounter between a (retired) peasant farmer and
>four aliens...The aliens had the stature and build
>of human children, he said."
> Vrancic offered to share his lunch--ham and
>dried figs--with the occupants, but they told him
>they weren't hungry.
> "We had no problem communicating, as they
>spoke a broken form of Croatian," Vrancic said.
> "I felt no fear, as I had previously seen things
>like this on TV," he added.
> Following a brief visit, the occupants reboarded
>their "iron-shaped spacecraft" and flew away.
> Vercernji List stated that the "pensioner" Vrancic
>"is reportedly well-liked in his village and was
>described as an honest and down-to-earth man by
>his friends." (See CNI News volume 3, number 22,
>part 2. Many thanks to CNI News editor Mike Lindemann
>and contributor James Sutton for this story.)

----------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, that was the quote.

I have received the article from newspapers at the same day when
it was published. The article was also published in newspapers
"Free Dalmatia" at 19th of January at Monday and there was some
small suplement in TV program "County today" about it. Well for
now there is no specific view of AGETI and POLARIS groups about
this event. If the article has published the original and true
words and context (without journalist editing to make story more
dramatic) of the Jakov Vranchicc statements, we can conclude
that it is village old man without imagination or person with
basic views of the world so that could mean that his events in
some forms maybe are the truth. But as I say that is only
conclusion which we can take out from the context of the words
from that newspapers article. For now the situation is that
POLARIS (National croatian UFO group) will probably go on the
ground and they will make interview with the man in question so
then we will see how strong is that story. For now everything is
based on Vranchicc words and nothing else. It is one man story
without other witnessess or other independent evidence who could
confirm the story.

If I found out any new info's about previous stories I will let
you know. For now the graphic and written analysis of the Pag
case are still in development.

ok, greetings for now...we are all busy here...we are monitoring
the situation... if you need any other info let me know!!!

END OF QUOTE


PLEASE NOTE: This mail has been in distribution around March and
April of 1998. The recent AGETI news (Elipse at Hvar, UFO
photography from Biokovo, Cutle mutilations from Arizona -
received from our ARIZONA co-operator, the death of Barry
Goldwater; are available inside CNINEWS, FILER FILES and UFO
ROUNDUP past issues...

The complete history of UFO sightings in Croatia with details
still isn't available on english language...when translation
will be over, file will be distributed...

Greetings John from Giuliano...

[END]


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/







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

                              Re: Stats Needed

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:25:24 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 23:00:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Stats Needed


>From: Ben Field <ben@abcfield.force9.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: HELP, I need some facts and figures.
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:24:26 +0100

>Dear List

>Would anyone happen to know anywhere I could get some facts and
>figures on UFO observations/abductions/experiences?

>Figures about the UK would be preferable on any subjects relating
>to UFOs (I'm thinking of 45% of people claim to have seen a UFO,
>for example-does this seem feasible?).

>By Friday if possible


I have asked at the end of hundreds of lectures all over the
world and find that about 10% have seen a UFO with only 10% of
that group having reported it. If people pay a lot of money for a
seminar then of course the % goes up.

Gallup polls say 10% as well.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                 Lyn Buchanan on Jeff Rense 10/5 7PM Pacific

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:11:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:09:06 -0400
Subject: Lyn Buchanan on Jeff Rense 10/5 7PM Pacific

Lyn Buchanan will be guest on Jeff Rense's 'Sightings On The
Radio', on Monday, October 5th, 7-10 PM Pacific. You can listen
on the Internet, if his show isn't aired in your area, by
hopping a link from Jeff's website at:

http://www.sightings.com

or you can listen at a later date by hopping the link to
broadcast.com and listening to the archived version.

Here is some background on Lyn Buchanan.

For over 20 years the DoD, CIA and other intelligence agencies
funded research into psychic acquisition of information. The
Russians were doing it and we wanted to do it too. This approach
worked so well that it went fully operational in 1978. Lyn
Buchanan was a professional remote viewer with the unit at Ft
Meade for 9 years and he was also responsible for training new
viewers.

Lyn is very interested in the UFO subject, and a personal
experience is recounted in Jim Marrs' book, 'Alien Agenda'.

The 'Controlled Remote Viewing' home page has just been
redesigned and in the coming weeks you'll find plenty of real
audio interviews, transcripts and articles by Lyn and his
students. There are plenty of remote viewing pages on the
Internet, but few are as authoritative (and down to earth) as
this one.

Visit:

http://www.crviewer.com

BTW, if you missed Joe McMoneagle's appearance on 'Sightings On
The Radio' on September 29th, you can listen via broadcast.com
by hopping a link from Jeff's website. An interesting interview
indeed. Joe has been a subject in many psi lab experiments and
was also part of the Ft Meade unit.

--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>






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

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 13:41:24 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 19:35:38 +0100
>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The Fort Worth Photographs
>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 20:59:59 PDT

>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 07:58:18 +0100
>>>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>>>To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>>Dear All,

>>>A selection of new images from James Bond Johnsons Fort Worth
>>>photographs. It is hoped these highlight the very many anomalies
>>>to be found in theses images. Please be patient with this site if
>>>it's slow, it's running as a background job on my own
>>>workstation.

>>>Included in the selection is the Ramey Paper with my own "make"
>>>on it's content, check it out an image is there to download.

>>>Follow the RPIT item link from:

>>>http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/

>>>Neil.

>>Neil & List,

>>I fail to see any great reason for analysing these photos, save
>>proving that it is/isn't Mogul wreckage. After all, if it was such a
>>top secret project I am sure they wouldn't allow photos of Mogul to
>>be taken in this manner - so they throw in some old baloon scraps and
>>say "Sorry, we slipped up."

>>Obviously the material in the photos can't even support its own
>>weight let alone encased passengers. The truth lies elsewhere.

>>Regards,
>>Leanne


>My Friend,
>It is just your attitude that has allowed these incredible historical
>documents to lie languishing in the archives of first the
>Star-Telegraph and then the UTA Libraries for the last 50 yrs. By
>the way NOT ALL the FWST Archives were handed over to the UTA it
>could be the other 2 pics might still be at the FWST, lost.

>Lets just think what these pictures represent.

>They are the only "public" photographic record that says The Roswell
>Event ever took place, other than these photographs all we have are
>peoples "memories" and a few "dodgy" telegrams, we don't even have
>a copy of the news release from RAAF that started the whole thing.

>Plus...Photographs (if well processed) don't fade like memories.

>Encapsulated in these 4 photographs is all we still have of that
>afternoon back in 47, FROZEN IN TIME.

>Have you taken in just what they say on the surface?, look at Jesse
>Snr, he's in the office of the General of the 8th Air Force and
>guess what, he's wearing his "B" grade uniform, it has dirt marks,
>his boots are scuffed and dusty, he's taken off his tie, it's on
>the radiator at the back of the room, he's a man who has arrived in
>a hurry.

>Yet Ramey, is in full dress uniform including his hat, indoors?.
>These days we'd say he looks like a man ready for a photo-oportunity?.

>And you say we shouldn't even bother looking at them!.

>While I'm on my Hobby-horse, can I also slay the MOGUL dragon
>before it raises it head.

>MOGUL was the alledged classified code name for the balloon
>project that Charles Moore et al were involved with, working
>out of Alamagordo AND working in close contact with the RAAF!.
>HIS project did not use the name MOGUL, the first time
>Moore heard it was in connection with the 94 AF report.
>The balloon trains he and his collegues were launching used
>NO out of the ordinary components, even the Sonobuoy was
>standard Navy issue and used common electrical components.
>Marcel, I think suspected this and even ask his son if he could spot
>any known components when he had some of the debris in his kitchen.
>NOTE Marcel Snr had been a Radio Ham for many years AND BUILT
>HIS OWN GEAR, he new electrical parts.
>He also knew RADAR, in the 2 years before 47 he spent
>extended period on RADAR training courses AND got good grades.
>HE KNEW FOIL, the USAF dumped hundreds of tons of the stuff
>all through the latter stages of WWII in their daylight bombing
>raides as a radar counter measure, it was know as "chaff", we
>(the UK) were still using it in the South Atlantic a few years back
>in our scrap over the Falklands to divert the other sides air
>launched missiles away from our ships, I gather it saved quite a
>few lives.

>So...guess what was one of the topics of Jesse Snr's radar courses
>"radar counter measures",

>Believe me he would know all about foil and it's uses with radar.

>Any balloon train, be it weather or NYU project would be using
>standard identifiable components, even the vacuum tubes use in the
>Sonobouy would have been military spec and made of metal NOT glass,
>you could drop the things from on high and they'd dent a bit but
>still work, they'd also have a military id number etched on them,
>Jesse Snr would have spotted these without any problem at all, same
>goes for any other standard resistors, capacitors and coils that
>might have been used, don't forget the batteries too, we're talking
>pre semiconductor days here, vacuum tubes take lots of juice to
>keep them going.

>We have two conclusions I guess, he and the rest of the 8th airforce
>were total nurdes and failed to identify said debris,

>or

>He,though a highly observant and technically qualified idividual
>together with the other staff at RAAF thought the debris was of
>a highly unusual nature and nothing that he and they could id as
>our's.

>Was the debris in the pictures the debris that was collect on the
>Foster Ranch?, I've know idea, but if it was then maybe a few bits
>of plants etc might have got collected too, well there are a couple
>of bits of plant stems in the pictures, draw your own conclusions.

>Neil.

>PS. Sorry if this is long and rambling but I'm in the throws of
>a stinker of a cold.<BG>


I think a few corrections are in order here, Neil and Leanne

l. I first found the pictures taken in Ramey's office in about
1979 and had prints made then by the Ft.W ST. so it really isn't
correct to say they have been languishing for 51 years.Check the
Roswell Incident by Moore and Berlitz.

2. There were many front page newspaper articles on July 8,
l947, in Evening papers from Chicago West. There was a very
large article in the Los Angeles Herald Express which even had
Ramey's explanation. Journalists were calling Roswell from all
over the country and expanding the story with new input such as
names etc.

3. There is a video Recollections of Roswell which has testimony
from about 27 witnesses some of whom are dead. 105minutes long

4. There is an RAAF base yearbook which allows us to verify many
positions at the base.

Don't be fooled by the attacks by the debunkers and other arm
chair theorists.They tend to ignore testimony they can't deal
with as the USAF did.

I personally believe that being able to read the memo in Ramey's
hand would be a very imprtant breakthrough.

We are getting close. It isn't easy.





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

                        Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:27:42 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:05:26 -0400
Subject: Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update


Hi everyone,

Jeff Rense's Sightings web site has two new articles that
will be of interest to UFO UpDates subscribers.

http://www.sightings.com/

Click on the two headlines "Nikolay Subbotin's Report On New
Expedition To Russian UFO Crash Site" to find out what was
found (or not found) at the alleged huge UFO crash site
near the border with China and "Kal Korff Receives Alleged
Russian TNT/KGB UFO Fragments" which includes a colour
photo of one of these fragments.

I wonder how anyone could totally remove a crashed UFO that
was longer than the CN Tower is tall from these remote Russian
mountains.  No wonder nothing was seen in recent satellite
images of the general area of the alleged UFO crash site.

Kal's fragment looks very much like copper plumbing to me
(two pipe pieces connected together with a 90 degree elbow
fitting).  The fibers at one end seem to be pieces of pipe
insulation.  Does this fragment look too Earthly to you
too?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                               Icelandic UFOs?

From: "P=E9tur =D6rn Gu=F0mundsson" <pippi@centrum.is>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 02:26:56 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:50:19 -0400
Subject: Icelandic UFOs?

Thank you for the 42 updates I recieved,

I will not be needing any more UpDates for a while thank you but I will
contact again.

If you on the other hand have any new updates on "The Varginha incident"
I would be thankful for that.

Respectfully yours,

Petur Gudmundsson

Iceland.

p.s.
Are there any Ufo sightings known to you from Iceland?
Our media NEVER covers anything out of the ordinary.







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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:46:55 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:39:55 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 98 12:32:45 PDT

>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:43:08 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

We are treated to Jerome Clark's ufogical wisdom:

>>Not only that, the practice of ufology is protected under the
>>first amendment: i.e. the free exercise of religion. Your past
>>actions have been precariously close to being unconstitutional.

>Huh? Can anybody explain to me what Ed is trying to say here?

Why bother? If Jerome Clark doesn't understand by now after
decades of involvement and expounding ufological wisdom at the
drop of a hat, he must be part of the problem and not part of
any solution. What a shame, and to think that he is a great
spell-checker extraordinaire!

>>>By all means, stick with the Robert O. Deans, the Kevin
>>>Randles, the Stanton Friedmans, the David Rudiaks, the Don
>>>Schmitts, the Phillip Corsos, the Don Berliners, the Jerome
>>>Clucks, the Mark Rodeghiers, the Michael Swords', the Mark
>>>Cashmans, the Steven Greers, the Clifford Stones, and let's
>>>not forget the oh-so pious Greg Sandows, and all the other
>>>ufological elite who have made the UFO field what it is
>>>today.

>>They are all keepers of the 'Word', tolerant of fellow
>>prophets and respectful of each others individual ufological
>>beliefs, especially when unsupported by data and evidence. It
>>is ufologically and politically incorrect to argue against a
>>fellow ufologist's position on ufological beliefs as long as
>>they are a keeper of the 'Word'. You, Robert Todd, are not a
>>keeper of the 'Word'. This makes you an infidel and a threat
>>to the stability of the faith, obviously someone that needs to
>>be demonized.

>Uh huh. Exactly. You must have telepathic powers, dude.

Dude with telepathic powers? Must be so since Jerome Clark is
known for his fastidious self-restraint in his ufological posts
and would never lower himself to the level of a demonized Robert
Todd; an example of ufological insight at its best.

>Or,

Wait, there is more ufological wisdom coming from Jerome Clark,
keeper of the 'Word' extraordinaire.

>anyway, you think you do, and that's all that matters, right?

And now the demonization of Ed Stewart continues. First,
attribute something to the person that can readily be seen as
not so, "dude with telepathic powers". Second, attribute the
connotation to your target to be demonized as if it is what the
target "thinks". This is present day ufological wisdom
practiced at its best! And by one of the illuminaries, Jerome
Clark. So much for self-restraint, not a characteristic
ufological advocates are known for.

>I must say, though, that it would take someone as far removed from
>ufological reality as a Todd or an Ed to draw all of these
>people, of widely varying approaches, views, and reputations,
>into the same rant.

Where does one find ufological reality? Please guide me to the
light? Do I find it in Jerome Clark's three volume encyclopedia,
or in his two volume revised encyclopedia? Do I find it in the
thousands and thousands of official pertinent government
documents that the demon Robert Todd uncovered over the last
three decades? Obviously not, Robert Todd's efforts over the
last three decades, significant as they are for an understanding
of the UFO problem and government involvement, unfortunately do
not point to the ufological reality that Jerome Clark alludes
to. Robert Todd is not even mentioned in Jerome Clark's three
volume encyclopedia, even though it is an impossibility to
discuss honestly ufo history and government involvement since
1947 without discussing documents that were uncovered first by
demon Robert Todd over the last three decades (At a personal
cost, I might add, that must be in the thousands of dollars).
But I am regressing, do I find ufological reality in the 1600+
books, 10,000+ magazines/articles, 300+ rolls of 16mm and 35mm
microfilm containing thousands of pages each, 500+ videos or in
the uncounted tens of thousands of newsclips available at my
fingertips and being cataloged as my personal hobby when I find
time? Do I find it in the photocopied reproductions of the
ufological collections of Dr. James MacDonald, or in bowels of
CUFOS, or in the hands of private UFO illuminaries that have
given me permission to photocopy their holdings and
correspondence in the past? Where do I find this ufological
reality you allude that I am "far removed" from?

>But of course the point is not to offer any insights but to
>smear by association, isn't it?

The point is obviously over Jerome Clark's head and his
ufological wisdom. Any one of the original mentioned people by
Robert Todd don't have the guts to start cleaning up ufology on
their own. They all tolerate each other. Yet, all have one thing
in common. Demonize Robert Todd and ignore his contributions
over the last three decades. BTW, I really don't know what is
meant by your term "removed from ufological reality". I live and
work in the real world. The world that in the last fifty years
has refused to buy into "ufological reality" simply because its
proponents, i.e. keepers of the 'Word', have failed time after
time to present compelling evidence as to the nature of the ufo
problem.

>>Popular consent determines the wellbeing of ufology. The more
>>people that believe, the more popular that ufology gets. Somehow
>>or other, that growing popularity, also known as the UFO
>>movement, is seen by some of the keepers of the 'Word' as the
           *************************************************
>>force that will ultimately thrust ufology to the forefront of
>>universal acceptance and respectability.

>Not my position at all (as Dennis Stacy, with whom I've been
>discussing the very topic of late, will testify), but hey, why
>let the facts get in the way of self-righteous posturing? You've
>never let them do it before, so why start now?

No one said it was Jerome Clark's particular position,
especially not I. Maybe, instead of using his spell-checking
expertise so much on my posts, Jerome Clark should take time and
expand his attention to read and understand my posts more
carefully. It is reproduced right above. But, somehow or other,
Jerome Clark's "ufological reality and wisdom" has once again
dictated his reaction. Accuse the target demon of a statement
not true, sugar-coat it with adjectives that will enrich a
fabricated persona and motive, i.e. "self-righteous posturing",
and add an innuendo or two that the target demon pays no
attention to facts or ever has. Really? I am afraid the only
thing Jerome Clark's statement and attribution to me shows, not
in ufological reality but real world reality, is a low contempt
for the readers of this mailing list, the readers, that is, that
recognize what a straw man argument is and how it detracts from
the accuser and not the accused. And the serious and
intellectual ufo community sits in the gallery scratching their
heads as to the state of ufology.

[garbage motives attributed to demon Robert Todd by Jerome Clark
snipped]

>>Obviously not, you [Robert Todd] have been previously officially
>>ex-communicated from the history of ufology by the exclusion of
>>even a mention in Jerome Clark's three volume encyclopedia,
>>louded by the publisher and author as the reference to be for
>>future generations and by a majority of the UFO community as a
>>prime example of objectivism in the field.

>I'm not sure what "louded by the publisher and author" means
>here. Is "louded" a word? In any case, on the assumption that
>our good-humored friend here means "lauded," I can't say that I
>have done any of that about my own encyclopedia, though I
>certainly did try to write the best possible book of which I am
>capable (and I leave it to others to decide how well, or how
>poorly, I succeeded).

>Incidentally, Bob Todd is mentioned in the Encyclopedia (pp. 188
>and 606). And Ed Stewart's splendid FSR index is cited also.

Incidentally, Robert Todd is _not_ mentioned as originally
stated above in your three volume encyclopedia. If you want to
talk about your newest two volume edition, I am sorry I don't
have it and cannot address it one way or another. I just
finished buying your three volume encyclopedia and don't feel
justified in spending another $140.00 for a revision since the
first edition was lauded as the greatest thing since peanut
butter, but apparently it wasn't sticky enough and needed an
improved edition.

>>On one ufological hand (Greg Sandow's), you are demonized for
>>your irrelevance to the 'Word' and in another ufological hand
>>(Jerome Cluck's), your research contributions are completely
>>ignored and unofficially rendered non-existant while the keepers
>>of the 'Word' loud Jerome Cluck as the "true" ufological
>>historian.

>A wonderfully perceptive observation, as usual. Whatever it
>means. You're badly in need of the services of a translator, my
>friend, not to mention a dictionary which will inform you of the
>difference between "loud" and "laud" and tell you how to spell
>"non-existent."

I am not your friend. Don't give anybody the wrong impression.
You insult me by calling me your friend. As far as I am
concerned you exemplify, as well as anyone can, the present
state of ufology. You are part of the problem and not part of
any solution. Keepers of the 'Word' will never see it that way,
thus ufology will always remain in its pit where it has been
dwelling over the last fifty years conjuring up demons to blame
for its own sorry state. You get an A for spelling, but a D- for
reading comprehension.

>And while I'm at it, don't you _ever_ have a good day?

Every day is a good day in the real world.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





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

                Newspapers Sue Website For Posting Copies Of

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 03:57:10 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:52:38 -0400
Subject: Newspapers Sue Website For Posting Copies Of


Source: The Modesto Bee Online

http://www.nando.net/24hour/modbee/newsroom/ntn/enter/100198/enter27_291
71.html

Stig

*******

Newspapers sue Web site for posting copies of stories

Copyright =A91998 Nando.net
Copyright =A91998 The Associated Press

LOS ANGELES (October 1, 1998 12:32 p.m. EDT) -- In one of the first
cases of its kind in cyberspace, the Los Angeles Times and The
Washington Post filed a copyright-infringement lawsuit against a Web
site that posts their stories without permission.

The federal lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Los Angeles
accuses the Free Republic site of using hundreds of stories from the
newspapers, violating their copyrights and diverting users and
potential revenue from their own Web sites.

Rex Heinke, an attorney for the newspapers, said the Free Republic site
has been posting the stories "on a very large scale for a very long
time."

The Fresno-based site posts the stories and allows users to write
comments about them. The site's operator, Jim Robinson, said he has
ignored warnings from the newspapers because the practice is protected
by the First Amendment and the "fair use" doctrine of copyright law.

The doctrine allows portions of copyrighted works to be duplicated when
presented in the context of commentary, such as a book review that
contains excerpts.

"I'm resolved to do whatever it takes to win this case," said Robinson,
a computer programmer. "I will not back down." He said he is being
singled out because of his political leanings. The Free Republic site
features many right-wing messages.

The suit is widely seen as a potentially groundbreaking attempt to
address how copyright protections apply to the Internet.

"It's a very important lawsuit because it's a question that needs to be
settled," said John Shepard Wiley Jr., a law professor at the
University of California, Los Angeles.

"The Net is one giant copying machine, and producers, authors and
content providers have been worried that the Net would threaten their
basic economic incentives," he said.







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

              Circle on Prince Edward Island, Canada - 10-01-98

From: psa@direct.ca (Paul Anderson)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:49:25 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:45:05 -0400
Subject: Circle on Prince Edward Island, Canada - 10-01-98


Circles Phenomenon Research Canada Update
October 1, 1998


 FORMATION REPORTED ON PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND

*Preliminary Report*

Just when we thought the season was over in this country...

Yet another formation reported, found on September 28, near town
of Tryon on Prince Edward Island, along Canada's east coast.
Large "triplet" with connecting pathways, in winter rye. Copy of
newspaper article, with report from Mike Mella, who first
reported it, follows:

____________________________


Here's an article which appeared in The Guardian, our local
newspaper, regarding the crop circle found in Prince Edward
Island, Canada, which I mentioned the other day (parts in square
brackets are my additional notes):

____________


"Who, or what, left Tryon's crop circles?" by Doug Gallant The
Guardian, Tuesday, September 29th, 1998

Tryon [a region of Prince Edward Island] has a new tourist
attraction, although nobody seems to know how it got there. Or
why.

The attraction lies in John Visser's winter rye grain field
which runs along the Trans-Canada Highway.

There, visible from the highway, are three large crop circles,
all of which are connected by paths. Two of the circles measure
just over 40 feet across while the third measures over 50 feet.
Within those circles, anything that might have been standing has
been completely flattened, while nothing outside the circles or
paths that connect them has been touched, save by the feet of
the curious, hundreds of whom turned up over the weekend after
word of the phenomenon spread through Tryon and neighbouring
communities.

Harry Craig, of Craig's Convenience Store in Crapaud [another
region of P.E.I.], says the circles have been the subject of
much conversation and no small amount of speculation. "Little
green men?" Craig says with a grin. "I don't think so. But it's
strange. I can't think of any piece of machinery I know of that
would make cuts so perfect [a bad choice of words, since I
myself can testify to the fact that the stalks were not cut].
The two small circles are exactly the same size, and the paths
that connect them are all the same width."

Potato producer John Visser says the circles look to have been
there since the middle of August. They were first brought to his
attention by a man from the Bedeque area who spotted them while
flying overhead in his private plane. Does Visser have any idea
how they got there? "I haven't got the foggiest idea where they
came from. And I don't see any tracks that would lead me to
believe somebody trucked equipment in there." Could it be
aliens?

"I don't believe in little green men from outer space," Visser
said. "And I'm not going to speculate either. As close as I come
to speculation is being in the potato business."  He would say,
though, that the wind has been known to flatten ground like
that. "A little twister could do that, and we do get them from
time to time." Visser says it doesn't really matter how they got
there, or who made them because they're not going to be there
much longer.

"I'll be running a disc through that field in a couple of days.
It won't matter what was there."

Similar finds elsewhere in the world have been attributed to
anything from aliens looking for a place to land, the popular
choice of tabloid newspapers; to the more-plausible explanation
of pranksters with time on their hands who carefully measure out
their "designer-crop circles, "then maticulously flatten the
growth within those circles with planks or sections of wood
which they either swing in circles or lay flat and stand on.

____________


Once I found out where the formation was, I went to see it
myself. I'm not exactly an expert, but from what I could tell by
looking at the circles, and drawing on my previous, albeit
admittedly limitted knowledge about crop-formations, it looked
pretty impressive to me. That is, if it was a hoax, it was
well-done, probably by someone who at least knows what
'authentic' circles are supposed to look like.

I noticed that the stalks were laid counter-clockwise, but since
it's now a high-traffic area due to all the publicity, I
couldn't tell if they had originally been broken or bent
(they're all trampled now).

Also, from what I could tell when I visited the field, there
seemed to be a ring, about 4 feet wide, of flattened grain
surrounding the large circle. However, as you can see, there's
no mention of it in the article,
so I suppose it may have been made by spectators.

--Mike.

_________________________________

Web site updated September 30.

_________________________________


For further information or correspondence, contact:



Paul Anderson

Director
CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International
Main Web Site:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310
1998 Updates:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1998

Director
MILLENNIUM RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Web:  mypage.direct.ca/p/psa/ (being revised)

Representative
BLT RESEARCH, INC.

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Tel / Fax:  604.731.8522
E-Mail:  psa@direct.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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                              Filer's Files #39

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:34:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:41:37 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #39


Filer's Files #39-1998  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  MUFON Eastern Director,
October 1, 1998,   Majorstar@aol.com  609 654-0020

R E W A R D of ONE MILLION DOLLARS for a UFO.  Henry Di Cienzo the owner of
The Flying Saucer Restaurant in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada is offering a
reward of $1,000,000 to anyone who can supply a FLYING SAUCER or pieces of
one.  Persons wishing to collect the reward must contact, Rob  McConnel, host
of THE 'X' ZONE RADIO SHOW at 610 CKTB, phone (905) 984-6610 or by e-mail at
xzone@610cktb.com.  All material received will be submitted to labs and
scientific centers for complete analysis.  The reward will be issued once the
material(s) have been thoroughly analyzed and the material(s) have been
confirmed to be either alien in content or from a  source other than Earth
therefore Extra-terrestrial.

GENERAL RAMEY�S MESSAGE PHOTOS CORRECTION:

Debbie Stock writes concerning the fifty years old message held in General
Ramey�s hand now being greatly enhanced and read in part for the first time
since July 8, 1947.  Several photographs were taken of General Ramey and
alleged flying saucer wreckage by James Bond Johnson.  These photos are under
going detailed scrutiny in an attempt to read this critical message apparently
sent to the General at 8th Air Force Headquarters.  Debbie Stock has found a
correction to the interpretation of Ramey�s Message.  The portion "THE CRASH
STORY"...  THE WORD "CRASH" IS DISK,,,(IT'S AN "I" INSTEAD OF AN "A") also
after "SAFE TALK OF MEANING AND STORY" I DETECT    THE WORDS.......SHOW
"STUFF"........OF WEATHER BALLOONS.   While there is some consensus on some
words, the  words we all agree on are the words "VICTIMS"     "FORT WORTH,
TEX."     AND  "WEATHER BALLOONS" CREWS AND TEMPLE.  Temple is the name of the
sender of the message.  Much more examination needs to be done.  I am looking
forward to input from others.  Thanks to Debbie Stock:  destock@pacbell.net

VERMONT

MUFON investigator Sandra Black reports that on September 25, 1998, between
1930 hours and 2000 hours an non-human entity was sighted about a half hour
north of Brattleboro.  Two women driving north on Interstate 91 noticed
several bright headlights approaching from the rear.  Three or four cars sped
by the witnesses, who were doing approximately 70 mph.  As these cars who
appeared to be traveling together went by, the headlights of one illuminated
the car directly in front.  The witnesses saw in the backseat of the front car
a lone entity sitting erect.  It looked tall with a huge head on a spindly
neck.  The color was pasty and it looked like a lot of veins covered the head.
These cars drove at such a high rate of speed that the witnesses could not
catch them.  Thanks to Sandra Black, MUFON Section Director, Coos County, NH
Vermont State Director Tom McFarland is investigating.

RHODE ISLAND

PORTSMOUTH:  On Tuesday, September 22, 1998,  a 22-year-old sailor in the U.S.
Navy, was driving north on Burma Road a mile from the Melville shipyard, when
he spied a UFO at 4:18 PM.  "It started above the tree line, about 10 degrees
above the horizon, and  disappeared into the clouds.  The departure angle was
close to 45 degrees towards the west.    "I'm a reliable judge of speed.  This
thing was smoking and accelerating!  Speed 400 to 500 knots, with a behind-
the-trees dash at Mach 1 (600  knots), easy." "It was the brilliance that
brought my eye to it.  If I had done a slow blink, I  would have missed it
completely.  This was truly an amazing sight."  He described the UFO as "oval,
like if you put your thumb and index finger together to make the OK sign.  No
blinking lights.  Glowed like the filtered amber/gold sun." Portsmouth is on
Aquidneck Island in Rhode Island's Narragansett Bay, about 25 miles southeast
of Providencel. (Thanks to Joe Trainor #39, 9,27/98, UFO Roundup.

NEW JERSEY

PENNS GROVE:  Evelyn Galson  reports that on August 13, 1998,  a sixteen year
old girl saw an egg shaped, metallic flying object.  It was low in the sky and
a beam of light was coming out of the front of it.  She called her friend to
see it, but it disappeared.  Later that evening while driving home with her
brother and younger sister,  they saw a light low in the sky.  The three were
traveling down Auburn Road at 9:00 PM in WOODSTOWN and believe they saw the
same object with a beam of light coming out from the front.  They didn't stop,
but kept driving and eventually lost sight of it.  Thanks to Evelyn Galson and
her husband Roger who recently passed their Field Investigators exam.
(galsonrm@citnet.com). Congratulations.

WANAQUE RESERVOIR:  Mike reports he and his friend Ryan visited the reservoir
on September 27, 1998, from 10:30 to 1:00 PM and saw six objects.  We then
drove to a nearby field, turned around and a huge triangle was just sitting
there.  It was about the size of a quarter in the sky.  The object hovered for
three minutes then slowly started moving from north to south towards the car.
At first was silent, but overhead we could hear an airplane sound, which was
distinctly quieter than normal aircraft.  It had two very bright almost tan
lights in the front and a green light on the left and a red one on the right.
The lights were strobing, but unlike normal aircraft lights.  I estimate it
was 700 feet above us.  It was incredible to watch.  If people want to
skywatch with Mike, e-mail him at MATHrk101.

BERGEN COUNTY:  Impressive photographs of orbs or plasmas were shot in New
Jersey over the last few weeks.  The photos show orbs that seem to be bouncing
across the tree line.  They usually are not seen with the naked eye but show
up clearly on film.  These are some of the best pictures taken so far in New
Jersey.  The orbs appear to move through the trees and around a yard.  A
single orb about the size of a basketball seems to start moving close to the
ground and then comes up and right over the head of the photographer. One orb
seems to have arms, legs, or tentacles.  You might try to do some of your own
photography to obtain similar pictures.  Many people are getting surprising
results.  E-mail fologic@aol.com See the orbs at,
http://members.aol.com/ufologic/Paranormal or at Paranormal at
members@aol.com.

PENNSLVANNIA

BROWNSVILLE:  Stan Gordon reports mysterious booms in Western Pennsylvania at
8:30 PM on September 27, 1998.  A loud boom was heard in Fayette and
Washington Counties covering a 15 mile area.  No source of the sound has been
determined.  A family in California Boro said their glass curio cabinet "was
rocked with glassware inside fell and broke"  A source in West Brownsville,
said the blast jolted her out of bed.  A Brownsville Police officer  heard the
boom and describes it as a concussion.  He said,  "It definitely was not
thunder, but more like an explosion."  Stan also received information of a
huge explosion at 2:00 PM on September 25, near Saltsburg, in Indiana County.
It was a low pitched explosion followed by a long rumble of a higher pitch.
Thanks to Stan Gordon UFO Hotline 724-838-7768

GEORGIA

LA GRANGE:  MUFON/ISUR John Thompson reports that a witness in La Grange has
come forward about a highly unusual observation that occurred in early August
of 1998.  She was on the porch of her home and saw what she initially thought
was a tornado forming.  In a few moments,  it turned a brilliant white and
took on the shape of a saucer.  The size was described as that of a tornado,
but it just remained stationary over the trees about a mile away.  There was
another witness, and while watching, a lightning strike occurred above it,
then it disappeared.  No tornado sound was heard.  It rained lightly about 30
minutes later.  A traveling businessman reported seeing a UFO in this same
area about two weeks after the described tornado UFO event and a similar
report occurred in England recently.

LA GRANGE:  John Thompson also reports on a daylight sighting of a dull black
triangle UFO of small plane size flying at 1500 to 2000 feet going northeast
on September 27, 1998, at 12:45 PM.  No sound was heard and the witness said
it looked like a stealth fighter more than anything.  Checked with LaGrange
Airport at around 2:15 PM and they showed no gliders flying and no dark
triangle aircraft operating in LaGrange area.  The remote possibility of small
military delta shaped drone should be considered.  The possibility of a
stealth fighter flying that low over LaGrange and making no sound is remote.
A misidentification by the witness is possible, and no other witnesses have
been found.

ATLANTA:  The National UFO Reporting Center  received a call on Friday from a
Marietta resident concerning UFOs.  Later she called MUFON�s State Director
Tom Sheets and said that on September 21, 1998, she and her husband were
driving north on 92 Highway and observed a triangle with rounded edges.  It
was a large dark triangular shaped object with steady green lights. and was
larger than a baseball held at arms length.  It appeared to follow them for
five minutes until they got to their home in Hiram at 10:00 PM.  They examined
the sky more closely and observed numerous unusual lights, some low enough to
reveal a round shape.  These lights were darting around and hovering.  One in
particular seemed to spin on an axis displaying a configuration of green
lights on one side, and white on the other, almost strobe like in intensity.
They noticed a slight humming sound during their observances.  At one point a
light she described as basketball size appeared to fall straight down toward
the horizon.  On the next two nights, similar displays were noticed and they
saw at least one aircraft that used a spotlight.   The Paulding County
Sheriff's operator advised they had received no UFO reports.  Other witnesses
are also reporting similar triangles and fire balls in the area.  America�s
most advanced F-22 fighters are being built at nearby Marietta.  One has been
test flown.

ALABAMA

LEE COUNTY:  John Thompson reports that a married 38 year-old University of
Alabama graduate called me to say that he had seen a UFO on September 25,
1998. EDT.  While working on a house off Highway 14, three miles west of
Auburn, he saw a high-flying UFO directly overhead at 1:35 PM.  The UFO was
"shiny white" and of roundish, oval or cylinder shaped.  Speed was very fast!
Altitude was over 14 miles high--possibly 30-70 miles high.  Witness said the
silvery UFO  went from directly overhead to his 2 o'clock position in "2-3
seconds."  It covered a third of the horizon, at extremely high altitude, in a
very brief interval.  Incredibly, the UFO had an apparent size of an 1/8 of an
inch.  This suggests a real size of approximately 400 feet long and more
likely--as the UFO was flying where the atmosphere turns its darkest at
extreme elevation--as much as 2,000 feet long, at 70 miles high.  No sound or
electrical interference (he had his radio on) was noted..  He does not believe
in UFOs, but knows what he saw was not a plane and why he called me.  Falling
space junk has to be considered although it appears the UFO was flying with
the contour of the earth. No vapor trail was seen.  A call was placed to the
FAA in Columbus and Marvin Burdette said their logs showed nothing unusual for
last Friday.  They only monitor aircraft that use a transponder.  Since this
UFO was above 60,000 feet it would not have registered whether transponder
equipped or not!  A call was also placed to Auburn's airport.  "Patsy" said
she was working then and no pilots flying into Auburn reported seeing a UFO.
NORAD is being copied  on this incident due to the high estimated altitude.
A MUFON general case one form was completed and signed by the witness today
and his testimony videoed.  Witness says he is certain that what he saw was
NOT an aircraft.  This field investigator is inclined to agree. A bright rare
daytime meteorite or space junk are possibilities but doubtful as the witness
says   he saw a solid craft of enormous size moving at extraordinary speed.
The UFO  flew  from east to west. The LaGrange, Georgia witness is well
educated and has an excellent reputation.

TENNESEE

CLEVELAND: Walter Sheets reports that multiple UFOs/lights were observed on
September  26, 1998, at about 1:00 AM.  Luckily, a witness was located and
told me that he is a student at the local community college.  He observed
numerous bright yellow/white star-like lights quickly darting back and forth
in the sky.  They would come close together to form a very bright
'collective,' then spread out.  At times, they formed hovering geometric
shapes such as a triangle, rectangle, and a straight line with square at the
end.  The lights would occasionally flicker, and hint at different colors,
moving very quickly.  There were at least 10 performing in this display.  He
watched for an hour, and called his girlfriend to come out watch.

ARIZONA

TUCSON:  On Thursday, September 24, 1998, three iridescent basket ball size
green balls were observed by two people traveling in the southwest side of
Tucson at 10:06 PM
The balls traveled side by side near Valencia road, traveling East, between
"Cardinal and Midvale."  The "center-one" dropped first and then the "Left-
one" dropped, then finally the "right-one" dropped.  They were then on the
same level then.  They shot southwest toward the San Xavier Mission and
disappeared.  This was reported to Skywatch�s June Scherrer, Arizona State
Skywatch director who took the phone call from Officer Murphy of the police.
Thanks to Roger Scherrer: cydonia@aztec.asu.edu and Skywatch International
Inc.

WASHINGTON

Peter Davenport, Director of the National UFO Reporting Center in Seattle
reports that on September 23, 1998, at 2125 hours (PDT) unusual blue/green
fireballs were seen at a rate that we rarely have experienced in the past.
The "blitz" of sighting reports has abated somewhat, but continues to some
degree, and is being accompanied by other reports of disc, spheres, and other
anomalous objects."  The reports appear to be grossly inconsistent with
meteoritic events, with re-entering space "junk," with aircraft, aurora
borealis, or any other more mundane explanations." Thanks to Peter Davenport,
http://www.ufocenter.com/

CHILE

ISLA DE MAIPO:  Carlos Covarrubias writes that on September 28, 1998, all my
family saw a halo, that looked like a cloud moving from the west to the east.
It disappeared towards the north east at 22:15 PM.  I have always been
skeptical about UFOs.  I consulted with European Southern Observatory and they
said that no cosmics phenomenon�s were expected for the night,  they had not
observed anything.   Today I heard in the radio that this halo had  been seen
in different places in Chile from Santiago to Punta Arenas to the South.
Thanks to Carlos: (562)8192744, address: Santa Rosa 2408  Isla de Maipo
Region, Metropolitana, Chile

AUSTRALIAN UFO ARMADA

GRAFTON N.S.W.:  Researcher Barry Taylor reports that a formation of twelve to
fifteen UFOs were observed on July 11, 1998, at 6:11 PM.  The white
illuminated objects were at very high altitude (40,000+ ft.) and were moving
fast in a "V" formation surrounded by a white haze.  They were plainly visible
against the stars moving south at 10,000 klm / hr.  I video taped the "V"
formation for three seconds in the clip.  Unfortunately, they are only seen
faintly on the original tape.  Five minutes later, while observing the
northern sky, 200 white illuminated objects surrounded by a fairly bright
white haze was seen moving east at 40,000 feet altitude.  Bryan Dickeson of
U.F.O.R. calculated their speed at 6500 to 6900 mph.  This current "Armada" of
UFO's arrived at Earth on April 6, and departed on July 11, 1998.  No similar
sightings have been seen since then.  Thanks to Barry Taylor.
stingray@nor.com.au

DR. BRUCE MACCABEE REGARDING  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

MUFON�s Maryland State Director comments on Filer's Files #38 Air Force
Engineer�s Secret Disc Aircraft.  A Wright Patterson engineer�s stated,
>Today, many of the futuristic vehicles of terrestrial origin carry advanced
directed energy weapon technologies such as sonic, laser, and rf capabilities
for biological system disruption and target hard kill. >  Bruce comments: "The
main subject here concerns objects which fly around.  There is only one such
object carrying a powerful laser.... That is a research aircraft known as the
AirBorne Laser (ABL) of the Air Force research laboratory at Kirtland, AFB.
It is a powerful laser on a 747  aircraft.  Why people persist in suggesting
that there are many aircraft carrying equipped with weapon level lasers such
as this is a mystery to me.   (There are numerous low power laser systems used
for missile guidance that have been  in operational use for more than 20
years.) I have been following and working with the forefront of powerful laser
weapon technology directed toward shooting down ballistic missiles for the
last 13 years, so I have an idea of the "leading edge" of the technology.  We
simply have not gotten to the point where there are operational systems flying
around, only test systems.  Only recently has the Air Force announced that the
ABL system tests have been sufficiently successful that they will build
several prototype operational systems in the next few years.  As for RF
capabilities, there have been systems designed to disrupt enemy electronic
systems for a long time.  But high power microwave beams capable of major
damage comparable to what a laser could do are still a long way off, if ever
(in large part because the longer wavelengths of microwave beams, as compared
to lasers, cannot be focused as easily to small spots on a target.).  > They
also have stealthy characteristics using broad band holographic technology to
easily "cloak" or conceal and/or present false targets.> Holographic?  This
refers to a specific sort of image reconstruction using coherent wavefronts or
radiation (laser, RF, acoustic).   Holography  tends to be monochromatic
because it requires wavefront interference that is constructive in some places
and destructive in other places.  Broad band radiation, however, is too
incoherent to have well defined regions of constructive and  destructive
interference.  In other words, broad band radiation obliterates the
interference patterns necessary to make a hologram.  There are methods for
concealing targets, but I don't see the connection with holography.  False
targets in radar systems can be created by electronic transmitters carried by
the objects (e.g., aircraft) being detected.  Receivers on board the object to
be detected are designed to analyze incoming radar signals and then to
transmit signals that overwhelm any natural echoes from the object.  The
signals that are sent back can be phase delayed to make it appear as if the
object being detected is moving at a different speed and/or is in a different
location from where it actually is.  This does not require holography.  Thanks
to Bruce Maccabee:

ST. LOUIS MUFON CONFERNCE OCTOBER 17, 1998

Bruce Widaman, MUFON State Director of Missouri is hosting a regional
U.F.O./I.A.C Conference on the known government connections with ufology.
Scheduled speakers include: Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist and UFO
researcher; Robert Swiatek, FUFOR; Chris O�Brien, author; Lt. Col. Gerald
Rowles MUFON State Director for Washington and Major George Filer, MUFON
Eastern Regional Director.  The conference will be held at the Comfort Inn,
located at Page Avenue and Highway 270.  The conference will be hosted by Ted
Phillips, Marvin Czarnik and Bruce Widaman.  This will be one of best
conferences of the year.

FREE REAL ESTATE RELOCATION SERVICES:  HELP UFO RESEARCH
As a special aid to our readers, we can help you obtain the best real estate
experts in your area at no cost to you.  We provide free relocation
information and consulting services from the largest and most respected firms.
If your planning to sell or buy a home and would like a top flight real estate
agent give me a call at 609 654-0020 or e-mail me at Majorstar@aol.com.

Filer's Files Copyright 1998 by MUFON EASTERN DIRECTOR all rights reserved.
Readers may post items from the Files on their web-sites or in newsgroups
provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the
date of issue in which the item appeared.

Send your letters to George A. Filer at Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to
keep your name confidential please so state in your E-mails.







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

                    Re: Mysterious Booms in Pennsylvania

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 08:25:41 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 16:25:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Mysterious Booms in Pennsylvania


Source: alt.ufo.reports

Stig

*******

Mysterious Booms Reported in Western Pennsylvania
Author: Danny Cox
Email:dcox@bc.seflin.org
Date:1998/09/30
Forums:alt.ufo.reports



From:   STAN GORDON [mailto:PAUFO@WESTOL.COM]
Sent:   Wednesday, September 30, 1998 12:01 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject:        Mysterious Booms Reported in Western Pennsylvania

Mysterious Booms reported in Western Pennsylvania
At approximately 8:30 P.M. on September 27, 1998 a loud boom was
reported from Brownsville, PA in Fayette County, and was heard into
Washington County as well, covering approximately a 15 mile area.

While no source of the sound has been determined, some possibilities
are that it was associated with a distant thunderstorm, a sonic boom,
or detonated explosives. One source has told me that a family in
California Boro said their glass curio cabinet "was rocked with
glassware inside, falling and breaking." Another person this source
knew in West Brownsville, said the blast jolted her out of bed.

One of my associates, Jim Brown who lives in Fayette County has been
following up on the incident as well, and has submitted this initial
report:

Reports were received by Brownsville Police around 8:30 P.M. on
September 27, 1998 regarding a loud boom. The boom was heard as far
away as Smock, PA and also into Washington County.

I contacted Brownsville Police and spoke with one of the officers on
duty at the time. (Name witheld pending clearance to publish) He states
he heard the boom and describes it as a concussion. When asked he said
it definitely was not thunder, but more like an explosion. Another
officer also on duty reports he heard what he describes as a fizz just
before the boom. He compared it to a "launching." He agrees it was a
concussion sound. Both investigated the area along with fire department
personnel but no physical evidence of any explosion was found.

They believe the boom was centered on or over the river, directly
behind the fire department. Neither witness saw anything visual at the
time of the boom, and of the numerous reports received only one claims
to have seem a flash of light. (I have not been able to contact this
person as of this date.) The weather at the time had a storm cell just
North of Brownsville, but it was not storming in the immediate area.
There have been no other reports received by Brownsville police of any
other phenomena as of this date (9-29-98)

Jim Brown

Another Boom reportedly occurred in Indiana County on September 25,
1998 I have received information that a similar occurence took place
around 2 P.M. on September 25, 1998 near Saltsburg, PA in Indiana
County. A resident told me he heard what sounded like a huge explosion.
It started out as a very low pitched explosion followed by a long
rumble of a higher pitch. The rumble continued for 15-30 seconds after
the blast, and decreased steadily in intensity. This person says he has
talked with others who heard it 15 miles away. I am trying to confirm
information on this at this time. Brownsville and Saltsburg are about
40 miles distance apart.

FYI

Similar mysterious blasts have been reported from around the country.
Some of you will recognize the terms Skyquakes or Airquakes that are
sometimes associated with these reports. As with cases of UFO's, quite
often a natural or man-made explanation can be found for these blasts,
yet some are never solved.

If you have any info on these reports or others in PA please let me
know.

Stan Gordon
UFO Hotline (24 hrs.) 724-838-7768
website: www.westol.com/~paufo






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

                             Re: UK Stats Needed

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 01:11:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 16:27:50 -0400
Subject: Re: UK Stats Needed


>From: Ben Field <ben@abcfield.force9.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: HELP, I need some facts and figures.
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:24:26 +0100

>Dear List

>Would anyone happen to know anywhere I could get some facts and
>figures on UFO observations/abductions/experiences?

>Figures about the UK would be preferable on any subjects relating
>to UFOs (I'm thinking of 45% of people claim to have seen a UFO,
>for example-does this seem feasible?).

>By Friday if possible

>All the best

>Ben Field


Dear Ben:

I have a computer database (which I sell to cover costs) of some
17,200+ UFO sightings over the ages.

Some 1190 of these are in Britain.

If you have some more specific questions,  I can come up with
numbers and other data.

I can look up, map, do counts and statistics etc. based on
some 90+ search paths;  dates, types of craft etc.

Please email me directly for more information:

<larryhat@jps.net>

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                          Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?

From: Gt Mccoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:44:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 16:15:08 -0400
Subject: Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: The New Nazi-ET Lie!
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 09:46:11 +0100

<snip>

>All the evidence that I have got strongly suggests to both
>myself, Bill Rose and the others associated with our research
>that it was indeed the US Navy (Engineering Division) who were
>most responsible for the early postwar sightings of metallic
>discs which, in most cases, were operating well within the
>boundaries of terrestrial technology. A gas turbine powered
>XF5U-1, that AIR 100-203-79 suggest was operational in 1947/8,
>would, according to several aviation  writers have been able to
>fly at very low speeds and would have had a flight envelope of
>between 0-550mph....

>A 'Project Sign' document in my possession indicates that the
>USAF Intelligence people knew about tests of low aspect ratio
>aircraft involved in 'boundary layer experiments' and that the
>aircraft as built by none other than Chance-Vought.

>Occasionally, new information on classified aircraft forces the
>UFO community to look again at it's underlying raison d'=EAtre -
>the theory of ET-human contact.

<Snip>


Tim,

What I can't figure out is how come silent-running vehicles,
invisible to radar, designed for atmospheric and space flight,
capable of hovering and stationary and vertical flight, that
reach tremendous speeds and acceleration (from 0 to 1500 knots
in seconds), are able to outpace any known conventional craft
and are almost invulnerable to enemy attacks have been kept in
the cupboard for more than 50 years?

Do you have any incentive on that?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:30:03 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 17:02:03 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs
>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0300

>>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 19:35:38 +0100
>>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The Fort Worth Photographs
>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 20:59:59 PDT

>>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 07:58:18 +0100
>>>>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>>>>To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: The Fort Worth Photographs

>I think a few corrections are in order here, Neil and Leanne

>l. I first found the pictures taken in Ramey's office in about 1979
>and had prints made then by the Ft.W ST.
>so it really isn't correct to say they have been languishing for 51
>years.Check the Roswell Incident by Moore and Berlitz.

>2. There were many front page newspaper articles on July 8,
>l947, in Evening papers from Chicago West. There was a very
>large article in the Los Angeles Herald Express which even had
>Ramey's explanation. Journalists were calling Roswell from all
>over the country and expanding the story with new input such as
>names etc.

>3. There is a video Recollections of Roswell which has testimony
>from about 27 witnesses some of whom are dead. 105minutes long

>4. There is an RAAF base yearbook which allows us to verify many
>positions at the base.

>Don't be fooled by the attacks by the debunkers and other arm
>chair theorists.They tend to ignore testimony they can't deal
>with as the USAF did.

>I personally believe that being able to read the memo in Ramey's
>hand would be a very imprtant breakthrough.

>We are getting close. It isn't easy.

>STF

Stan,

Thanks for comeing in with the comments, I wasn't trying to
detract from the importance of witness testimony, it was after
all Jesse Snr's testimony that started all this. But wanted to
highlight the facts that memories do fade and in a few notable
Roswell related cases testimony changes, whereas appart from
accumalating a collection of scratches the negatives and the
story they tell has remained unchanged since the afternoon they
were taken. As I said they capture a raw instant in history
untainted by interpretation of the passage of years on memory or
the journalistic spin of the time.

As for reading the memo, it is enlightning but also difficult,
the area of the negative where the paper is situated has
sustained quite a bit of scratch damage and the negatives
emulsion seems to have been distorted in places, most probably
due to the rushed developement and printing at the time. This
all makes the interpretation of the letters even harder though
as the text does seem to follow a fixed grid ie is typewritten,
it does help by giving a "letter count" for the totally
unknown's.

It's all very much like a historical version of a mixture of
a "Crossword Puzzle" and "Scrabble".

Now are "flying" and "disk" triple point words?<BG>

Best Regards
Neil.






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

                             Re: KGB Files Show

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:41:52 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 17:07:27 -0400
Subject: Re: KGB Files Show


Greetings everyone,

Out of curiousity, I looked up a photo showing Stephen Michalak
who was burned by the hot air that came out of a grill-like
opening from the underside of a UFO he allegedly came in close
contact with in the woods of Canada in 1967.This occurred less
than 2 years before the recovery of the alleged UFO wreckage in
the Sverdlovsk region of the Soviet Union shown in the TNT UFO
special.

As best as I can determine, the matrix of square burn marks on
Michalak's chest in the photo consist of 5 rows of squares with
4 squares in each row.The maximun size of the burn area is no
more than 1 foot square.Using the people standing next to the
Sverdlovsk UFO crash as a reference, we can see that the two
grill-like patterns shown on one side of the crashed UFO are
similar looking but about twice the size.If both UFO stories are
true (a really big if), then these UFOs may have had a similar
designer.

On Wednesday members and guests of MUFON Ontario at our meeting
at York University in Toronto got a chance to view this TNT UFO
special for the first time.To me the UFO looked very much like a
crude concrete object that may not be a flattened circular
object since the central raised area is more of a rounded
rectangular shape which resembles a vertical door.This door is
aligned in an up-down direction, something one would not expect
if the UFO came down in a random manner.

The metal-like tubing (and other more Earthly looking debris)
shown in front of the crashed UFO resembles one of the fragments
given to Kal K. Koroff for scientific testing.There are a few
Canadian scientists here who have examined some of the alleged
UFO artifacts I have passed on to them (and who have some
extraterrestrial artifacts of their own, including two rocks
from Mars) who would be very interested in examining fragments
that can be shown to have been collected at this crashed UFO
site.

One of several things which I found interesting in the alien
dissection portion of the TNT UFO special was the very brief
images (a few frames only?) of Soviet military officers(?) in
the same room with the persons in the white lab coats who did
the dissecting.These officers are not seem any other time.An
explanation was given on how the camera may have captured their
unexpected presence in this public hospital dissection room but
I could not understand it.Can anyone explain this to me?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                        Re: UFO UpDate: Stats Needed

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:22:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 17:05:34 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stats Needed


> Dear List

> Would anyone happen to know anywhere I could get some facts and
> figures on UFO observations/abductions/experiences?

> Figures about the UK would be preferable on any subjects relating
> to UFOs (I'm thinking of 45% of people claim to have seen a UFO,
> for example-does this seem feasible?).

> By Friday if possible

> All the best

> Ben Field

While working on my dissertation I came across the following
that might be of help.

>From Psychotherapy in Private Practice Vol. 6(3) 1988, p. 159:

Of adults 18 and over - 9% reported seeing something they thought
of as a UFO. 49% thought UFOs were "real" and 30% thought they
were imaginary. 21% weren't sure.

>From The Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 123, Second Half, Aug
1984, p. 199

Among American applied scientists and engineers, the possible
sighting rate is 18%.  Astronomers reported a rate of 11% (which
just goes to show you that Astronomers do see UFOs and at a rate
larger than the general population) but international
astronomers saw them at a 5% rate. This article also mentioned,
but gave no figures for a UFO encounter of the first kind, by
those above mentioned applied scientists and engineers.

The Abduction statistics can be found at the NIDS website. They
just reconducted the Roper Poll and found the numbers to be
about half of what was discovered in the first, more famous
poll. I don't have that in front of me, but it seemed that the
rate of abduction was inside the margine of error. I'm sure John
Velez or one of the others can point you in that direction.

Hope this is what you needed.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                   Another Upgrade Of Oberg/Cooper Website

From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen@li.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 14:15:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 17:14:21 -0400
Subject: Another Upgrade Of Oberg/Cooper Website


Hello to all UFO UpDates list members,

I am pleased to inform you that the "Important Topics" link on
the Oberg/Cooper website has been updated and now includes:


8.      University of Stanford Sturrock Committee 1997 reversal
     of the 1969 Condon Colorado Project conclusions, complete
     with direct links to the Sturrock report and the Journal
     for Scientific Exploration.

14.     A link to Loy Lawhon's rebuttal to Philip Klass' "ball
     lightning" theory for the 1965 Exeter sightings.

15.     Specific evidence offered from various UFOMind
     discussions regarding the 1989/90 Belgium AF NATO
     sightings.

19.     My summation of and response to several discussions
     regarding Jimmy Carter's 1969 UFO sighting.

Additionally, many links on the site have been readjusted for a
smooth, direct flow.

BTW, the O/C site is more than just two people disagreeing; it
is a research center containing a collection of facts not found
in other places and also, information from various websites on
the NET.

Respectfully,
Jerry Cohen

 Author: Oberg/Cooper rebuttals
Website: http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/
UFOmind: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/c/cohen/


P.S.  Those people desiring in-depth scientific studies performed
on UFO sightings should add the 'Journal of Scientific
Exploration' to your subscription list. As in CUFOS publications,
I believe an honest, critical eye is being applied to UFO
phenomena and they are certainly deserving of everyone's perusal
and support.








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

                  TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 17:10:48 -0400
Subject: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


Hi Errol and list,

I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
opinions.

The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
catch that. That is a different piece of evidence that something
was out there. Something that both pilots saw.

What your take on this? Looking for input.

Donnie





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

                   Laura Lee Show E-News - October 3, 1998

From: webmaster@lauralee.com
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:53:15 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 16:58:45 -0400
Subject: Laura Lee Show E-News - October 3, 1998


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is your WEEKLY E-NEWS from THE LAURA LEE SHOW and www.lauralee.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laura Lee E-News is sent by subscription only. If you wish to unsubscribe
go to: http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hello. Hope you had a great week! Thanks for subscribing to Laura Lee E-News.
++++++++
Following this weeks list of upcoming guests and topics, youll
also find FAQ (Answers to Frequently Asked Questions) on:

        --Bulletin Board: Your Reaction to Guests
        --Audio Archives (now in REAL AUDIO)
        --Live Webcast
        --Live Laura Lee Show Hours
        --Radio Stations Carrying The Laura Lee Show
        --Book Giveaway: how to enter
        --Photo Gallery Link
        --Subscribing or Unsubscribing to weekly Laura Lee E-News
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GUEST/TOPIC LINE UP for Saturday, October 3, 1998
By Laura Lee

Charles Finch
Iron ore was mined 43,000 years ago in Southern Africa. Mathematics can
trace its earliest origins back 25,000 years to Africa's Great Lakes
region. Dr. Finch also traces the earliest origins of astronomy,
engineering, architecture, navigation, and map-making to Africa.
And future surprises await: outside of the Nile Valley, 95% of the known
archeological sites in Africa have yet to be excavated. Dr. Finch is
an MD, and the Director of International Health at the Morehouse
School of Medicine in Atlanta. He is the author of "The Star of Deep
Beginnings: The Genesis of African Science and Technology." The Dogon
name for the star Sirius B is the Star of Deep Beginnings". Finch devotes
an entire chapter to the Dogon, discussed a few weeks ago with Robert
Temple. We thank Richard Fields for recommending Dr. Finch.

Philip Burt
This Australian natural health researcher keeps up on all the journals,
studies and in the field, and shares his up-to-the minute report
on new findings. Burt is the editor of the world's first and most
comprehensive encyclopedia of natural health on CD-ROM, the Hyperhealth
CD-ROM. This format, listing tens of thousands of references and studies
on natural therapies, the organs of the body, herbs and nutrition, and more,
makes the task of empowering ourselves with information all the easier.
For more info: http://www.lauralee.com/hyperhealth.htm

Andrew Collins
We've been following the trail of a lost civilization. This British researcher
has been following the trail of what he believes is a lost race, referred
to as the Watchers. They are described as tall, with white hair
and viper like faces in myth and ancient religious texts, where you also find
stories of Watchers who mated with human women to produce giant offspring
called Nephilim. You'll also find a variation on the Flood myth --- the
Watchers revealed to mankind forbidden arts and sciences, transgressions
that led to their destruction in the Great Flood. Collins believes these
Watchers were not Extra terrestrials, but "human angels". Collins is the
author of "From the Ashes of Angels: The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race."
This book is not published in the US. If you'd like a copy, sign up through
the Radio Bookstore.

Open Phone Discussion: Does Sagan's axiom, "Extraordinary Claims Require
Extraordinary Evidence" ring true with you? This goes to the heart of what
we do here on The Laura Lee Show, for you will hear a few extraordinary
theories and conjecture from our guest researchers! What constitutes
extraordinary evidence? How do you decide what is true and what is not?
I enjoy entertaining new paradigms andnotions that lie outside our consensus
on reality, and therefore outside the ordinary, and trying them on for size.
But to actually incorporate new ideasinto my belief system requires much more
than evidence. In the meantime, I'm comfortable with unknowns, and have found
sitting on the fence a rather interesting vantage point. I see the world
painted in myriad shades of gray. Do you, or do you see distinctly drawn
shades of black and white, right or wrong?

THIS WEEK'S POLL:
In general, do you assume that ancient texts speak in literal terms,
(vote yes) or metaphorical terms (vote no)?
TO VOTE go to: http://www.lauralee.com/poll.cfm

After voting give us your feedback on the Laura Lee Bulletin Board:
http://www.lauralee.com/bulletin.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS FOLLOW.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE LAURA LEE SHOW WEBSITE:
http://www.lauralee.com/home.htm

REAL AUDIO ARCHIVES:
Posted in full by Sunday Noon Pacific for the previous nights show. Now
formatted in REAL AUDIO. The Audio Archives will remain
on our website indefinitely. http://www.lauralee.com/archives.htm

AUDIO CASSETTES:
Should you need an audio tape of same to send to a friend, or to listen to
when you are not at your computer, call 1-800-243-1438. Tapes are edited of
commercial and news breaks, are often on 90 minute cassettes, and only $7
each. More info at:  http://www.lauralee.com/cassette.htm

LIVE WEBCAST:
If you cannot get radio reception, try the webcast during live show hours.
To join the webcast, click the AUDIO button on our homepage,
and follow directions from there.
Or go direct:  http://www.lauralee.com/aud_live.htm

BULLETIN BOARD SECTION for YOUR REACTION TO GUESTS:
We named it "And the Conversation Continues"
This new feature is a bulletin board segmented by date, then guest,
to gather your musings and reactions to the various guest and their research.
Offer as well as read the musings of others, including Laura Lee.
http://www.lauralee.com/bulletin.htm

LIVE  RADIO SHOW HOURS:
Saturday  7 PM to Sunday 2 AM Pacific
Saturday  8 PM to Sunday 3 AM Mountain
Saturday  9 PM to Sunday 4 AM Central
Saturday 10 PM to Sunday 5 AM Eastern

RADIO STATION LIST:
For a complete list of stations carrying the Laura Lee Show,
click on the TIMES & STATIONS button. Please note that not every station
takes all of our show hours. And if your local station does not, you can
always direct an email message or postcard to the Program Director, requesting
that he/she add the missing hours of our show to their lineup.
That simple gesture can work wonders!
http://www.lauralee.com/stations.htm

WEEKLY BOOK GIVEAWAY:
Books, videos and audio tapes are given away from a random drawing of entries.
To enter, go to:  http://www.lauralee.com/contest.htm

SEE SOME INTERESTING PHOTOS
Weve got "must-see" photos of Chinas pyramids, and Japans
underwater stone mysteries. View photos at: http://www.lauralee.com/mystery.htm
And a few personal photos of Paul, Laura Lee, and dog Chance at:
http://www.lauralee.com/photoalb.htm

LAST MINUTE CHANGES OFTEN OCCUR:
The list above of posted guests/topics represent what is scheduled when
this is sent. Last minute and often unavoidable changes can occur. When
a scheduled guest  is unable to join us, well include a rescheduled
time/date in the next email message to you. We apologize for any inconvenience.

TO SUBSCRIBE:
 If you wish receive these weekly updates, and you are not already on our list
(perhaps someone kindly forwarded this message to you) simply
return this message with "subscribe" as the subject, and we
will add you to our email list.  Or go direct to
http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm

TO UNSUBSCRIBE:
If you receive this message without subscribing, it means that someone
else has entered you for subscription. If you wish discontinue receiving these
updates, simply return this message with "unsubscribe" as the subject, and we
will take you off our email list.  Or go direct to
http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT
We appreciate it! Please tell your friends and colleagues around the world
about our website, the radio show, and our audio archives to which they can
listen at any 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 >
   Oct > Oct 2

                       Last call for NUFOC Conference

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 15:33:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 18:40:08 -0400
Subject: Last call for NUFOC Conference


Greetings Fellow List Slaves --

In just over a month, this year's glorious edition of the National UFO
Conference convention will convene.  Don't miss it!

-- Cheers, KARL


--------------------------
ANNOUNCING THE 35th ANNUAL NATIONAL UFO CONFERENCE CON

NUFOC sponsors the oldest continuing annual UFO convention in
the United States, perhaps the world, and maybe even the Galaxy
(Universe might be pushing it).  Founded by Rick Hilberg and
others, NUFOC sponsored its first convention in Cleveland in
1964 and has held one in various cities throughout the United
States every year since then.  James ('Saucer Smear') Moseley
has been Permanent Chairman since 1971, heading an illustrious
governing board called the Permanent Organizing Committee (POC).


>>>>>>> THIS YEAR:  'APPROACHING THE MILLENNIUM' <<<<<<<

WHEN -- Saturday, November 7, and Sunday, November 8, 1998.

WHERE -- The Days Inn, Bordontown, New Jersey (near Trenton), on
Route 206, just off New Jersey Turnpike Exit 7.  This is about
45 miles southwest of Newark Airport, where cars easily can be
rented.

WHO --

-- Local Chairman:  Legendary New Jersey UFO researcher Pat
   Marcattilio.

-- Master of Ceremonies:  Ufology's Gadfly and Keeper of The
   Field's Sensahumor Since 1954, the More Than Legendary
   James W. Moseley.

-- Confirmed Speakers:

* UFO historian and investigator Karl Pflock with an illustrated
  presentation on the intriguing results of his re-examination
  of the classic 1952 Scoutmaster Sonny Desvergers Florida
  'saucer-attack' case.

* 'Fate' columnist Antonio Huneeus on UFOs in Chile and
  elsewhere.

* Richard Sauder, Ph.D., on underground bases.

* Bob Durant on 'Roswell?  YES!'

* Rick Hilberg on 'UFOs: The First Three Decades'.

* Tom Benson on 'One Good Case Is Enough.'

* David Huggins on his 'Lifetime of Abduction Experiences.'

* Matt Graeber presenting a cornucopia of his hillarious
  ufological cartoons.

* James Moseley on 'Highlights of 45 Years in the UFO Field'.

* Curt Sutherley, author of 'Strange Encounters', on 'Magical
  Mystery Tours'.

* Peter A. Jordan on 'Cattle Mutilations and UFOs'.

* George Hansen on Remote Viewing.

* Marshall Barnes on 'The Case for the Philadelphia Experiment'

* 'Katie X', abductee, on 'What the ETs Are Telling Us to Do'.

* Pat Marcatillio on abductee implants.

* Melanie Green, abductee, on her abduction experiences.

+IMPORTANT NOTE:  Matt Graeber, may not be on the program, but
will be in
attendance on Saturday.

Most lectures include slides, and more surprises will surely be
added as the conference date draws nigh.

ADVANCE REGISTRATION -- Cost is $35 for one day, $65 for both
glorious days, IF PAID IN ADVANCE BY MAIL prior to October 20.
Send check or money order made out to Pat Marcattilio to:
NUFOC, PO Box 1709, Key West, FL 33041. After October 20 and at
the door, rates are $40 for one day, $70 for both.

HOTEL ROOMS -- The special NUFOC rate at the Bordontown Days
Inn, the convention hotel, is $50 plus tax per night, single and
double.  Make your reservation directly with the Days Inn at
800-329-7466 or 609-298-6100.  Be sure to ask for the special
NUFOC convention rate.

FOR MORE INFORMATION -- Call 609-883-6921 or 305-294-2270 or e-mail
<sparkle@earthlink.net>.

!!! BE THERE OR BE SQUARE...OR MAYBE TRAPEZOIDAL !!!






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

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:17:35 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs
>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0300

>I think a few corrections are in order here, Neil and Leanne

>l. I first found the pictures taken in Ramey's office in about
>1979 and had prints made then by the Ft.W ST. so it really isn't
>correct to say they have been languishing for 51 years.Check the
>Roswell Incident by Moore and Berlitz.

>2. There were many front page newspaper articles on July 8,
>l947, in Evening papers from Chicago West. There was a very
>large article in the Los Angeles Herald Express which even had
>Ramey's explanation. Journalists were calling Roswell from all
>over the country and expanding the story with new input such as
>names etc.

>3. There is a video Recollections of Roswell which has testimony
>from about 27 witnesses some of whom are dead. 105minutes long

>4. There is an RAAF base yearbook which allows us to verify many
>positions at the base.

>Don't be fooled by the attacks by the debunkers and other arm
>chair theorists.They tend to ignore testimony they can't deal
>with as the USAF did.

>I personally believe that being able to read the memo in Ramey's
>hand would be a very imprtant breakthrough.

>We are getting close. It isn't easy.

>STF


Stan,

I note that the deciphering of the telegram indicates that it
makes reference to a site near Magdalena. This would appear to
lend support to the story told by Santilli's cameraman.  I don't
think anyone specifically related a crash site to Magdalena
before this.  Am I right?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                              Re: Icelandic UFO

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:24:23 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:25:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Icelandic UFO



>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 02:26:56 +0000
>From: "P=E9tur =D6rn Gu=F0mundsson" <pippi@centrum.is>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>If you on the other hand have any new updates on "The Varginha
incident" I would be thankful for that.

>Respectfully yours,

>Petur Gudmundsson

>Iceland.

Dear Petur:

I (personally) have heard nothing new about the Varginha
incident, but would also like to hear more.

Perhaps Philippe van Putten can offer some updates.


As regards Icelandic UFOs,  I am especially interested,
since I catalog sightings.     Iceland is well placed to have
such sightings,  between Europe and North America.

It is a pity that your press is so quiet about them.    The
same problem applies to certain European countries,
where journalistic practices amount to a sort of
self-censorship.

I attach a short file of the nine ( or so ) Icelandic area
sightings that I do have listed in my database.

Clearly this is not even a representative sample of the
actual activity.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch

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



>p.s.
>Are there any Ufo sightings known to you from Iceland?
>Our media NEVER covers anything out of the ordinary.

That is indeed a pity!   -LH


#2551: 1952/10/8  21:0  1  22:35:0W  63:55:0N  3333  OCN ICL KEF
6 9 KEFLAVIK Apt,ICELAND:4 USAF OFFICERS:SCR>>NE+SSW:SHOOTS
^/1sec:NO SOUND/VAPOR Ref# 136 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1952/6
books Book # 5  Page 64 COASTLANDS

#2587: 1952/10/26  9:30  1  18:6:0W  65:40:0N  3333  OCN ICL AKU
6 10 AKUREYRI,ICELAND:NMRS OBS:4 SPHERES >>N OVER
N.COAST:FAST+SLNT:NFD Ref# 136 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1952/6
books Book # 5  Page 82 TUNDRA

#3285: 1954/8/24  20:30  1  20:43:0W  63:54:0N  3333  OCN ICL
LAG  8 6 EGILSTADIR,ICELAND:BBK#3180:FARMER:2'x 5'CYL
WHIZZES:S/L FAST+SLOW:DROPS/SAND Ref# 185 BERLINER,DON: The
BLUEBOOK UNKNOWNS  Page No. 23 FARMLANDS

#4093: 1955/5/4  12:40  1  22:30:0W  63:55:0N  3333  OCN ICL KEF
6 9 KEFLAVIK,ICEL:AF COLONEL+1:10+60'SCRS/25K'alt/LOOSE
FORMn:1000knts++:/r70p3-40 Ref# 139 GROSS,L.:UFOs a
HISTORY-1955/3 books Book # 1  Page 58 MIL. BASE

#9170: 1972/11/0  22:0  1  21:39:0W  64:10:0N  3313  OCN ICL RYK
7 9 REYKJAVIK,ICELAND:3/AIRLINER:3 XTREMELY BRITE PASS
N>>S:XTREME SPD/GND RDR Ref# 114 HAINES,Richard: PROJECT DELTA
Page No. 158 IN-FLIGHT

#10484: 1975/1/9  11:0  3  14:50:0W  65:43:0N  3333  OCN ICL ---
6 11 VOPNAFJORDUR,ICELAND:MANY OBS:FBL MNVRS
FAST+SLOW:WAVE/ICELAND SINCE MARCH/74 Ref# 186
SOBEPS:INFORESPACE/Belgium bimonthly Issue No. 25 COASTLANDS

#15360: 1992/12/20  0:0  1  13:30:0W  64:30:0N  3331  OCN ICL
SEA  6 6 off LANGENESS,ICEL:CONF.MIL.SOURCE:3
UFOS/RDR:DIVE/SEA:/UFO MAG.UK v12#4p22 Ref# 97 MISCELLANEOUS
JOURNALS. Press Ctrl-R Footnote 12 OFFSHORE

#15361: 1992/12/21  0:0  10  13:5:0W  66:0:0N  3331  OCN ICL SEA
7 8 off NE.ICELAND:FISHERMEN:FAST FLASHING SUBMARINE BREAKS
NETS:GLO-BALL OVHD:>>S Ref# 97 MISCELLANEOUS JOURNALS. Press
Ctrl-R Footnote 12 HIGH SEAS

#15367: 1992/12/24  0:0  9999  13:0:0W  64:35:0N  3331  OCN ICL
SEA  4 8 off LANGENESS,ICEL:NATO SHIPS+SUBS SEARCH/LRG UNDERSEA
CRAFT:Russian subm?? Ref# 97 MISCELLANEOUS JOURNALS. Press
Ctrl-R Footnote 12 HIGH SEAS





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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 98 16:35:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:30:35 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:46:55 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 98 12:32:45 PDT

>>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:43:08 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


To our long-suffering fellow list members:

I've snipped all kinds of nasty stuff here, leaving just a
random paragraph or two or three to give you the flavor of our
pal Ed Stewart's amazing rhetoric:

>And now the demonization of Ed Stewart continues. First,
>attribute something to the person that can readily be seen as
>not so, "dude with telepathic powers". Second, attribute the
>connotation to your target to be demonized as if it is what the
>target "thinks". This is present day ufological wisdom
>practiced at its best! And by one of the illuminaries, Jerome
>Clark. So much for self-restraint, not a characteristic
>ufological advocates are known for.

>The point is obviously over Jerome Clark's head and his
>ufological wisdom. Any one of the original mentioned people by
>Robert Todd don't have the guts to start cleaning up ufology on
>their own. They all tolerate each other. Yet, all have one thing
>in common. Demonize Robert Todd and ignore his contributions
>over the last three decades. BTW, I really don't know what is
>meant by your term "removed from ufological reality". I live and
>work in the real world. The world that in the last fifty years
>has refused to buy into "ufological reality" simply because its
>proponents, i.e. keepers of the 'Word', have failed time after
>time to present compelling evidence as to the nature of the ufo
>problem.


>[garbage motives attributed to demon Robert Todd by Jerome Clark
>snipped]

<incomprehensible motives attributed to me by Ed "Never Had a Good
Day" Stewart snipped>

>I am not your friend. Don't give anybody the wrong impression.
>You insult me by calling me your friend. As far as I am
>concerned you exemplify, as well as anyone can, the present
>state of ufology. You are part of the problem and not part of
>any solution. Keepers of the 'Word' will never see it that way,
>thus ufology will always remain in its pit where it has been
>dwelling over the last fifty years conjuring up demons to blame
>for its own sorry state. You get an A for spelling, but a D- for
>reading comprehension.

All I can say, my friend, is that I'm glad I'm not you. I
suspect a lot of people reading the venom that seems to consume
you are glad they're not you, too.

Now go take a couple of aspirin and lie down. I'm sure you'll
feel better tomorrow. Maybe tomorrow will be the good day that
keeps eluding you. If not, occupy yourself with indexing or some
project more productive than the spewing of hate-laced prose
against individuals you don't even know except as conjured up in
your personal demonology.

You are, at the very least, in serious need of some lightening
up, guy. You're going to have a coronary if you continue at your
current pace.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                       UFO Lecture in Rijeka, Croatia

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 20:43:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:16:24 -0400
Subject: UFO Lecture in Rijeka, Croatia

Dear Errol,

I'm not sure if we have any Croatian readers but I have been
sent details of a lecture in Rijeka, Croatia and forward it in
case it is of interest to anyone on the list:


Date: Fri, 02 Oct 98 13:30:09 +0200
From: 9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
To: jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
Subject: LECTURES IN RIJEKA


PUBLIC DOMAIN


===###===###===###===###===###===###===###===###===

LECTURES IN RIJEKA

AGETI SSI
Analytical Group For Extra-Terrestrial Information
Section for Searching and Intercepting

9A4AG (Giuliano Marinkovicc - ME) i 9A4BF (Josip CCiricc) will
do a public lecture at 03rd of October 1998, Saturday. The place
of the lecture is Philosophical University at city Rijeka,
Croatia. Our lectures are inside project RIKON (Rijeka's
convention of Science fiction). The subject of my lecture is
'UFOlogy And Connections With Modern SF', and 9A4BF will do a
lecture about Tolkien ('The Lord Of The Rings') and he will give
analytical perspective of Tolkien's work in a philosophical
sense. The lectures will start after 14:00 hours. The author of
RIKON project is Fantasy Club Aurora and Mladen Ban. During the
convention many people will play SF Board and Card games as 'The
Lord Of The Rings', 'Star Wars' and 'Star Trek'.

Some of my subjects in my lecture will be:

A) Main Informations About Ageti & Arufon Hamradio Ufo Groups

B) Foo Fighters

C) The Chronology Of Ufology Since 1947 / From Kenneth Arnold Case:

D) Project Blue Book

E) The Roswell Incident

F) Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter And Barry Goldwater

G) Un Ufo Commission Pressures: Colonel Keviczky, Gordon Cooper And
   U-Thant

H) The Investigation About Roswell During 1994 And 1995 / Mogul
   Report (Congressman Schiff And Gao)

I) Ray Santilli'S Documentary Of Alien Autopsy

J) Cia'S Role In The Study Of Ufo'S From 1947-1990
   Gerald K. Haines (Summer 1997.)

K) Barbie And Ken Crashed At Roswell (Air Force Dummies Report)

L) The Day After Roswell (Philip G. Corso)

M) Chilean Air Force Starts With Investigation Of Ufo'S (November
   1997.)

N) Edgar Mitchell And Ufo'S / Congressional Hearings Pressures

O) Science Fiction About Ufo'S (Is Ufology Based On Sf Or The Sf Is
   Based On Ufology?):

   - Orson Wells 1938 - The World Of The Wars
   - Close Encounters Of The Third Kind
   - The Ufo Incident
   - Intruders
   - Fire In The Sky
   - Roswell
   - Official Denial
   - The Rock
   - Independence Day
   - MIB
   - The X-Files
   - Dark Skies

THE LECTURE WILL END WITH THE LATEST NEWS:

P) Scaned Message At General Ramey Photography 08Th Of July 1947.
   (The Latest)

R) Spain Opens Military Ufo Files For Public (The Latest)

S) International Panel Of Scientists About Ufo'S (End Of June 1998.)
   Recorded Audio Bulletins From Bbc World Service (12,095 Mhz) Will
   Be Presented.

T) Recorded Audio Materials Of Some Comments At Croatian Media About
   Roswell Incident.

U) Ufology On Internet: CNInews, UFO Roundup, Filer Files And Other
   Sites.

V) Data For Contact And Open Debate With The Listeners.

=====================================================================

* 9A4AG and 9A4BF are Hamradio Callsigns...

Sent by:

=====================================================================
AGETI - World Wide Hamradio Group
Analytical Group For Extra-Terrestrial Information
---------------------------------------------------------------------
MAIN SYSOP:                          |  POST ADDRESS:
9A4AG - GIULIANO MARINKOVICC - JIMMY |  ANTE STARCHEVICCA 25/C
                                     |  23000 ZADAR
                                     |  CROATIA, EUROPE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----
TELEPHONE:                           |  PACKET RADIO ADDRESS:
for international calls:             |  9A4AG@9A0YSI.SBK.HRV.EU
+385-23-430-970                      |
for calls inside Croatia:            |  E-MAIL ADDRESS:
023/430-970                          |  9a4ag@s55tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@clarc.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE MODE  |  AGETI WEB SITE ADDRESS (Created by
9a1cto):
                             |  http://public.srce.hr/~ivangloc/
AMPRn WW UFO channel 1947    |
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/3099/
                             |  9A4AG's HOME PAGE:
                             |  http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag
---------------------------------------------------------------------

AGETI is a group of radio-amateurs who are exchanging world wide
informations, views and news about the extra-terrestiral subject!!!
=====================================================================

[END FORWARDED MESSAGE]


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/







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

                     Ufology - Some Things Never Change

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:26:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:28:18 -0400
Subject: Ufology - Some Things Never Change


The following award winning essay on ufology was written almost
20 years ago. How much of this essay is still apropos today?
Towards the end of the essay it asks where ufology will be in 30
years? Twenty years have past since then. Yet, not much in
ufology as changed since then. Read it and make your own
judgement call.  Where will ufology be ten years from now? To
keep ufology as it has been for five decades, you need to simply
follow the lead of its illuminaries in the past and do nothing.

Ed Stewart

----------


From: JamesOberg@aol.com

New Scientist magazine, London, October 11, 1979

The failure of the 'science' of ufology, by James Oberg

The winner of the 1,000 pound 'New Scientist'/Cutty Sark Whisky
essay on unidentified flying objects criticizes UFO believers
for their unscientific approach. Just because scientists cannot
explain every "sighting" does not mean that UFOs exist.

:::::

In the 30 years since the current flying saucer fever began, the
phenomenon has apparently been transformed from the property of
cranks and crackpots to the subject of true scientific study.
The sensational term "flying saucer" became the more
semantically neutral "unidentified flying object", or "UFO". The
study of such reports -- the objects themselves, not being
physically present, cannot be studied -- came to be called
"ufology".

The word has all the appearances of a true science, yet somehow
that particular branch of study has not become accepted as a
science. Can ufology really be considered a true science, or
perhaps an infant science, or possibly an unborn science -- or
is it instead just a hysterical pregnancy? After all the labor,
what has been produced?

Ufology has been shunned by "traditional" science, a rejection
which many participants in the movement see as a knee-jerk
reaction to any new and unconventional idea. Ufologists regale
themselves with anecdotes about Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Louis
Pasteur and Charles Darwin, future science.  "How much of
yesterday's heresy is today's science?" they ask knowingly.


The answer, unfortunately, is very, very little. Most scientific
heresies of the past fell by the wayside, forgotten in our
history books, and unnoticed by modern would-be Galileos.
Ufology must have better credentials than simply its rejection
by modern science. After all, in those 30 years since UFOs
appeared, modern science has undergone several generations of
radical revolutions in its comprehension of the Universe, from
the cosmic and macroscopic to the microscopic and subatomic
scales.

The suspicion with which modern "establishment science" regards
the UFO movement appears to be more closely connected with some
disturbing characteristics of "ufology" itself. Although many
negative feelings have, no doubt, been aroused by the crackpot
aura with which the flying saucer movement has long been
associated -- despite the best efforts of a few serious
ufologists -- other criticism has been leveled at the very
philosophical foundations of ufology.  The inability of
ufological theorists to come to grips with these objections
represents the most serious roadblock to the acceptance of
ufology as a legitimate branch of modern science.

The criticisms are essentially these: ufology allegedly refuses
to play by the rules of scientific thought, demanding instead
special exemptions from time-tested procedures of data
verification, theory testing, and the burden of proof.
Ufologists assert the existence of some extraordinary stimulus
behind a small fraction of the tens of thousands of UFO reports
on file. The cornerstone of the alleged proof is the undisputed
observation that a small residue of such reports cannot at
present be explained in terms of prosaic (if rare) phenomena.
Yet this claim is invalid: it is clearly not logical to base the
existence of a positive ("true UFOs exist") on the grounds of a
hypothetical negative ("no matter what the effort, some UFO
reports cannot be explained").

Rumors, lies and fraud.

This latter fallacy can be called the "residue fallacy", and it
has been addressed by philosophers of science numerous times in
the past, apparently without effect on ufologists. Writing in
Science magazine in 1969, Hudson Hoagland expressed it as
follows: "The basic difficulty inherent in any investigation of
phenomena such as those of. .. UFOs is that it is impossible for
science ever to prove a universal negative. There will always be
cases which remain unexplained because of lack of data, lack of
repeatability, false reporting, wishful thinking, deluded
observers, rumors, lies, and fraud. A residue of unexplained
cases is not a justification for continuing an investigation
after overwhelming evidence has disposed of hypotheses of
supernormality, such as beings from outer space.... Unexplained
cases are simply unexplained. They can never constitute evidence
for any hypothesis."

It is not necessary to conjure up visions of blind, drunk and
dishonest UFO percipients to cast doubt on UFO reports. The vast
majority of UFO witnesses apparently are honest, sober and
intelligent people faced with an extraordinary perception. Yet
there are amazingly many obvious and subtle ways in which such
perceptions can be understandably generated. And there is bound
to be an artificial residue of unexplained cases, a residue
created purely by bizarre coincidences, by limitations on human
perception and memory, or by rare undocumented natural
occurrences. Additional sources of unexplained sightings could
be human activities which are never publicized due to military
security, to the illegality of the activity, or to plain
ignorance on the part of the human agents of the activity that
they had caused such a fuss. That residue will never be solved,
and no extraordinary stimulus need be referred to.

In a similar fashion, the existence of unsolved crimes , unfound
missing persons, unexplained aircraft or automobile accidents,
and similar all-too-familiar manifestations of our
less-than-perfect knowledge of events cannot be taken to prove
the need for the existence of some extraordinary criminals, some
extraordinary kidnappers, or some extraordinary traffic
saboteurs. "Unexplained cases are simply unexplained," to repeat
Hoagland's perceptive assertion. "They can never constitute
evidence for any hypothesis."

To dedicated ufologists, such a line of reasoning is denounced
as a confusion between IFOs ("identifiable flying objects") and
true UFOs. According to Dr J. Alien Hynek, whose Center for UFO
Studies in Evanston, Illinois, finds that at least 95 per cent
of all UFOs reported to it are in fact IFOs:  "Experienced
investigators quickly recognize IFOs for what they are ... but
sometimes it takes hard work to unmask the masquerader."

Skeptics such as aviation journalist Philip J. Klass take
exception to Hynek's confidence and point to cases published by
his own center, cases which were solved only by strokes of
unexpected luck on the part of researchers. All too often, these
skeptics claim, the "hard work" prescribed by Hynek is absent --
and the "sheer luck" which allowed the unmasking of some tricky
IFOs masquerading as UFOs is not available. The result is that
many (if not, as skeptics claim, all) of the official UFOs on
the list of unsolved cases are still camouflaged IFOs.

Such a hazy line between IFOs (which provide only data about the
limitations of the reliability of eyewitness testimony) and UFOs
(which are alleged by ufologists to mark a potential
breakthrough in human science) is an appallingly weak basis for
the foundation of the new would-be science of ufology. That
weakness is accentuated by another highly suspicious and
non-scientific feature of ufology, an extremely cavalier
attitude towards verification of data.

Advertising tricks.

Ufology is still struggling to achieve scientific and popular
respectability, so it is perhaps understandable that public
pronouncements of ufologists would be primarily in the
persuasive rather than expository vein. It can thus be observed
that all the traditional tricks of the Madison Avenue
advertising executive's trade are followed: appeals to authority
("Jimmy Carter saw a UFO"; "our heroic astronauts have seen
UFOs"); assertions of the consequent ("the Universe is so large
that other civilizations must exist out there!"); the bandwagon
appeal ("Most Americans now believe in UFOs''); the
conspiratorial appeal ("The government knows all about it but is
hiding the truth"); and the salvation appeal ("The people from
space will come to bail us out of our self-indicted miseries").
It is not necessary at first to examine the actual validity of
such statements. What is important is to recognise them for what
they are:  tactics of illogical persuasion.

At the same time, most of what is commonly published about
ufology is undeniably nonsense. UFO proponents such as Hynek are
as adamant in the criticism of the media exploitation of UFO
stories as any skeptic could be. For the publishing industry and
the news media, UFO stories are good business; they combine
human interest, comic relief, scary stories, and swipes at
government cover-ups and know-it-all scientists.  It is based on
such misinformation (and not a little disinformation) that the
vast majority of the public has formed its attitudes about UFOs.
To say, then, that "most Americans believe in UFOs" is to
testify not to the scientific credentials of ufology but to the
effectiveness of the media mythmakers.

Few choose to look behind the myths. The much-touted "Jimmy
Carter UFO", for example, was never investigated by any of the
ufologists who flaunted it or by any of the newsmen who
advertised it -- they simply passed it on as a good story, a
useful anecdote. Yet when one skeptical young investigator named
Robert Sheaffer tracked the case down, he uncovered gross
inaccuracies in Carter's four-year-old recollections of the date
and location of the event, and also came up with testimony from
other witnesses which helped determine an entirely prosaic
solution to the account. Nevertheless, the "Jimmy Carter UFO" is
still constantly being referred to by UFO spokesmen who, due to
an unconscious media blackout of skeptical work such as
Sheaffer's, probably do not even know or care that it has been
investigated and "solved".

Another glaring example of the total disregard for authenticity
of evidence by most ufologists is the oft-repeated assertion
that "astronauts have seen them too".  Dozens of accounts have
been collected of space pilots seeing and photographing UFOs;
more than 20 such stories were featured in Hynek's Edge of
Reality, a book which was billed as a "progress report" on the
state of ufology. Yet not one of these cases has any relevance
to "true UFOs", as they are for the most part frauds and hoaxes
conjured up by unscrupulous writers and UFO buffs (several
blatant photographic forgeries have been identified in these
stories), or misunderstandings by citizens concerning the
meaning of ordinary space jargon, or in a few cases, reports of
passing satellites which in no way appear to be extraordinary.
Yet with selective omission of explanatory data, with
exaggeration, misquotation, or even fabrication of alleged
"voice transcripts", and with deliberate accusations of
"government cover-up", such stories form a major pillar of the
public's "belief" in UFOs.

Hynek visited NASA's Houston space center in July 1976 and was
shown the original films and tapes involved in the most
publicized space UFO stories. He later told colleagues that he
deeply regretted including the UFO stories in his book without
verifying them, and that he was satisfied that no "true UFOs"
were among them. Referring to the astronaut-UFO stories in an
interview with Playboy in January 1978, Hynek testified that, "I
went to Houston and saw the photographs, and I must confess that
I was not impressed".

The "Carter UFO" and the "astronaut UFOs" underscore a key
problem in the acceptance of ufology as a science: ufologists in
general have not been as willing as Hynek to retract
endorsements of explained cases, and have preferred instead to
continually recirculate and embellish the same stories. The
authenticity of UFO reports, as portrayed in the popular press,
therefore remains highly questionable --and justly so.

Such a problem with the "disproof" of UFO evidence points to yet
another major weakness of the philosophical foundations of
ufology. The burden of proof, which customarily lies with the
claimants of supernormality (or, in a criminal trial, of the
guilt of the accused, who is "innocent until proven guilty"),
has been shifted to the skeptics, who are in the case of UFOs
required to disprove the evidence. In the Carter-UFO and the
astronaut-UFOs, it was the skeptics who investigated and solved
the cases -- while ufologists assumed the cases were authentic
until proven otherwise (and most still believe so).

And yet the rules of science are clear: extraordinary claims
demand extraordinary proof. The thesis of ufology is an
indictment against the ability of contemporary science to
explain the Universe, and it must prove such an indictment as
every other such proponent must prove it: the need for a
modification of our current model of reality must be established
beyond reasonable doubt.

The very foundation of ufology is contrary to this time-tested
procedure.  For ufologjsts, the mere existence of unsolvable
cases is allegedly proof of the need to modify modern science.
For ufology, extraordinary reports can be considered to be valid
data until disproved; and, in the most devastating departure
from scientific methodology, ufologists reject the concept of
"falsifiability" of scientific theories.

No theory can be considered scientific until it can be
formulated so as to be disprovable, or falsifiable. That is, the
theory must explain a portion of the Universe in such a way that
further observations or experiments will either fail or conform
to the theory's predictions, or will conform to it (while,
preferably, not conforming to traditional predictions).
Einstein's prediction of the bending of star light observed near
the Sun during a total eclipse is a famous example of such a
procedure.

Yet after three decades of aimless speculation, no scientific
theories worthy of the name have been produced by ufology. It is
thus a sterile "science''. Every wild speculation is touted as a
"new theory", yet none of them makes predictions which would, by
not coming true, discredit the theory.  Here again, the
processes of thought which characterize "ufology'' cannot be
classified as "scientific".

The most regrettable aspect of this current unscientific state
for "ufology'' is that it is not a judgment on the actual
validity of many of the published speculations about what might
be behind the "true UFO" sightings (if any exist). Alien
spacecraft could well be visiting Earth, and there are at least
a dozen valid reasons why "they'' might decide not to make overt
contact, while allowing Earthmen to catch glimpses of them. UFOs
might well represent some other phenomenon, such as "psychic
projections", "time machines", a terrestrial but undiscovered
civilization or life form, or many other similarly bizarre
possibilities. The only thing that can he said scientifically is
that none of these suggestions has been even suggested, much
less proved in any rigorous sense.

The pity is that if such eventualities should come to pass, and
the ufologists are proved "right' ', they will in all
probability have impeded rather than accelerated the acceptance
of that phenomenon by traditional science. This is because the
new theories will most likely be championed by those ufologists
already badly discredited by too many cries of "wolf!'', by too
many endorsements of what subsequently turned out to have been
hoaxes, and by too many anti-scientific assertions and claims.
They would be "right" only by accident, not by their own virtue.

What is ufology?

If ufology is not a science, what then is it? It might be
considered as a protest movement against the impersonality and
specialization of modern science, which has all but eliminated
the role of the "citizen-scientist'', the amateur investigator
who in the past contributed substantially to the development of
science through part-time dabbling.  Belief in UFOs is also an
undeniably attractive "ego trip", a posturing of inside
information and secret lore, the possession of which puts its
intimates apart from and above the rest of the unimaginative
world. Such speculations demand more scientific attention of
sociologists.

Nor would it be fair to judge ufology by the quality and
quantity of the outright crackpots whom it attracts -- other
fields, such as medicine, religion, education and economics,
have certainly attracted crackpots as well. Yet it cannot be
overlooked that ufology seems to have attracted more than its
fair share of cranks, and that it has failed to police
adequately its own ranks in this regard.

Where is the "ufology" movement likely to be after another 30
years? Perhaps new evidence will finally appear which can stand
up to scientific scrutiny. Perhaps self-styled ufologists will
establish truly scientific standards of evidence, will accept
the burden of proof, will produce "falsifiable" theories, and
will seek to formulate their science on positive rather than
negative logic. Perhaps something significant will come out of
this after all.

Many skeptical observers join ufologists in hoping so, because
if any of the claims of ufology prove valid it would indeed rate
as a major scientific breakthrough, perhaps one of the most
important such events in human history (even if not, the UFO
movement would then "merely" be the most powerful public
delusion of the century, which is in itself well worthy of
sociological and psychological study). But in more cynical
moments, such skeptics fall back upon the famous quotation
attributed by Boswell to Samuel Johnson when he learned of the
news of a friend's second marriage. "Ahh," Johnson is quoted as
saying, "the
triumph of hope over experience.

 ----------------

James Oberg is a member of the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation of claims of the Paranormal

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






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

                               KGB Files Show

From: Michel M. Deschamps <739411@ican.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 17:51:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:07:55 -0400
Subject: KGB Files Show


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Files Show
>Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 10:42 PM

>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:20:50 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Files Show
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 21:41:39 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Files Show

<snip>

>>I also recall seeing Russian pictures of what was said to be a
>>landed UFO that also closely resembled the American lunar
>>lander. The witnesses who approached this landed UFO landing are
>>said to have become ill or died shortly afterwards. Would you
>>recall which publication(s) these pictures can be found in?
>>Could this be evidence that some extraterrestrial spacecraft are
>>based on "alien" American technology? ;o).

>Nick Balaskas

>This sounds like a crock to me. There have been so many screwy
>photos of UFOs in space that I have lost track. I know of only
>two guaranteed unknowns (there may be more) photograped during
>Gemini 11 (Sept. 1966) and Skylab 3 (I think, 1973). At any
>rate, I don' know where the picture you mention is published. If
>I cared to look it up (which I don't) I would look in one of the
>'tabloid' UFO magazines publlished 10 to 20 years ago. A number
>of articles on supposed UFOs photographed by astronauts, US and
>USSR, have been published in those magazines.


Nick,

I've seen those photos. They appeared in Volume 9, number 6 of
UFO Magazine (UK) and later, in Volume 13, number 6. The
photographs were purporting to show _an alien device_ which had
been shot down by a Soviet ground-to-air missile. But in Volume
13, number 6, you can clearly see that it was a prop built by
construction workers to be used in a Polish film, "On Silver
Globe". See March/April 1995 issue of UFO Magazine, pages 31 -
33.

Michel M. Deschamps





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

                          BWW Media Alert 19981003

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 12:48:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:09:35 -0400
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19981003

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).


October 3, 1998

If you are a cryptozoology fan, it looks like you have a bit less to see this
week.  Apparently, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL has replaced ANIMAL X with STRANGE
BUT TRUE.  I also checked the British X-CREATURES site, and I couldn't see
that anything was scheduled this week: it has gone through its initial six
week run.  If you know anything different, please let me know.  The major news
outlets here in California did have a story on a recent bigfoot sighting,
apparently with seven witnesses.  I'm looking for more information.  Also, AP
had an interesting media tie-in to the information being released in
Washington.  An inventory was taken of the books in the President's private
study, and this line was included:

> "``Vox,'' Nicholson Baker's steamy novel about phone sex, was listed on a
shelf >right between volumes entitled ``Churchill on Courage: Timeless Wisdom
for >Persevering'' and an Air Force report, ``UFO Crash at Roswell.''



TELEVISION

A&E
Sunday, October 4, 6:00 PM, THE UNEXPLAINED: EXTRATERRESTRIALS

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, October 5, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GOD BEAR OF KAMCHATKA
Sunday, October 5, 1:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: NEAR DEATH AND EXORCISM
Sunday, October 5, 2:00 PM, ALIENS: ARE WE ALONE? (includes UFOs)
Thursday, October 8, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: THUNDERBIRD
Thursday, October 8, 9:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: DOWSER DETECTIVE AND
SUPERNATURAL RESCUE
Friday, October 8, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: THUNDERBIRDS
Friday, October 8, 1:30 AM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: DOWSER DETECTIVE AND
SUPERNATURAL RESCUE
Friday, October 9, 10:00 PM, MYSTERY OF THE CROP CIRCLES
Saturday, 2:00 AM, MYSTERY OF THE CROP CIRCLES
Next Sunday, October 10, 2:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: CROP
CIRCLES
Next Sunday, October 10, 2:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
ZOMBIES, THE LIVING DEAD
Next Sunday, October 10, 5:00 PM, MYSTERY OF THE CROP CIRCLES

THE LEARNING CHANNEL
Friday, October 9, 7:00 PM, 48 HOURS: PSYCHIC AND SKEPTIC

THE SCIENCE CHANNEL
The new schedule is weird programming for an hour each at 6:00 AM, 2:00 PM,
and 10:00 PM.  Rotating shows include: INTO THE UNKNOWN, STRANGE BUT TRUE, and
ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE.

THE SCI-FI CHANNEL
Sun, October 4 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3017: Alleged close encounter aboard
the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt; twins search for siblings; past-life memories;
time travel; dream murder.
Sun, October 4 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3017: Alleged close encounter
aboard the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt; twins search for siblings; past-life
memories; time travel; dream murder.
Mon, October 5 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3018: English paranormal activity;
evolution and aliens; psychic sculptor; tragedies at mine-disaster site;
child's death premonition.
Mon, October 5 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #201: Group reincarnation; lovelorn
ghost haunts Dallas family; cryonics.
Mon, October 5 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #201 Group reincarnation; lovelorn
ghost haunts Dallas family; cryonics.
Tue, October 6 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3019 Mexican UFOs; psychic bond
between twins; CIA and LSD; cloning; lost animals
Tue, October 6 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #202 Multiple UFO sightings in Mexico
City; hauntings in Alcatraz.
Tue, October 6 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #202 Multiple UFO sightings in Mexico
City; hauntings in Alcatraz.
Wed, October 7 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3020 UFOs in the Pacific Northwest;
alleged coma healer; system to improve luck; psychic detective; haunted
Hollywood hotel.
Wed, October 7 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #203 Officials of paranormal events
and clerics examine an English werewolf; alleged UFO contacts have photos.
Wed, October 7 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #203 Officials of paranormal events
and clerics examine an English werewolf; alleged UFO contacts have photos.
Thu, October 8 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3021 Alleged government UFO studies;
Roswell; dog senses its owner's imminent heart attack; psychic detective;
haunted cemetery.
Thu, October 8 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #204 Vampire rituals; UFO dogfight;
paranormal experiences.
Thu, October 8 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #204 Vampire rituals; UFO dogfight;
paranormal experiences.
Fri, October 9 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3022 Aliens abduction of twins;
artificial intelligence; haunted mansion; angelic intervention.
Fri, October 9 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #205 Lizzie Borden; demonic
possession
Fri, October 9 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #205 Lizzie Borden; demonic
possession
Sun, October 11 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3023
Sun, October 11 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3023
___________________________

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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                             Re: Icelandic UFOs

From: Philippe Piet van Putten <abp1@uol.com.br>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 22:34:32 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:50:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Icelandic UFOs


>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 02:26:56 +0000
>From: "P=E9tur =D6rn Gu=F0mundsson" <pippi@centrum.is>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Icelandic UFOs

<snip>

>If you on the other hand have any new updates on
>"The Varginha incident" I would be thankful for that.

>Respectfully yours,

>Petur Gudmundsson

>Iceland.

Hello Petur,

Mr. Vitorio Pacaccini is the main researcher of the Varginha
Case (January 20, 1996). He is a very friendly person and speaks
fluent english. I suggest you to write directly to Pacaccini:
pacman@cyberdock.com.br

Best regards

Philippe Piet van Putten
abp1@uol.com.br
brasil@pufori.org
http://www.pufori.org/brasil






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

                  {95} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: Lloyd Bayliss <lloyd@POWER-AGE.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:19:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:31:59 -0400
Subject: {95} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                         3 October  1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 2 Issue 95
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in over 40 countries.


[UK 4]******

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1998 13:50:21 +0200
Subject: [UASR]> Searching For Life On Europa
From the BBC. URL:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_159000/159770.stm

Go to the page for images!


Stig


*******


BBC News Online: Sci/Tech

Friday, August 28, 1998

Published at 01:04 GMT 02:04 UK


Searching for life on Europa


By Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse


Scientists have dived into an aquarium to test a new probe that
might one day look for life in oceans that may exist beneath the
ice crust of Jupiter's icy moon Europa.

Researchers from Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory are conducting
the engineering tests in the California aquarium as a warm-up
for an experiment that will place a scientific probe in an
underwater Hawaiian volcanic vent later this year.

The Lo'ihi Underwater Volcanic Vent Mission Probe will
investigate an undersea volcano located 27 kilometres (20 miles)
east of the Big Island of Hawaii at a depth of about 1,300
metres (4,250 feet).

"The purpose of using the Monterey Bay Aquarium kelp tank is to
begin testing the instruments in an aquatic environment that
contains some biological material that will stimulate and test
the hardware," said the principal investigator Dr Lonne Lane.

"The information to be gathered from these experiments at the
aquarium and later in Hawaii will prepare us for future missions
to difficult places like Antarctica's Lake Vostok (under 4
kilometres/2.5 miles of ice), and below the surface of Jupiter's
ice-encrusted moon Europa."

The search for life and organisms in extreme environments has
prompted scientists to examine the thin, gelatinous veils of
material that have been previously observed at underwater
volcanic hot water vents.

Although there have been only a few observations of this
material, on at least one occasion the white material has
appeared to come from the vent throat.

Measurements of thermal conditions inside the vents have
produced a range of temperatures from near 80 C (176 F) to
almost 350 C (662 F).

The presence of life forms inside these vents would challenge
what scientists believe is the accepted temperature range for
life to exist.

Currently the accepted temperature range is about -5 C to 110 C
(23 F to 230 F), according to Lane.

"The goal of the Lo'ihi mission in Hawaii is to develop an
instrumented underwater probe that can be placed inside these
deep, hot water vents," said Dr Lane.

Europa has become one of the most facinating objects in the
solar system. The Galileo spacecraft, currently in orbit around
Jupiter, has sent back some remarkable pictures of it.

It has a surface of ice that may be only a mile thick.
Underneath there may be an ocean of water warmed by volcanic
vents.

---

[UK 5]******

{In response to Gary Val Tenuta's 1993 sighting of a black triangle
[issue 94 uk.nw.uk], we received this mail.

Any more comments?}

At around midnight, in December 1996, whilst driving home to
Chorley [Lancashire UK] from my sisters home - I spotted 3 red
lights in the sky. The lights were continuous, like he
mentioned. One at the (apparent point) and the other two behind
to make a squashed triangular formation (as a triangle would be
at an angle).

As I drove north down a winding country lane at 40-50mph, it
travelled northwards on my right, over Winter hill. It seemed to
be as big as a large plane, I would estimate it's speed to be
around 100-150mph. It was hard to determine height, size and
speed because I couldn't see any object - and so, didn't have
any frame of reference.

The lights turned slowly in unison towards the West( and towards
the coast 20 miles away), and as they passed in front and above
me - (accelarating) - I slowed my car down to a stop, and got
out. As I watched the lights leave my visability, I couldn't
hear any noise from them.

As I have always been sceptical of Ufo's - I assume it was some
sort of steath plane, and it gave me no reason to believe
otherwise.

---

[UK 6]******

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Subject:  East Kent MEP:  Demands UFO Investigation
Source: UFO UpDates <updates@global.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

----------===============******************===============----------

World News
==========

[W 1]******

{The following series of articles from the BBC and ITV Teletex
services details the antics of a runaway weather balloon :)

uk.ufo.nw says: Hmmmm, what hope against the alien invasion - or
are we just being cinical ;-)}

Source: Teletext News (ITV text service)
Publish date: Saturday 29th August 1998

Balloon lost over Atlantic

A massive 900ft-wide and 200-300ft high weather research balloon
is loose over the North Atlantic after Canadian Air Force pilots
failed to shoot it down.

As it passes through the North Atlantic it is expected to move
into different air control areas.

Over Icelandic waters the US Air Force will have a chance to
shoot at it and if they fail the RAF may be called in.

**********

Source: BBC World News (BBC text service)
Publish Date: 1st September 1998

Rogue weather balloon may have ditched

A runaway weather balloon tracked by the airforces of three
countries may have come down in the Artic Sea, the company that
launched it has said.

A spokesman for the Canadian firm told the BBC the balloon had
last been seen near Spitsbergen, Norway.

With no new aircraft sightings, "we believe its finally down,"
he said.

The 330ft - tall balloon may have been punctured when Canadian
jets fired 1,000 rounds at it last Thursday.

**********

Source: BBC News (text service)
Publish date: Thursday 3rd September 1998

Troublesome balloon comes down to Earth

A wayward research balloon that withstood an attack by fighter
jets has finally landed in Finland.

The balloon, the height of a 25-storey building, landed at
Mariehamn Island after a nine-day odyssey.

Researchers in Canada launched the balloon to study the ozone
layer, but lost control of it over the Atlantic.

Air controllers were forced to re-route flights because of the
balloon, which was peppered with 1,000 rounds by jets.

---

[W 2]******

From: Carnado (bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net)
http://www.sightings.com/ufo/fatherET.htm

Father Balducci's New Book Repeats His Pro ET Position
By Ruth Gledhill
Religion Correspondent
The Times (London)






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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 22:34:54 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:55:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:11:38 PDT
>Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:13:36 -0400
>Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

>Postings like this always puzzle me.  Though I do not doubt for a
>moment the poster's good intentions, it's never clear whether he
>or she objects to _all_ disagreement or simply to the sort of
>dissent that sinks to slurs and ad hominems.
>It's not even clear, since typically the distinction is not made,
>whether the poster recognizes such a distinction even exists.
>
>Vigorous debate within ufology  is as essential and necessary as
>it is in any field of inquiry.  If the poster thinks
>disagreement, including strongly expressed disagreement, is
>unique to ufology, he or she ought to get out of the house once
>in a while -- or read something besides UFO literature, where the
>battles are fast and furious.  (Just look, as Greg Sandow
>observed recently, at a typical "Letters" section of the New York
>Review of Books.) I can't imagine anything duller than the
>"unified UFO community" the correspondent above claims to
>desire.


<snippy - snip snip>

and I do mean SNIP!

Jerome,

Since you don't doubt the poster's good intentions, then it's
clear to me that you DO understand his or her intent. So why
make an issue of it?

For the sake of arguement, only?

THAT is EXACTLY the sort of activity, I feel, most people on the
list would like to see as a thing of the past. Beyond that, are
you suggesting that people should be excused for being rude just
because the subject of UFOs is a passionate topic for them?
After all, this is not an oral debate, subject to sudden
impulses and unintended breaches of civility due to the 'heat of
the moment'. Anyone participating in this listing must sit down
and THINK about what they are going to write. Or, at least, they
SHOULD.

In my opinion, written displays of intolerance and mudslinging
are even more shameful since they are, clearly, premeditated. No
matter how fast someone types, entering one's thoughts into a
computer one letter at a time is as about as deliberate and
mechanical a process that ever existed. Whithin any given
slam-filled sentence, there are dozens of chances to write
something else; to make a point another way. To ignore those
opportunities is not only uncivil, it's just plain old lazy. I'm
not sure which offends me more.

While the vast majority of the post and private emails I've
received support my position on maintaining civility within the
list, there have been a few that suggest to me, and others like
me, that we simply use the 'delete' button if we read something
we find offensive.

Don't prevent arson, just douse the flames with water, eh?

This is just plain silly. After all, those writing slams KNOW
they are writing slams; that's why they're writing them! To
justify an atmosphere for them under the guise of 'vigorous
debate' is counterproductive, I feel, to the real goals of the
list.

And finally, no one is suggesting that differences of opinion or
open disagreements is unique to UFOlogy. And no one wants
everyone to think and talk the same way. On the contrary, the
need to hear the nuances in each person's view makes 'getting
rid of the static' even more important.

Time to turn it down.


As always, later....

Roger Evans
Producer/Director
MovieStuff   Houston, Texas    www.cyberjunkie.com/moviestuff





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

                Re: {95} part 4 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: Lloyd Bayliss <lloyd@POWER-AGE.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:22:16 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:45:50 -0400
Subject: Re: {95} part 4 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                        3rd October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 4 Issue 95
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in over 40 countries.



Laura:  Fish. John:  Fish . . . like goldfish? Laura:  No.
They're like . . . rainbows.  They're pretty.  They glow in the
dark.

John:  Hmm.  So, is the room kind of dark?

Laura:  A little.

John:  The white monkey is loose; running around. Have you ever
seen a white monkey before?

Laura:  No.  It's pretty. John:  Take a good look at the white
monkey.  Stop the action, take a good look at it and describe it
. . . how big it is . . . .

Laura:  It's small.

John:  Would it fit into your hand?

Laura:  No.  Like a dog.

John: You could pick it up with two hands?

Laura:  Uh, huh.

John:  Is it furry?

Laura:  Hmm . . . It's not too close to me, because it's afraid
of me.

John:  How do you notice that it's afraid of you?  What does it
do?

Laura:  It backs off.  I like the fish.  They're in little
tanks.

John: And what are the tanks on?

Laura:  They're on tables.

John:  And there's nobody in there?  What do you do in this
room?

Laura:  I should . . . I think . . .

John:  What? Laura:  I think the monkey was supposed to be put
back in its cage, or something.  (Laugh).  And I didn't do it.

John: Had you ever seen the white monkey before?

Laura:  Hmm . . . Maybe I had. John:  And you're sixteen.  You
can feel sixteen, and you can think like when you were sixteen.
And you can react like when you were sixteen. You can remember
what you did at sixteen, when you saw this white monkey.

Laura:  (Laugh.)  I wanted to touch it; to pat it.

John:  Uh, huh.  And what did its face look like?

Laura:  Like an owl.

John:  Okay.  with an owl face is something you want to touch
and hold?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  But it won't let me.  It's in the corner.

John:  And what happens next?

Laura:  I'm going to get to go all the way around.

John:  Do you mean around the room?

Laura:  No.  Into the hallway, back . . . there are five rooms.

John:  Where do you go, now?

Laura:  I'm . . . kinda . . . following these two people.
That's how I know which way to turn.

John:  What did they look like?

Laura:  Just . . . It's a man and a woman.  They're human.  They
kind of guide me to the . . . so I don't get lost.

John:  And where do you go?

Laura:  I think I should go get my mother and sister.

John:  Do you know where they are?

Laura:  I think so.

John:  Okay, but what really happened?  Even though you feel you
should go get your mother and sister?

Laura:  I'm going to sit in the hallway. Like, there's a . . .
oh, a booth, or not a booth.  You know, what you sit on . . . a
long thing.

John:  A bench?

Laura:  Yeah!  I'm gonna sit there.

John:  Okay.  Do you remember what you were wearing?

Laura:  It's like a tee-shirt.  But, see . . . when you're here,
you wear . . . just a white . . . thing.  A robe . . . it's just
white. I don't know what it is.

John:  Okay.  What do you see; what do you do next?

Laura:  Um . . . (Giggle) . . .

John:  What do you notice, now?

Laura:  What it reminds me of . . . you want me to tell ya?

John:  Sure.

Laura:  Okay.  It reminds me of a big . . . Um, this room would
be like . . . It's really neat; I like it.  Pretty.  It's like,
if you had been swallowed up by a--what do you call those
things?  Clam. The whole room--this is what it reminds me of.
It's like you're inside a clam.  And in the very middle of this
clam-room . . . because it's even got scallops.  The room is
scalloped, which I think is really neat.  In the very middle is
this table.  And it's like, white.  And it's the pearl.

John:  Okay.  Nice description.

Laura:  It looks like a pearl in the center of a clam.

John:  And what are you doing?

Laura:  (Tongue click) . . . I want to go.

John:  You're going to do what, now?  Are you just standing
there, looking at everything?  How long does that seem to last?

Laura:  Not very long.  I'm going to go get on the table.

John:  Okay.  Is somebody helping you with that?

Laura:  No, but they . . . See, the door would open, and they
come....

John:  They?  Humans?

Laura:  Well, I'm trying to see . . . It's kind of purple in
there, too, a little now.  'Cause I'm making it look like a
clam.

John:  Uh, huh.  And you're sixteen, and as you feel the room
around you, and you're going toward the table, you can see what
they look like . . .

Laura:  They're going to operate.  They look like doctors.

John:  Look like doctors.  They have green masks and gowns, and
all that sort of stuff?

Laura:  Kinda-sorta.

John:  Kinda-sorta?  Well, let's take a good look at them.

Laura:  No. John:  That's okay.  You can just pretend you've got
a Polaroid camera, and you can just snap a picture, and then
look at the snapshot.  When you do that, you can look at the
picture you've got, and tell us what it looks like.

Laura:  I'm not going to look at their faces.

John:  Because . . . ?

Laura:  I want them covered up. John:  You want their faces
covered up . . . 'cause you don't want to look at them?

Laura:  Right.

John:  If you were to look at them, what would you see?

Laura:  Hmm . . .

John:  What do they remind you of?

Laura:  Ants.

John:  Little, tiny ones?

Laura:  No.  Big ones. John:  Big ants . . . about how tall?

Laura:  (Whispering) . . . They're very tall.

John:  Where are you?

Laura:  I'm on the table.  They're operating on me.

John:  How do you see that, or feel that?

Laura:  I'm just lying there.  They're . . . See, they're on
either side of each other.  Across the table from each other.

John:  And how do you know they're operating?

Laura:  My breathing has been . . . like . . . disconnected from
me.

John:  What do you notice?  What, in particular, do you notice?

Laura:  Everything is gone.  They took all the bottom part of me
off!

John:  How'd they do that?

Laura:  I don't know.  It's pretty interesting.

John:  Did you see anything . . . tools, devices?

Laura: There's a blue light up above.

John:  Does it shine on you?

Laura:  Yes. All over.

John:  How does that make you feel?

Laura:  It makes me feel good. John:  And in that blue light,
what seems to take place?

Laura: They're operating.

John:  Uh, huh.  Describe what you see.  Pretend you're trying
to teach it to somebody, and tell us what they do, and how they
do it.

Laura:  I don't . . . I just can't describe it.  I just don't
know what to tell ya.

John:  Do you feel anything?

Laura:  I watched their hands, but . . .

John:  How are their hands moving?

Laura:  They're working.

John:  Uh, huh.

Laura:  And they're working fast.

John:  Are they short, stubby little hands?

Laura:  No, no!  No, no!  (Whispering) . . . Their fingers are
really long!

John:  How long?

Laura:  Their fingers are as long as my stomach would be, if it
was still there! John:  If it were still there?  Where is it?

Laura:  Where's my stomach? John:  Uh, huh.

Laura:  (Whispering) . . . They took it off!  They took the
bottom part of my body off!

John:  Did they just open you up?

Laura:  No!  They took the whole thing off!

John:  It's in two pieces?

Laura:  Oh, yes!

John:  Do they just separate it, or put it on another table, or
what?

Laura:  Just separate it--and I don't know why.  God, I'm scared
a little!

John:  It's okay.  Just watch.  Just watch.  Can you see what
they're doing with the other half?

Laura:  It was cutting . . . like an accordion!  It's all
accordion pieces.

John:  Okay.  Tell us how you remembered it, and see how you
felt at the time, too.

Laura: (Whispering) . . . Their hands are really long!  They're
really long.  A couple of feet long.

John:  How many fingers?

Laura:  There are three, and maybe a thumb. John:  And what do
the hands do? Laura:  They're fixing me.

John:  What's broken?

Laura:  (Sigh) . . . I didn't know anything was.  Ohhh . . .

John:  It's okay. Laura:  I don't want to do this anymore.

John:  Hmm?

Laura:  I don't want to do this anymore.  I don't want to.

John:  Well, you know it all came out okay.  They're fixing
something, but you'll be safe.  What do they seem to be fixing?

Laura:  It's my stomach and my abdomen.

John:  Did they just use their hands?

Laura:  I think so.  I don't want to look for anything else.

John: Do they have fingernails?

Laura:  I don't know.  They wear gloves. They're big and white.
I don't want to look, though.  I don't want to look for shots!

John:  Okay.  So, you're on this table....

Laura:  Uh, huh.  I like the table.  I liked it.  It was pretty.
It's white.  It's pretty.

John:  Was it solid?

Laura:It's carved; it's pretty.  It's like alabaster.

John:  Okay.  And is the blue light still on you?

Laura:  I saw it.  It makes you feel good.  I liked that, too.

John:  Let's go back in time, just a step.  As you're lying
there, move forward, just a bit, and see what's the next part.

Laura:  When they get done with me, you mean?

John:  Whatever the next step is.  See if anything else changes
the scene.

Laura:  They're . . . you know, when they operate on ya . . .
when they come out of the door, to come into the room, it kinda
matches the light there.  Peaceful.  And they're wearing that .
. . um . . . They have . . . It's that thing they have on, the
same one I've seen before. It's the same, but it's just one.

John:  What does that look like?

Laura: It's that triangle . . . but it's clear inside, though.
And I don't know what that means.  But I wish I did.

John:  And it's on their right shoulder?

Laura:  Not really.  It would be . . . on the other side of
them, really.  It would be on this side.  But when I look at it,
it's . . . you know . . .

John:  Yes, I understand.  It's on their left shoulder, and
right side, as you look at it.

Laura:  Yeah.

John:  And does the triangle have any color?

Laura:  It's gold.  And the clothing is a light blue.

John:  And what style of clothing?

Laura:  They wear a one-piece. It's really soft, when you touch
it. (Whispering.)

John:  Is it tight-fitting, or loose?

Laura:  Not really.  It's like silk, when you touch it.

John:  So, do you touch it?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  I touch one of them, because I was afraid,
when they were going to cut my body off.

John:  Most people would be.  But, obviously, things came back
together. Did you see how they did that?

Laura:  Um . . . I think it was a different one (bottom half)
they gave me, but I don't know.  I didn't want to know.  I
didn't . . . I don't want to know.  I don't want to know!

John:  But you do know?

Laura:  They brought in . . . another . . . body . . . for me.

John:  What was different about that body?

Laura:  It was better, I guess.  I don't know.

John:  Were you hurting, or ill, or . . . ?

Laura:  No!  I don't know why.

John:  Well, did they make a switch?

Laura:  Yes.  The bottom half.

John:  Just the bottom half?

Laura: (Laugh) . . . I know it!  It's okay with me.

John:  Why?  Was it a better half?

Laura:  (Humor evident.)  I guess.  I don't know what they were
doing.  It's what they wanted.  It was okay.  I like the light.

John: Uh, huh.  But you don't want to look at their faces.

Laura:  Not really.

John:  But you obviously took a peek at them . . .

Laura:  They're ants.

John:  What makes 'em look like ants?

Laura:  Their eyes are on the side, right here.  (Gestured with
hands.)

John:  And do they have a skin color?

Laura:  I don't really know, because . . . because . . .
(whispering again) . . . I don't want to see.  I don't want to
look, really.  I want them to keep their masks on.

John:  Masks that you've given them, or that they're really
wearing?

Laura:  They're wearing masks, anyway.  They're operating.

John:  Where do the masks come on their faces?

Laura:  Um, to here.  Around the eyebrows.

John:  Does that come from the top, down; or the bottom, up?

Laura:  Bottom, up.

John:  Anything else that makes them look like big ants?

Laura:  Well, because . . . they make sounds. (Whispering) . . .
They talk like that.

John:  Like what?  Talk like what?

Laura:  Like a . . .  Oh, that's really unnerving!

John:  Well, what's the sound like, that you hear?

Laura:  Screeches.  You know, like a . . . cricket that rubs its
legs together.  It's a fast cricket sound.

John:  Okay.  Do they communicate with you in any way?  Or do
you say anything to them?

Laura:  Um . . . (whispering) . . . I kind of wanted my body
back.

John:  So, did you tell them that? Laura:  A little.  But they
gave me a new one, anyway.

John:  What did they do with the old one?

Laura:  I don't know.  Probably put it in a bucket!  God!  Oh,
well.

John:  So, what happens next?

Laura:  I'm getting ready to go.  They're really happy.

John:  Why were they so happy?

Laura:  I don't know.  They handed me my nightgown.  I had been
wearing a white thing, 'cause when they cut my body off, right
from here, down, the nightgown was too long, so . . .

John:  Okay, do you remember having any . . . stomach problems .
. . later?

Laura:  Not really.  No.

John:  Okay, so you're getting ready to leave.  How many of them
are in the room?

Laura:  Oh, there are . . . one, two, three, four.  Only a
couple are going to stay, though, 'cause . . . they're busy.
They all do different things.

John:  Can you tell me, without looking at their faces, what
each one of them did?  What was their role?  Just go around the
table, and tell me what each one seemed to do.

Laura:  Well, it's like you're an accordion.  I don't really
know how to describe it.  The ones on the left are the ones that
take it away; and the ones on the right are the ones who put it
in.  It's like . . . it's like a team.  An assembly line.

John:  What'd they put in?

Laura: (Exasperated.)  Ah, they put a new body in me.  I don't
know, maybe it was just part of it.  Maybe I got to keep my
legs.  (Laugh.)

John:  Okay. What happens when you get ready to leave?

Laura:  They pat me on the back . . . this one.  See, there's
one that's kind of friendly.

John: How does he show that?

Laura:  Oh, he just . . . kind of pats me.  And the other one is
really helpful, 'cause he helps you put your clothes back on.
They're . . . really nice, you know.

John:  So can you look at them, now?

Laura:  Well, you see . . . (Laugh) . . . I can, but . . . They
look a lot like ants, okay?  They're really tall and thin.  I
need to get going, though, see.

John:  Why?

Laura:  I need to pick up my mom and my sister.

John:  Okay.  Well, let's see what happens, then.

Laura: I'm just waiting on the bench again.  They brought my mom
and my sister up, where I was sitting.  And now we all get to go
home.

John:  Okay. How do they look to you?

Laura:  The ones that brought 'em up, you mean?

John:  Sure.

Laura:  Well, you see, they look like the little white monkeys.
But they don't . . . these white monkeys don't have tails!

John:  Oh.  How tall are these little white monkeys?

Laura:  They're three feet tall.

John:  Are they furry?

Laura:  Well, I think if they had fur, it would be so soft and
silky.

John:  Do they have fur?

Laura: Probably not.

John:  Okay.  How many of these white monkeys bring up your mom
and your sister?

Laura:  There are three.  One for each of them, and one that
stands in the back.

John:  And what happens?

Laura:  They seem . . . I'm pretty happy, and they are.  We're
getting ready to go home.  But see, I don't remember how to get
home, because they erase it.

John:  How do they do that?

Laura:  I don't know how to go home.  I don't.  I don't
remember.

John:  It's okay.  Suddenly, you're home.  What was it that
worried you about your mom and your sister, especially your mom,
since you went and sat in her chair?

Laura:  I just . . . It was . . . See, I was afraid they didn't
get home.

John:  So you were checking on them?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  And I wanted them to know.  Did they remember?

John: Did they act strange the next day, or talk about any weird
things?  Did you notice, or remember that?

Laura:  Well, I knew and remembered.  See, I'm afraid of the
getting home.  Because something could go wrong, see. And we
might not get home.  It's . . . it's kind of tricky.

John:  Do you remember being there, before?

Laura:  Oh, when I was probably really tiny; maybe a baby.  I
went there.

John:  What do you remember about that?

Laura:  The fish.  I was a baby.  A baby that couldn't talk;
less than a year old.

John:  Where are you, as a baby, when you see the fish?

Laura:  I was sleeping in my crib.

John:  How'd the fish get there?

Laura:  I don't swimming all over the place.


----------===============******************===============----------

UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK

STATEMENT UK-UFO-NW statement: The articles or text appearing
within these pages are not necessarily the views or opinions of
United Kingdom UFO Network.

REPORTS
Please forward all reports to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

WWW
Visit us on the World Wide Web at
http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/

BACK ISSUES & FILES For information on receiving back issues and
other files send mail with REQUEST INFO in the subject area to:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

IRC - (INTERNET RELAY CHAT) The meetings take place at 11pm
(2300hrs) each and every Saturday night. Times will vary
depending on your location in the world. If you would like to
know the time in your part of the world send a mail to:

ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

In the subject section put: IRC TIME INFO

In the message of your mail please put:

a) Your Country
b) Your location
c) Nearest major City

Connecting to our weekly UFO meetings on the IRC (internet relay
chat) is now easier than ever.

**NEW**

Fully configured MIRC irc software for you to download

We continually tell people that one of the best IRC programs
available is MIRC. It is a free/shareware program (fully
working) and is the 'preferred' software for use on the IRC.

Would you like to use MIRC to connect to the UK.UFO.NWs weekly
Saturday meetings? Would you like to join in when we have
regular special guests on the channel?

Well now you can. We have two fully configured versions of MIRC
available for download for PC users. They will enable you to
connect straight to the UK.UFO.NW UFO channel.

One version is for Windows 95 users. The other for Windows
3.1/3.11 users. To download go to:

http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk

and select the 'Download' link from the button bar. Both
programs are approximately 600Kb in size and should download
fairly quickly.

Once you have downloaded the relevant file 'Run' or 'Load' it,
which will install MIRC onto your hardrive.

Next load the MIRC program.

Enter your name, e-mail address and two nicknames that you wish
to be known by on the channel. You only have to do this the
first time you use the program. Lastly click on 'Connect to IRC
server'. Once you are connected to a server a window will appear
with '#ufo' inside. Click on the '#ufo' and then click on 'Join
channel'.

You will now be joined to the UK.UFO.NW ufo channel. In the
right hand window you will see a list (including yourself) of
all those who are currently joined to the channel. The large
upper left window is where you view the conversations. The small
lower window is where you type anything you want to say,
remembering to press 'Return' on your keyboard at the end.

The main windows within MIRC can be fully resized like most
windows programs.

Don't be shy. We are all a friendly bunch. Give it a go. You'll
soon get the hang of it. We'll be happy to offer any assistance
that you may need.

For those of you needing help connecting to our IRC meetings
send your questions to:

ufo-irc-advice@crowman.demon.co.uk

SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION The UK.UFO.NW free fortnightly e-zine
covering UFO reports and information from the UK and around the
world is now available by subscribing to our new List Server.

Send mail to:

listserv@sjuvm.stjohns.edu

In the main body of the mail put:

subscribe ufo fn ln

note: in place of fn put your first name. in place of ln put
your last name.

For example:

subscribe ufo John Smith

A confirm mail will then be sent to you which you need to reply
to within 48 hours to be put on the e-zine mailing list.

If you have problems you may also subscribe by sending mail to:

ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

In the subject section of your mail type: SUBSCRIBE

That's it - see you next 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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                        Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto

From: Daev Walsh - Blather <daev@blather.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 23:54:01 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:53:27 -0400
Subject: Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto

_______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
October 2nd 1998 Vol 2. No. 21
_______________________________________________________

BLATHER ANEW

Readers may notice several distinct changes to this week's Blather...
Now running as an independent production, Blather has changed its web
address to http://www.blather.net and is kitted out with a new
look'n'feel (And, if you do pop in Blather's old web address, it will
automatically take you to the new one).

Consequently, subscribe/unsubscribe details will change slightly *next
week* - more on that in the next issue, but bear in mind, *Blather
subscribers do not need to change anything*. However, if there's as
much as a screed of a problem, please harass admin@blather.net

- daev


KLAATU BARADA NIKTO

Last weekend, the BlatherGHQ TV was accidentally powered-up and
tuned on to *The Day The Earth Stood Still*, a 1951 extraterrestrial
contact movie directed by Robert Wise and adapted by Edmund North
from Harry Bates' 1940 short story, *Farewell to the Master*.

We relaxed, enjoyed it, and casually prepared to note any motifs which
may have influenced today's interest in UFOs, alien abduction, and
extraterrestrial life. All the typical material was there - the
classic saucer shape, the silver space suits, terror on the streets,
silvery robots carrying panicking female leads into spaceships, and
the usual 'save the planet' kinda jazz. All the usual style of US
movies from the era of the Cold and Korean Wars was represented in the
film, and the accompanying baggage communist paranoia, but is in this
case somewhat anti-military, while gently ridiculing the 'reds under
the beds' mindset.

However, it was uncanny how closely the film stuck to the story of the
life and death (and afterlife) of one J.H. Christ. A tall and
severe-looking, yet handsome human gentleman, Klaatu (Michael Rennie)
comes from the heavens, offering a 'choice' between peace and
salvation, or the Earth's destruction - at the hands of greater (and
apparently wiser) powers elsewhere in the Universe.

Klaatu is immediately demonised by the authorities, and shot while
reaching for a gift to give to the US President. He escapes from a
military hospital, and begins to lead a secretive life, rooming with a
Washington family as a rather quiet bachelor whilst using the name
*Carpenter* (Representative of the Holy Family?).

He conducts a rather civilised existence, befriending the widowed
daughter of the family, Helen (Patricia Neal) - who has influential
connections - and her young son Bobby (Frances Bavier), while the
world outside goes berserk searching for the 'monster'. Bobby leads
Klaatu to Professor Barnhardt (Billy Gray), "the smartest man on
earth". To cut a long story short, Klaatu demonstrates his power by
neutralising out all electrical power world-wide, including cars and
telephones. But no one is harmed - aircraft in flight and
hospitals are unaffected. This is a display of Klaatu's (or rather his
superiors' *miraculous* power.


Barnhardt, suitably convinced, gathers together disciples --
scientists from around the world -- but before Klaatu arrives at his
meeting with them, he is betrayed by Helen's rather irritating
boyfriend, and gunned down in the street by the army (Klaatu throws
his arms in the air as he is pierced by the bullet...crucifixion?)
His dead body is moved across the street to a police station, where it
locked in a cell, and protected by an armed guard (the tomb of Christ
perhaps?) Helen has already been told to use the words "Klaatu Barada
Nikto" to prevent Gort - Klaatu's tall silvery robot sidekick, a
*faultless policeman of the universe* (holy spirit, angelic being) -
from destroying *everything*. She manages to convey this message
before Gort gets a chance to zap her, and 'he' carries her into the
saucer, presumably for her own safety. Gort then blasts a hole in the
side of the police station, and removes Klaatu (disappearance of the
body from the tomb, luminescent figure responsible). Back at the
saucer, Klaatu is *temporarily resurrected* by Gort, and addresses his
disciples - scientists and leaders of the world - explaining to them
what they must do to avert impending doom. He then *ascends into the
heavens*, leaving them to complete his work on earth. Sound familiar?

It was only when only on reading Mark Pilkington's *Screen Memories*
that I found out that scriptwriter Edmund North had admitted to
somehow *hiding* the Christian aspect of the story from the director
and producer: "It was my private little joke. I never discussed this
angle with Blaustein (producer) or Wise because I didn't want it
expressed. I hoped the Christ comparison would be subliminal."
(Mark Pilkington quotes from *Seeing is Believing* by Peter Biskind).


Mark P rounds off his treatise by pointing out that '...human
looking aliens who live amongst us on Earth, and the aliens' fears for
the Earth's destruction have become staple elements in the abduction
scenario of the 1990's. It is possible that these may have their roots
in the science fiction of the fifties, but such themes have been
central to myth, religion and visionary thought since time immemorial,
their recurrence in *The Day the Earth Stood Still* and other films
being intrinsically connected to the collective fears of the time.
Then it was the threat of nuclear destruction that hovered over the
West; today it is mankind's destruction of the environment, not just a
threat but a reality, that brings the other down to Earth.'

As *The Day the Earth Stood Still* is one the first movies to
propose UFOs as spaceships, it is rather ironic that our *modern*
UFO culture should be fueled by a 'private little joke' involving the
New Testament.




ADDENDUM:
While asking about on the Fortean email list for information on
writings about *The Day The Earth Stood Still*, list members came
forth with a plethora of subtle or synchronistic connections. . .


Apparently ex-Beatle Ringo Starr released an album called *Goodnight
Vienna*, the sleeve of which features a superimposition of his face
and Klaatu's, with Gort in the background. This lead to speculation
that a band called Klaatu were really the Beatles, a situation not
helped by the lack of information about the band on their record
sleeves, and the fact that they actually sounded a bit like the
Beatles. The band remained anonymous, and Capitol Records (also the
Beatles' US label) released their album without meeting the band.
Klaatu originally recorded a song called *Calling Occupants*, which
was later covered by *The Carpenters* (back to Jesus of Bleedin'
Nazareth again!...the set decorator's of *The Day The Earth Stood
Still* was *Claude E. Carpenter*...)


The ever amazing Snopes has pointed out that:

1) When Klaatu is asked where he is from, he says, "Venus and Mars."
This, of course, is also the title of a 1974 McCartney/Wings album.
2) At the end of a concert in Boston during his 1976 tour, McCartney
told the crowd: "See you when the earth stands still . . ."
3) The inside of George Harrison's "33 & 1/3" album includes a
drawing quite similar to the cover of the Klaatu album.
4) One of Klaatu's songs ("Sub Rosa Subway") ends with a backwards
tape loop. When this section is played backwards, the words "It's us,
it's us, it's us . . ." repeat.


In the movie *Army of Darkness* (Evil Dead III), '"Klaatu Barada
Nikto" is the shibboleth needed to negate the demonic forces of evil,
or something'. Lead actor Bruce Campbell (Ash) can't quite remember
it; "Klaatu Barada. . . necktie!"
In *The Empire Strikes Back, Darth briefs his bounty hunters - Boba
Fett is flanked by two others...Klaatu and Nikto (Klaatu, Boba,
Nikto?)

KUDOS
Many thanks to Mark Pilkington, Kelly McGillis, Snopes
(http://www.snopes.com), the incredibly Reverend Joe McNally
(Gentleman Consultant and supplier of the *Army of Darkness* and
*Empire Strikes Back* stuff), Stephen Dewey, Tim Chapman and the rest
of the Fortean mailing list!

NOTES:
*Screen Memories - An Exploration of the Relationship Between Science
Fiction Film and the UFO Mythology* - Mark Pilkington
(http://www.hedweb.com/markp/ufofilm.htm)


OTHER SITES:
Harry Bates:
(http://hubcap.clemson.edu/~sparks/sffilm/film.html)

'The Day the Earth Stood Still'
(http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/features/dcmov
ies/daytheearthstoodstill.htm)

TDTESS SiteGuide
(http://www.geocities.com/~klaatu-/gort/index.htm)

Internet Movie DataBase
(http://us.imdb.com/Title?Day+the+Earth+Stood+Still)


SOUNDTRACK TO THIS ISSUE
Pixies' *Bossanova* and Fun Lovin' Criminals' *Love Unlimited* single,
on repeat.
(Special thanks to Barry White, for saving my life)



SMATTERINGS
Strange Magazine has just published Kurt Burchfiel's *The Serpent�s
Tale* which is about the recent *GUST* Norwegian lake monster
expedition, also documented by this Blatherskite in *Gubu Norge*
(http://www.strangemag.com/serpentstale.html)
(http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no16.html)

_____________________
Dave (daev) Walsh
2nd October 1998
daev@blather.net





_______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.blather.net/archives/index.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 admin@blather.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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  {95} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: Lloyd Bayliss <lloyd@POWER-AGE.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:18:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:22:11 -0400
Subject: {95} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                        3rd October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 1 Issue 95
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in over 40 countries.

This issue comes in 4 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be
reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject
section e.g.  Repost {95} part 1, part 2.

In this issue:

Editorial
---------

Lloydy's back, so grab your keyboards and start tapping :-)
More 'Special Guests' comming up on IRC
Carnado - uk.ufo.nw reporter extrodinaire...

United Kingdom News
-------------------

[UK 1]  Anyone Out There?
[UK 2]  New Call To Seek ET By Looking For Flashes Of Light
[UK 3]  Rendlesham - The Unresolved Mystery By Nick Pope
[UK 4]  Searching For Life On Europa
[UK 5]  Response to Gary Val Tenuta's sighting of a black triangle
[UK 6]  East Kent MEP Demands UFO Investigation


World News
----------

[W 1]  The saga of a lost weather balloon
[W 2]  Father Balducci's New Book Repeats His Pro ET Position
[W 3]  Thousands participate in Internet search for aliens
[W 4]  Call it freedom? Or beyond the fringe?
[W 5]  Sarah McClendon Press Release
[W 6]  Antimatter research brings Star Trek technology closer to real
life


Book serialisation
------------------

A Fearful Symmetry

A True Story Of Alien Intrusion Into Human Lives

By D. Lynne Bishop


Statement, Subscription Information and Stuff
---------------------------------------------

How, where, and maybe even why, to find us - and what to do when you
get there :)

----------=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----------

Editorial
---------

Hello again everyone, and welcome to issue 95 of the UK-UFO-NW
ezine!

Firstly, sincere apologies for taking so long to get this issue
out to you all.  Excuses like pressures of work and all such
crap will be treated with the contempt they deserve!  Anyhow,
routers and servers currently in an operative state, let's carry
on regardless!!!

Well, for some inexplicable reason, Dave our intrepid leader,
has once again entrusted me with putting an issue together for
your perusal. So, after the excellent response we had from Issue
93 about that highly controversial piece of Martian rock called
Cydonia (see the letters section in issue 94), I thought I'd try
and wind you all up once more :)

Its obvious from the many replies we got, that not everyone
thinks this little mystery is over just yet.  And I have to say,
I'm still not convinced either way.  Maybe time will eventually
help coax out the whole truth - from whatever source - but for
now, however much NASA, skeptics and debunkers alike would have
you believe otherwise, Cydonia remains as one of the most
fascinating plots of landscape in our extra terrestrial back
yard.

The next question has to be, how much more has this Solar System
got hiding up its proverbial sleeve?  Scientist's thoughts have
already turned towards other celestial bodies such as Io and
Europa, and many of these scientists, including the well known
straight man Arthur C Clark, now believe that life is not only
possible in these inhospitable places, but may even be probable!

If, as seems likely, this change of attitude gets more widely
accepted in mainstream science, then what the hell lies beyond
our cosy little solar system - or even our cosy little galaxy?
But, I hear you cry, its just not possible for us to be visited
from another star system, the distances are far too great.
Well, lets be fair, traveling at the speed of light (the
theoretical maximum speed for anything in the universe), it
would take over 4 years to get here from our closest solar
neighbour, Alpha Centauri.  Enough to put off even the most
ambitious of self-respecting, curiosity ridden little green man,
methinks!

Lets take some time out to cast our minds back a little here
though. Not too many years ago, most scientists thought that
molecular engineering was impossible.  Now, not only are they
are saying its possible, but that it will happen within the next
few decades. Not many years before that, space travel was
thought impossible, before that it was the sound barrier, before
that, flight itself, and way, way before that, scientists just
knew that the Earth was at the centre of the universe and
everything rotated around it.  Before that even, the Earth was
flat!  According to scientists, even the poor humble bumble bee
can't fly - theoretically :)

Most of you will have spotted what Im trying to get at by now.
It seems to me that, at any particular time in history, science
seems to be the best guess of the best minds in our particular
little world. Dont get me wrong, I dont pretend to understand
even the basics of science, and I regard those that do with the
utmost of respect.  But every now and again, something comes
along and challenges the beliefs, theories and laws of
scientists and science itself.  Is it really so far fetched to
think that, in the years, decades and centuries to come, man
will find a way to travel faster than light, or to fold space
and time, or even learn to control and harness that most basic
of human assumption, gravity?

Answers on a postcard please, to blah blah blah...

---

Ok, that's the wind up bit over with, now for the incentive to
keep on bothering with this bunch of looney toons known as
uk.ufo.nw!

As you might have gathered, there has been some spouting off of
late, promising a rather special guest for our weekly IRC
meeting in the near future.  Well, Jesse Marcel Jr has recently
confirmed his visit for some time in the very near future, so
start working that grey matter to get some awesome questions
ready for him!  Remember, his dad may well have been one of the
first people on this blue-tinted, 3rd rock from the Sun to have
touched technology from another world! I'm sure there are plenty
of good (and not so good...) things you can think of to ask him!

Talking of IRC guests (yes we were, read the above - please pay
attention...), our most successful guest to date has agreed to
pay us a return visit, this time after an arduous tour of
Australia. Yep, that most popular of nuclear scientists (to us
that is, not to the US Government!) Stanton Friedman has agreed
to bless us with his presence and knowledge (and no doubt his
seven page, blacked out FOIA document!) once again.

---

One final note before we get on to the e-zine in proper.  In the
last issue, {94}, Dave gave a mention to a guy called Carnado.
Carnado has been contributing to the e-zine regularly for far too
long now, and I would just like to add my thanks to him for his
efforts in getting print-worthy reports to us for this e-zine.  As
you may notice as you amble through this issue, an awful lot of the
reports are from Carnado once again.  Long may it continue!

Remember, without contributions from yourself and people like
Carnado, this e-zine would not be worth the bandwidth it's sent
over.  So please, any article you find that you think just might
be worth including, send it on!

----------=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----------

United Kingdom News
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

[UK 1]******

From: Doug Roberts <doug@littlegreenmen.demon.co.uk>

Source: BBC News Online (www.news.bbc.co.uk)

Monday, September 14, 1998 Published at
14:07 GMT 15:07 UK

Sci/Tech

Anyone out there?

Jodrell Bank on the hunt for radio signals from aliens

Astronomers have begun the most sensitive and comprehensive
search ever attempted to look for radio signals from aliens. Our
science editor Dr David Whitehouse reports:

The research programme, organised by the Search for
Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) Institute in the US, is
called Project Phoenix. It is using the Jodrell Bank radio
telescope in England and the huge Arecibo radio telescope in
Puerto Rico.

Scientists believe they stand the best chance of finding out if
there is intelligent life in space with radio observations.

This is because radio waves travel relatively unhindered through
space and are easy to detect.  The radio telescopes have begun
to look at several hundred Sun-like stars that lie within a
distance of 200 light years.

Cosmic

Jill Tarter, Director of the SETI Institute, says: "By using the
Arecibo and Jodrell Bank telescopes in the search we will have
the most sensitive system possible."

The privately-funded SETI Institute has developed an
ultra-sensitive receiving system that can sift through the
cosmic static looking for any evidence of an artificial signal.

The receiver is located at the Arecibo telescope and will be
used to make the initial detection of candidate signals. Jodrell
Bank will then be immediately used to eliminate earth-based
interference or confirm any suspected extra-terrestrial signal.

Previous searches for Life in the Universe have always been
plagued by interference originating on Earth or from artificial
satellites.

The search is being undertaken during two three-week observing
sessions each year and will continue for several years.

Professor Andrew Lyne, Director of Jodrell Bank, said: "If an
extra-terrestrial signal were detected, it would be one of the
most dramatic discoveries ever made. We are glad that we can
make a contribution to this exciting scientific quest."

---

[UK 2]******

From: Carnado (bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net)
Source: http://www.sightings.com/ufo/lightlook.htm

New Call To Seek ET By Looking For Flashes Of Light In Distant
Space

By Nicholas Booth
The Times - London
9-1-98


If ET is trying to contact us, he won't be phoning - he will use
the powerful flashlights that are lasers to draw our attention.
Like lighthouses on the unexplored seas of space, these unique
flashes of laser light, which astronomers can detect with simple
equipment, will soon tell us whether any stars are harbouring
advanced civilisations.

That is the startling claim of the American inventor of the
laser, Charles Townes, who has long urged his colleagues to look
for such tell-tale signs of alien intelligence. All scientific
searches to date have involved listening for radio signals from
alien civilisations; now a team from the University of
California at Berkeley will use a simple, antiquated telescope
to try to spot the laser flashes.

At 83, Professor Townes, a Nobel prizewinner, is delighted to be
vindicated. "I proposed this idea in the Sixties," he says. "Now
a group of astronomers will start to make a search this autumn.
I am very pleased."

This attempt is the start of a new era of astronomy. The method
is, according to the astronomer in charge, "embarrassingly
simple". Embarrassing because it could have been undertaken at
any time in the past four decades, but Professor Townes's notion
of looking, rather than listening, was largely ignored.

"If there are aliens sending us messages by laser, we will see
them," says Dan Werthimer, the director of Berkeley's Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) programme.

Unlike the aliens in movies, who frequently speak English, the
real ones would probably not use Morse code. "They would send
very short, powerful pulses of laser light that would be
unmistakable. It doesn't require that much energy to do," Dr
Werthimer says.

Later this autumn, he and his colleagues will use a 30in
telescope - modest by professional standards - at Mount
Leuschner, about 20 miles east of Berkeley, to look for laser
flashes. Light captured by the telescope will be split into two
and fall on to photo-multiplier tubes, which will amplify the
signal. If both see unusual flashes at specific wavelengths
-lasting perhaps a few billionths of a second, with a power
output greater than that of the stars they are looking at - they
will have hit the jackpot.

Seeing signals in the two separate halves of the beam means that
they could not be artefacts of the detection process.

Lasers are the only way that bursts of light could be
sufficiently concentrated. As with the powerful search beams of
a lighthouse, they could be directed to specific stars such as
our Sun. Lasers work by exciting gas atoms and forcing them to
give up their energy in the form of an intense flash of light.

"We could easily send a message into space to other
civilisations," Professor Townes says. His Berkeley colleagues
agree. According to Dr Werthimer, you could attach a simple
laser to an optical telescope and direct it to nearby stars and
send messages. "You could do that with a laser that transmits
one megawatt," Dr Werthimer says. "That's about the same power
as a television station."

But that is far into the future. For the moment, the Berkeley
team is starting its own modest search; improbably, this optical
work will cost just $20,000 (=9C11,400) a year, a sign of the
times for SETI research. Searching for aliens has been
criticised by some as a kind of wishful thinking, a subject
without a science. And American legislators certainly agree:
Nasa's ambitious program of SETI research using radio telescopes
was cancelled in 1993.

However, with private funding from supporters such as the
science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke and the film director
Steven Spielberg, SETI struggles on.

Others have said that finding evidence for alien civilisation
will be impossible. A similar thing was said to Professor Townes
during the late 1940s after he proposed the forerunner of the
laser, the maser (which produces microwave radiation rather than
light). As a researcher at Bell Labs in New Jersey, he was a
world expert on microwave spectroscopy, the probing of gases
using radio waves. He realised that by using molecules to
amplify signals, he could generate a powerful source of
radiation. After he discussed the method in a scientific journal
50 years ago, "more than one Nobel laureate said it would never
work. It was viewed as a crazy, cute idea and there wasn't much
to it."

Early one spring morning in 1951, while sitting on a park bench
in Washington, Professor Townes had what he calls "divine
inspiration" of how to make a maser work and its possible
applications. "I recognised that it could be a sensitive
amplifier or atomic clock," he says.

Throughout the 1950s, the wavelengths used to probe gases were
made progressively shorter - so much so that he could get down
to optical wavelengths. Together with his brother-in-law, Arthur
Schawlow, he developed the laser. Accordingly, Townes won the
Nobel Prize in 1964 (along with two Russians who had
independently come across the same principle). Lasers can now be
found everywhere, from supermarkets to home CD players to
hospitals.

"It comes home to me when I hear of friends who have had their
sight restored," Professor Townes says. "To me, it was clear
that the most important uses would come from connecting up
optics and electronics."

Proof positive comes from the telescope now being used by Dr
Werthimer's team (it is normally used to train Berkeley
undergraduates). In 1959 - the same year in which a workable
maser was developed - two radio astronomers declared that
detecting radio signals would be the only way to find aliens. As
a result, the scientific community tended to dismiss any other
wavelengths that could be used to send messages.

By the mid-1960s, Professor Townes had moved to Berkeley and was
working at the Space Science lab. By then, his idea was
bolstered by the discovery of naturally existing masers in
space. There are vast clouds of gas between the stars which can
act as masers. Their constituent molecules are naturally excited
to such an extent that they amplify microwaves across the vast
firmament of the heavens.

Any sufficiently advanced alien civilisation would be well aware
of that and could emulate the process. Professor Townes points
out that these clouds have been emitting intense radiation in
all directions, but it was only recently that humanity has
acknowledged their existence.

"If we'd have found them earlier, then we could have developed
the laser sooner," Professor Townes says. "We didn't look. Other
civilisations might have taken their cue from natural masers in
space."

This autumn, the Berkeley group will systematically look at
2,500 nearby stars. The criterion is fairly simple: they will be
Sun-like stars, around which planets like ours - and
corresponding civilisations - could have evolved.

All involved agree that the search is a long shot, with truly
astronomical odds against it.

But the final word goes to Professor Townes, who insists that,
as with the invention of the laser, the discovery of life in
space is simply a matter of looking hard enough.

"We don't know what we will find, so we must keep looking."


---

[UK 3]******

From: Carnado (bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998
Source: UFO Updates Mailing list (updates@globalserve.net)
Subject: Rendlesham

Rendlesham - The Unresolved Mystery By Nick Pope

There has been much recent debate about the Rendlesham Forest
incident, and some interesting and well-researched articles have
appeared.  These include @Seeing the Forest for the Trees@, a
detailed analysis from Jenny Randles, which appeared in the
Summer edition of International UFO Reporter. There have been
two articles by James Easton, entitled @Rendlesham Unravelled@
and @Resolving Rendlesham@, together with a piece by Georgina
Bruni, entitled @Rendlesham Unravelled - NOT@. How are we to
make sense of the various conflicting views? Has the case really
been resolved, or is there more work to be done before we can
make such a claim?

As many readers of this statement will be aware, I work for the
Ministry of Defence, and between 1991 and 1994 was responsible
for researching and investigating the UFO phenomenon for the
British Government.  As such, while my involvement with the
Rendlesham Forest case came long after the events concerned, I
had an advantage over other researchers in that I was
approaching the case from a unique angle, having access to the
official government file on the incident, and being able to call
upon official resources and expertise.

Various accounts of the Rendlesham Forest incident have appeared
in numerous books, magazines and articles, many of which take a
radically different view. I have summarised the case in my first
book, @Open Skies, Closed Minds@. More detailed accounts appear
in @Left At East Gate@ by Larry Warren and Peter Robbins, and
@UFO Crash Landing@ by Jenny Randles. I shall not attempt to
rehash any of this material, but shall instead focus on the
areas that have sparked the recent controversy.

The first of these areas concerns the original witness
statements made by Penniston, Burroughs, Cabansag and Chandler.
James Easton makes much of the fact that these statements are
fairly bland, and points out that some of the witnesses seem to
have added to their stories over the years.  However, based on
my own official investigations of other cases I can tell people
that this is entirely consistent with the way in which junior
military personnel report UFOs. They do so tentatively if at
all, as they are unsure on official policy and unclear as to
what ramifications there may be for their careers.  They will be
more forthcoming in telephone conversations and face to face
meetings, and much more inclined to speak out once they have
left the service. Having met a number of the military witnesses,
Jenny Randles is clearly aware of this factor. Sadly, a number
of the sceptics do not seem to have the same understanding of
the way in which the military operate.

Bearing in mind the above point, the key document is still
Charles Halt's memo, and its mention of a @strange glowing
object@ which was @metallic in appearance and triangular in
shape, approximately two to three metres across the base and
approximately two metres high@. As a senior officer he had no
qualms about being more forthcoming, because he was clearly
aware of policy, and knew that there was a requirement to report
details of any UFO sighting to the Ministry of Defence.

What then are we to make of inconsistencies between the accounts
of different witnesses, and in particular the testimony of Larry
Warren? Taking the first point, it is well-known to any police
officer that different people perceive the same event in
different ways. This has been demonstrated in a number of
studies, and is something that I was briefed about as part of my
official duties at the MOD. With regard to Larry Warren, he and
Peter Robbins stayed with me for several days while they were
promoting @Left At East Gate@, and we had numerous, in-depth
conversations about the case.  I am personally convinced that he
was present, and was a witness to some quite extraordinary
activity.  But it was abundantly clear that the activity he
witnessed was not that referred to in Halt's memo.

This brings me to the recent work done by independent researcher
Georgina Bruni, editor of the Internet magazine @Hot Gossip UK@
" www.hotgossip.co.uk. Georgina is a good friend of mine, and in
recent months she has re-interviewed many of the well-known
witnesses, and uncovered and spoken to several new ones. She
will be publishing this material in due course, although she
will be unable to do so in the immediate future, due to the
pressure of other business commitments.

Let us now turn to the physical evidence. This consists of the
damage to the trees in the clearing where the metallic craft was
seen on the first night of activity, the indentations at the
point it apparently landed, and the radiation readings taken
from these trees and indentations.  In @Open Skies, Closed
Minds@ I revealed the results of the first and only official
investigaton into this aspect of the case, detailing my
enquiries with the Defence Radiological Protection Service. The
official assessment was that the radiation readings recorded
were ten times what they should have been for the area, although
I should stress that the radiation was low level, and would not
have posed any danger to those present.

Ian Ridpath has highlighted some legitimate doubts about the
suitability of the equipment used to record the radiation
levels, and further suggests that Halt may even have misread the
dial on the Geiger counter. Whilst I accept these points, I
should explain that any official investigation can only be based
on the data received by the Ministry, and not on such
speculation - intriguing though it may be.  But one can actually
set aside any debate about the precise level of the readings, on
the basis that the readings can only be considered in their
proper context.  In other words, we need to consider the events
collectively, not individually.  We have a sighting of a UFO,
coupled with tree damage and indentations in the very same
clearing in which the UFO was seen. Then we have radiation
readings which, irrespective of how high they were, just
happened to peak where the trees were damaged and in the very
centre of the indentations.  We should also remember the fact
that Halt's memo explains how @the animals on a nearby farm went
into a frenzy@ when the object was seen. While none of this
proves that the UFO was of extraterrestrial origin, it seems
clear that there was an object of some sort involved, which had
an effect on the surrounding environment.

The sceptics clearly disagree, returning to the theory that all
the UFO sightings were misidentifications of the Orford Ness
lighthouse or the Shiplake Lightship, or even of stars, and that
the indentations in the clearing were caused by burrowing
rabbits! When I met Charles Halt he was dismissive of this, and
confirmed that he and other witnesses were familiar with the
lighthouse, which was indeed visible as an entirely separate
object for some time during his actual UFO sighting.
Furthermore, as he explained on the @Strange But True@
documentary on the case, @A lighthouse doesn't move through the
forest; the lighthouse doesn't go up and down, it doesn't
explode, doesn't change shape, size - doesn't send down beams of
light from the sky@.

Long after the events concerned, questions are still being asked
about this case in parliament, both in the House of Commons and
the House of Lords, by MPs and Peers who are clearly alive to
the defence and national security implications of the incident.
When seeking expert analysis on a case such as this, one really
cannot obtain a more authoritative view than that of Admiral of
the Fleet The Lord Hill-Norton, a former Chief of the Defence
Staff and Chairman of the NATO Military Committee.  With the
greatest respect to the sceptics, Lord Hill-Norton is
considerably better qualified to analyse  an incident such as
this. Commenting on the case he has said @It seems to me that
something physical took place; I have no doubt that something
landed....either large numbers of people....were hallucinating,
and for an American Air Force nuclear base this is extremely
dangerous, or what they say happened did happen, and in either
of those circumstances there can only be one answer, and that is
that it was of extreme defence interest..........@

In summary, James Easton and Ian Ridpath should be commended for
highlighting some intriguing new material and for stimulating
constructive debate on this case. But while it's a neat
soundbite to claim that the case is resolved, this would be a
premature and naive claim to make, and one that is clearly
inconsistent with the facts. As Georgina Bruni and Jenny Randles
have shown, there is still work to be done here.


Nick Pope London 27th August 1998


-[continued in part 2]-







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

                     part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: Lloyd Bayliss <lloyd@POWER-AGE.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:20:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 15:42:13 -0400
Subject: part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                        3rd October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 3 Issue 95
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in over 40 countries.



[W 5]******

Source: UFO Magazine
Publish date: September/October 1998

Sarah McClendon, aged 88 and a White House correspondent for
more than half a century, stated that the time is long overdue
to unveil details of the government's role and knowledge
concerning the long and controversial history of UFOs; from
Roswell, New Mexico to the White House.

Respectfully called 'Sarah' by every president since Franklin
Delano Roosevelt, McClendon began lending her newspaper column,
news letter and her radio commentary on some 1,200 radio
stations nationwide to coincide with the call from Ufologists
and enthusiasts for government disclosure and the establishment
of a global scientific conference on the subject.

McClendon, who has made more than one president squirm, said
"the lid on UFOs is gradually coming off. There is a national
drive to get one million signatures on a petition calling for an
open Congressional hearing for government employee
witnesses.".........


Date sent:              Thu, 02 Jul 1998 10:07:53 -0700
To:                     webmaster@cseti.org
From:                   "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org>
Subject:                Sarah McClendon Press Release

July 1, 1998

From: Sarah McClendon
White House Correspondent

Washington, D.C. - Pressure is building up for Congress to give
attention to the controversy over unidentified flying objects.
With scientists from Stanford, MIT, Cornell, Princeton and
elsewhere studying UFO evidence, the controversy is now being
brought out into the open and heavy secrecy surrounding the
subject is being lifted. Seminars on UFO evidence are being held
periodically throughout the country with laymen discussing the
evidence without fear of being ridiculed.

When about 30 members of Congress or their staff heard a
briefing on UFOs in April of 1997, Rep. Dan Burton, R., Ind.
chairman of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee,
displayed some interest in the matter. His committee has
received a number of letters on the subject, according to staff
member Matthew Ebert. "These letters are treated seriously," he
said. Ebert thinks there is a possibility congressional hearings
will be held.

At a May 11 hearing on human rights documents pertaining to
Guatemala and Honduras held by the House subcommittee on
Government Management Information and Technology, its chairman
Rep. Steve Horn, R. CA, asked how the government classifies UFO
documents. The two witnesses, Lee Strickland, chief of the
Information Review Group of the Central Intelligence Agency and
Steven Garfinkle, director of the Security and Oversight Group
of the National Archives, both said they thought UFO documents
should be considered as public information.

There may be economic benefits from this emerging information.
Dr. Steven Greer, an emergency room physician, who for eight
years has briefed and been briefed by government and U.N.
officials on the subject of unidentified objects in U.S.
airspace, is convinced that the materials and technology of UFOs
carry enormous benefits. For example, he says their energy
creating apparatus does not use internal combustion.

Greer asserts the financial and environmental cost of exploiting
oil and gas to service 6 billion people worldwide can be
dramatically reduced. Large scale energy production derived from
UFO technology would reverse environmental damage and save
hundreds of billions of dollars annually in direct costs.

Dr. Greer is the International Director of the Center for the
Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence and leads a working team
of around 200 composed of CSETI members and associates,
government employee witnesses, consultants and government
contacts. Their hope is to get congress to hold hearings and
take testimony from witnesses. He has explained his conclusions
to a number of congressional members.

A national petition utilizing the Internet and calling for
congressional hearings was launched last year by another group,
Stargate International out of Tucson, Arizona. It has
accumulated 20,000+ names to be presented to congress.  A
million signatures are sought.

Greer is aware that many employees of the government keep secret
facts which they have obtained about UFOs. He feels it is
unconstitutional for government to bottle up information of this
importance.  He would like to see UFO's openly discussed and
covered widely in the press.

For some years the belief has been widespread there is in the
public domain a presidential executive order forbidding
government employees from talking about UFOs. Dr. Greer is not
aware of any such an executive order but indicated concern that
secret executive orders have been issued and not disclosed to
Congress or the public. Such secret orders would make it
difficult for people to learn more about UFOs.  From the White
House it was learned that a check of executive orders going back
to the early eighteen thirties shows none has been issued on
this subject. Surprising is the growing number of citizens
showing an interest in finding out more about UFOs. Seminars are
being held around the country every week with as many as five
and six hundred in attendance.


202-483-3791 McClendon News Service, Inc. Fax: 202-328-1818

_________________________________________________________

Sarah McClendon is the Dean of the White House Press Corps

**********************************************************


The following is a March 30, 1998 Press Release on the subject by Ms.
McClendon

By SARAH MCCLENDON
WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT
March 30th, 1998

Washington, D.C. -- Unidentified Flying Objects, a term given
for many years to unexplained sightings of craft in the skies
over every state in the Union, are actual visitors from other
worlds, believe a community of scientists and technicians
employed by government.

The real danger to the U.S. and perhaps this whole planet is the
government has placed such a heavy blanket of secrecy upon this
issue. So much secrecy, those in government who have knowledge
showing UFOs are identifiable feel the subject cannot be
discussed by those in the know without serious repercussions.
Others are afraid their friends and co-workers will think they
are crazy if they even so much as insinuate that UFOs are
identifiable as manned craft from outside the earth. This
particularly applies to newspaper editors and publishers,
reporters and analysts. Thus the U.S. is denying itself the
chance to learn more about UFOs or to encourage research despite
the fact the U. S. stands to gain from such discussions.

Not publicized but true is that the Clinton administration, soon
after coming to office, had many briefings on the subject.
Laurance Rockefeller provided the information for the President
and Mrs. Clinton. Others provided documents and verbal briefings
to presidential advisors Jack Gibbons (science), Bruce Lindsay
(personal), Anthony Lake (national security) and Vice President
Albert Gore. About the same time a three hour briefing was given
by Dr. Steven Greer to the sitting Director of the CIA, Admiral
Woolsey.

Subsequently, Clinton instructed Webster Hubbell, when naming
him to the position of Associate Attorney General at the Justice
Department, that he wanted him to investigate and report back to
him on two things, circumstances surrounding the death of
President John F. Kennedy, and the existence of UFOs. Hubbell,
despite his position and the presidential imprimatur, was boxed
in at Justice Department and never was able to find out. All of
this was disclosed in Hubbell's memoir Friends in High Places.

Now the lid on UFOs is gradually coming off. There is a national
drive underway to get one million signatures on a petition
calling for an open Congressional hearing for government
employee witnesses. Dr. Steven Greer, Director of the Center for
the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI), devotes most
of his time seeking disclosure of government evidence proving
the existence of craft manned by non-humans. Another who feels
that positive proof exists within government, is Lt. Col. Philip
J. Corso (retired), who reveals in a recent book, The Day After
Roswell, that he was in charge of the Roswell files during his
tenure as head of the Army's Foreign Technology Division. He
states unequivocally that these files confirm the crash which
occurred at Roswell, New Mexico was an alien space craft. This
completely refutes the Air Force denials and subsequent
explanations. Corso says that the crashed vehicle was studied
and proved to be manufactured of materials unknown as to source
and usage in this country. In time, he says, this and other UFOs
provided technologies which were "worked into the commercial
world via front companies." Incidentally he vouches for the fact
that this has proven to be a valuable contribution to U.S.
aircraft design and other commercial products.

After the Roswell incident, the Air Force replied to reporters'
inquiries that this was all part of research using weather
balloons and other equipment. Corso and hundreds of others who
work or have worked in secret defense and scientific agencies,
are willing to swear under oath that alien craft are repeatedly
penetrating our airspace.

Whenever the military agencies are asked to look into this
matter further, the answer is always the same - "We do not
investigate UFOs."

Contact:

McClendon News Service
202-483-3791
202-328-1818 fax

---

[W 6]******

Source: The Huntsville Times
August 25, 1998
by JAMES McWILLIAMS
Times Technology Writer

Antimatter research at Marshall bringing 'Star Trek' technology
closer to real life

The technology that fuels the Starship Enterprise on ''Star Trek
could power real-life exploration of interstellar space, say
officials at NASAs Marshall Space Flight Center.

On ''Star Trek, powerful antimatter fuel pushes the starships
engines to warp speeds - faster than the speed of light.

Marshall scientists are now working on antimatter research that
could help propel rockets at 0.3 percent of the speed of light
by 2020, according to Gerald Smith, a researcher on the project.

Thats about 560 miles per second - more than 2 million mph -
within the range of the Enterprises pre-warp ''impulse-power
speed.

Such speed is still too slow for humans to travel to other star
systems in a normal lifetime (unless astronauts could somehow be
frozen in suspended animation). But satellites powered by
antimatter could explore vast areas of space much faster than
now, said George Schmidt, chief of propulsion research at
Marshall.

Antimatter can produce 100 times more energy than nuclear
fusion, and without producing radioactive waste, Schmidt said.
Thus, a small amount of antimatter could safely propel a
spacecraft much faster and farther than a comparable amount of
traditional rocket fuel.

Marshall needs less than $10 million to prove the viability of
antimatter propulsion, although creating an antimatter-powered
spacecraft would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, said
Schmidt. So far, Marshall has spent $200,000 on antimatter
research with Smith.

Antimatter is a substance made of subatomic particles that have
characteristics, such as electrical charges, that are the
opposite of what normally occurs in the known universe.

Atoms of normal matter include positively charged protons
orbited by negatively charged electrons. Antimatter has
negatively charged antiprotons orbited by positively charged
positrons.

Because of the differences between antimatter and matter, they
normally cancel each other out when they come into contact.
Matter and antimatter annihilate each other, producing energy.

Although part of the energy comes in the form of gamma rays, it
leaves no radioactive residue, said Smith. Because the matter
and antimatter annihilate each other in a mere moment, they
leave behind no waste.

Researchers are working to channel antimatter energy for a
variety of purposes, including propulsion, welding, tumor
removal and medical imaging. Physicians already use antimatters
positrons to make a type of medical image called positron
emission tomography, or PET scanning, which closely tracks
individual metabolic processes, Smith said.

Smith, a physics professor from Penn State University, has
worked at Marshall this summer on an antimatter-containment
project that he and colleagues from his school designed.

Smith has built a device capable of capturing 10 billion
antiprotons in a ''trap and holding them for four days.

Within a year, Smith expects to be finished building a mobile
trap that can capture a trillion antiprotons, store them for 10
days, and transport the antiprotons around the country for
experiments.

Someday, advanced traps could be the fuel tanks for spacecraft.

The current traps hold antimatter produced in synchrotrons at
federal laboratories. A synchrotron, a type of ''atom smasher,
is a device that accelerates atoms or subatomic particles until
they crash into one another and create new types of particles.
The energy from these crashes can produce antimatter.

Storing antimatter is tricky. Because antimatter and matter
destroy each other on contact, scientists cant simply stuff
antimatter into shopping bags. The bags and their contents would
immediately destroy each other. So, Smiths trap levitates the
antimatter inside a magnetic field that won't let matter and
antimatter touch.

In an interesting parallel of science fiction and science fact,
the Starship Enterprise also keeps its antimatter in magnetic
fields, according to the book ''Star Trek Concordance, by Bjo
Trimble. However, the Enterprises engines manage their
antimatter fuel by using a fictitious technology called
''dilithium crystals, said Smith.

Once antimatter is safely contained, it proves to be a
relatively compact energy source. A trillion antiprotons weigh a
little more than one three-trillionth of an ounce.

If all those antiprotons were laid side by side in a straight
line, they would be only a millimeter long, but far too thin to
see with the naked eye or even with an electron microscope.

But Smiths trap cant store the antiprotons in a small straight
line. The antiprotons electrical charges repel each other.
Identical charges repel, and opposites attract, just as
identical poles of magnets repel each other and opposite poles
attract.

The closer the antiprotons get to one another, the stronger
their charges become.

So, Smiths trap gives antiprotons plenty of room to separate.
The antiprotons spread into a sausage-shaped cloud 20
centimeters long and two centimeters wide.

The governments Fermi National Laboratory near Chicago could be
modified to fill Smiths trap with antimatter whenever needed.
That will allow scientists to continue developing antimatter
technologies. Smith is negotiating with Fermi to gain its help.

Although antimatter rockets are decades away, Smith sees
short-term benefits of antimatter research.

Antimatter traps could make PET scans and other medical
procedures available in many more places. PET scans are
available only in hospitals in the largest cities of the nation,
and in experimental hospitals that have their own atom smashers,
called cyclotrons, Smith said.

The scans require radioactive isotopes that decay within
minutes, and thus are difficult to transport. Smith said he
wants to use trapped antimatter to create the isotopes at a
patients bedside.

Another antimatter technology that could be available soon is a
plasma gun that fires ion gases heated by antiprotons, said
Smith. Such a gun wouldnt be intended to be a weapon, but would
instead use ions to etch computer circuits into silicon wafers.

The plasma gun would be portable, and would thus let small
laboratories and roving maintenance workers make computer
repairs that are difficult today.

The plasma gun would actually be similar to a small antimatter
rocket, Smith said. The plasma guns muzzle and the rockets
exhaust both would propel energy. So, work on the gun could
improve ideas for rockets.

Before scientists develop a rocket fueled solely by antimatter,
they will probably build a rocket fueled by nuclear-fusion
reactions sparked by antimatter, said Smith.

A single milligram of antimatter could hold as much energy as
all the fuel in the main, 180-foot-tall fuel tank on the space
shuttle, but producing antimatter is a slow process, said
Schmidt.

Todays synchrotrons would require at least 10 years to produce a
milligram of antimatter, said Smith. Some scientists believe the
process could take longer. So, using antimatter to spark nuclear
fusion is a more viable technology for the near term.

Nuclear fusion, unlike the nuclear fission used in current power
plants, is a fairly clean source of power, because the radiation
fades quickly, said Smith.


----------===============******************===============----------

A Fearful Symmetry

A True Story Of Alien Intrusion Into Human Lives

By D. Lynne Bishop

A FEARFUL SYMMETRY Copyright 1995 by D. Lynne Bishop

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including
photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission of
the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief
passages.

First Printing September 1995

Printed in the United States of America

Bookfinder Publishing

http://bookfinder.simplenet.com/

Lynne Bishop's home page

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3862/

---

CHAPTER 15

Through my continuing correspondence with John, I attempted to
keep him apprised of each new occurrence of UFO and alien
phenomenon in my life, and also any strange happenings affecting
my other family members.  My sister had expressed a desire to
delve further into one of her past experiences that had
indicated multiple involvement with other family members, and
John arranged a hypnosis session for her on February 7, 1993.

As we made the trip to Springfield, I reflected on the distance
this "journey" into my past had taken me.  One small, almost
faltering step in February of last year had set the course I had
followed, for good or ill.  And now, we were embarked on yet
another path in that tortuous trail.  It had been a long and
winding road--and there was no end yet in sight. Upon arrival,
we greeted John and his assistant. Now familiar with the memory
recovery process, our small group gathered for an informal
discussion, and the hypnotherapist spoke with my sister to
refresh old memories, prior to inducing regression:

John:  So, what was it you were thinking about that night?

Laura:  I was sixteen--and I was thinking over and over and over
. . . Walked in and looked at my mother that night, like I was
going to wake her up and tell her about the aliens, and then
deciding not to. I just sat there in a chair, feeling really
isolated and freaked out. But now, at nineteen, when they came
in and I told everyone to freeze, it was gray.  Gray is daytime;
orange is night.

John:  Yeah.  That one (at age nineteen) is the one we started
to go for one time, but ended up at a different age.  That's the
one that would also have involved your twin sister.  We'll try
to touch on that one, too.  It would be interesting to get your
perceptions, if that's the same one she's already told us about.

Laura:  Uh, huh.  But Mom and my sister were in the one at
sixteen, too. That's why I wanted to tell them at that time,
because they were there.

John:  Yeah, kind of hard to tell your family that. Laura:  If
you're alone, it can just be you, and you can go live your own
life, but . . . you know. John:  Do you remember about what time
it would have been, when you "came to" that night?  (Again
referring to the incident at age sixteen.)

Laura:  It would have been about . . . 2:00 or 3:00 in the
morning.

John:  Okay, so that's where you spent the rest of the night?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  In the chair.

John:  And then how long after that was it you decided you were
leaving home?

Laura:  (Laugh) . . . It started right away.  Um, before that I
had the ball lightning, and . . . We'd had strange . . . um . .
. things.

John:  Tell me about the ball lightning again.

Laura:  Okay.  I'm in the front bedroom.  I'm fourteen.

John:  You saw it out the window?

Laura:  No.  No, it was in the room.  Like a lightning bolt, or
something.  All of a sudden, it just made me wake up and open my
eyes.  And it was hovering over me, like this.  (Accompanied by
hand gestures.)  It really freaked me out!  Really bad.  And it
didn't move.  I slid out from underneath it.  It just stayed
right there, and I went screaming down the hallway.

John:  Do you remember any kind of physical sensation that went
along with it?

Laura:  No.  I was just very freaked out.

John:  Did it have any kind of rough size to it?

Laura: Yeah.  It was about two feet in diameter.  And you don't
ever forget it, when you have that happen.  I mean, there's
nothing . . . You've got nothing in this world to compare it to.
I didn't touch it; I was afraid my hand would go right through
it.  After I ran down the hallway, my brother met me halfway,
standing at his doorway, and I was screaming at the top of my
lungs.  Then, all of a sudden, his fluorescent light came on . .
. and it just lit up . . . when he and I met there.

John:  So there was an electrical effect . . . .

Laura:  Yeah.  Definitely an electrical effect.

John:  Okay, so you're fourteen . . . .

Laura:  Yeah. And then there was the cat.  (The mutilated cat
mentioned previously.)

John:  What do you think you have the most curiosity about this
morning?

Laura:  Me?  Curiosity?  (Laugh) . . . I really don't have any
curiosity. I really don't.  I think it's . . . See, I don't
think it's evil.  I don't think they're out to get us.  I don't
think there's any harm from it, really.  I think it's
beneficial.  When my sister first started . . . when she came
here . . . even though I was worried and upset because it did
create family conflicts, I told her the first time . . . I said,
"It's the best thing that ever happened to you."

John:  Hmm.

Laura:  And I do believe it.  I think it's wonderful, because it
changes you.  You become different.  I wish it could happen to
everybody.  It's an empty existence, without it.  It makes your
mind grow.

John:  Okay.  Anything else?

Laura:  Yeah, when I was sixteen . . . my brother had been sick.
There had been . . . we had big traumas, one right after
another. So, see . . . in my conscious life, I had traumas, too.
In the middle of this you add ball lightning, the weird death of
a cat, and aliens.  But also, we were brought up . . . not
orthodox.  I'm gonna be really honest with you.  I could never
explain why the ghosts came- -but they looked like angels.  I
mean, I never saw wings, or anything, but they had a white light
that glowed all over them. That's why people would think they
have white robes and wings.  I don't see them very often,
though.

John:  When did that happen?

Laura:  I was fourteen when I saw the first one--the woman who
came to get something.  She was beautiful; I mean, just
beautiful.  They are stunning, in fact.  And when the man came,
at thirty-six, it just . . . you feel the whole thing, as they
come toward you.  It's definitely an energy thing, or something.
But, I was afraid he was going to touch me, and that I would die
that day, so I got pretty scared, too.  I was really sad that
day, and I was kinda . . . meditating, let's say.  So, he had
come to comfort me.  But I didn't want him to touch me, either.
'Cause I thought I might die.  So, see . . . I've had a
different life, anyway.

John:  So you're used to things like that?

Laura:  Yeah.  Now, especially, I am.  None of it really bothers
me. Driving down the road, that airplane . . . I see it crash;
it doesn't bother me.  I mean, we honestly, consciously, think
we've seen a plane crash, so we want to report it.  But
something else has really happened. I just knew to stop there,
and not pursue it.  To let it go. But, you know, most people
wouldn't see it that way.  It would really worry 'em, or freak
'em out for the rest of their lives.  I mean . . . I have had my
own . . . pockets of self-doubt throughout my life.  I'm human.
But I think they make you grow, and I think that's what we're
here for, anyway. I think what freaks everyone out, anyway, is
why they have an examination.  That's where everyone hangs up,
is why are they examined?  I've tried to figure that out, too.
It seems to be the first step . . . but, you know, in my book,
it only has to be one time.  You don't have to keep going back
and getting examined.  You don't have to. That's my own opinion.
My theory, I guess.

John:  Okay.

Laura:  The curiosity I have is what that thing is they have on
their head.  The rosette.  It's not a crown, but it's not . . .
a "third eye," let's say. It's a little higher than the "third
eye."  And it gleams.  I'd like to know what that is.  I'm not a
very practical person, you see, so it wouldn't be in me to come
up with a technical thing for that, anyway.

John:  Well, we'll see.  Maybe we can get some answers today.

HYPNOSIS SESSION February 7, 1993

John:  (Hypnosis has been induced; the time frame returned to
age sixteen.)  . . . And perhaps you'll come to a time when you
remember sitting up all night, wrestling with many feelings.
You can picture your surroundings . . . and be aware of the very
first thing that made that night different.  What do you become
aware of?

Laura:  I woke up.

John: When you woke up, what was the first thing you were aware
of?

Laura:  The wallpaper.

John:  What does the wallpaper look like?

Laura:  Beige.

John: Is the room illuminated in any way?

Laura:  Huh, uh.

John:  Okay.  Go on . . . .

Laura:  And I went in . . . (Sigh) . . . that was in the front.
(Whispering) . . . And I went in and sat in the chair where my
mother was.

John:  Okay, you sat in the chair . . . .

Laura:  I put the afghan on me, and snuggled up to get warm.  I
stayed up the rest of the night.

John:  What were your thoughts?

Laura:  I was really more worried about Mother.  It was about
her, really.  It was for her.

John:  Okay.  Was she sick, or was there something wrong?  What
had you experienced that caused you to worry?

Laura:  (Sigh).  It was like the sun.

John:  What was like the sun?

Laura: The orange.  The orange.

John:  And where is the orange?

Laura:  It was all over.

John:  All over?  Was it in her room?  The orange . . . ?  What
does that mean?

Laura:  We get very small, when we go in there.

John:  When do you get small?

Laura:  When we go into the orange.

John:  Did you see the orange when you first woke up?

Laura:  No, not when I really woke up.  It was . . . I could
scratch the wallpaper. (Laugh).

John:  What woke you up?

Laura:  I didn't think they'd come back!

John:  Who are "they"?  That you didn't think would come back .
. . ?

Laura:  My mother and sister.

John:  Your mother and sister were gone?

Laura:  Yeah.

John:  How did you know they were gone?

Laura: (Whispering) . . . In that orange light, you can see . .
. just the two, but . . . (Sigh).

John:  Did you see them leaving, or coming back?  Were they
going into the orange light, or coming out of it?

Laura:  Going in. And they're getting smaller.

John:  Getting smaller?  How do you account for that?

Laura:  I don't know.  They just are.

John:  Where do they go? Where are you when you see this?

Laura:  I'm behind them.  You see, it's dark.  The black is
them; the orange is the other.  They're silhouettes.

John:  Okay.  So, as you watch them, like silhouettes shrinking
into the orange light, what happens with you?  Be very aware of
what you do, and where you are, and what happens to you.  Where
are you?

Laura:  It's this thing, and you stand on it.  A circle-thing.
I'm alone on it.  Some light comes down from the top.

John:  Some light comes down . . . ?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  Like a tube. John:  Okay.  Do you see your
feet? What happens? Laura:  I'm going to be frozen.

John:  You're going to be frozen?  Is it cold? Laura:  No, but
they're going to freeze me. John: How do you know that?

Laura:  I just do.

John:  Who are "they?"

Laura: The workers.  The workers.

John:  Okay.  Where does this circular thing seem to be located?

Laura:  It's in the ship.

John:  Okay.  What does the rest of the area look like?  Is it
dark, or orange, or what?

Laura: Mostly, they keep the light on me, because I'm scared,
otherwise. (Entire sentence was whispered.)  The light comes
from the top, and it's mostly white, but there's some orange.

John:  And they keep the light on you?

Laura:  Uh, huh.  'Cause I'm afraid, otherwise.

John:  So, does a tube come down around you?

Laura:  I don't want it to.  I wish it wouldn't.

John:  Well, watch really closely and see what happens.

Laura: Oh, I don't think they're going to.  They're not going
to.

John:  Watch and see what really happened.

Laura:  I don't want to.

John:  (Assurances of well-being.)  It's okay.  You'll be safe .
. . be safe.  What do you feel, physically? Has something
happened to change the scene?

Laura:  I get to walk.

John: Are you alone, when you get to walk?

Laura:  Um . . . No.

John:  Who's with you?

Laura:  There's a bunch of people.  But I don't see 'em, really.
I don't know 'em.

John:  You don't know them; never seen them before?

Laura:  Huh, uh. John:  Never seen them since? Laura:  Huh, uh.

John:  How many?

Laura:  There are two.  They're busy.  They're walking up and
down the hall.

John:  Humans? Laura:  Uh, huh. John:  Do they look like they
know what they're doing?

Laura:  Uh, huh.

John:  Okay.  What does the hall look like?

Laura:  It's grated.  It's a workplace. John: Does it look
familiar to you? Laura:  Um . . . No.

John:  Okay.  So, you're walking.  And how do you know where to
walk?

Laura:  I just know. It's a five . . . a five . . .

John:  A five-sided room?

Laura:  Yeah.

John:  And so, where do you walk to?  Watch your feet, and just
watch yourself go.

Laura:  Hmm . . . I go into a room.

John:  Is there anybody behind

Laura:  Huh, uh.

John:  So, when you go into the room, do you put your hand on
the doorknob to open it?

Laura:  No.  (Laugh).  There's no doorknob.  You just walk up to
them, and they know.  They just let you in.

John:  And when you go into the room, what do you notice?

Laura:  Hmm . . . There's a white monkey.

John:  And where is this white monkey?

Laura:  Well, it's running up and down in the room, because . .
. because this is the room with all the animals.

John:  The room with all the animals . . . What other animals do
you see?

-[continued in part 4]-







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

                      Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 23:21:31 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:39:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 19:06:23 PDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:54:31 -0400
>Subject: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>Stefan & List,

>A link exchange would be great but for a newbie to this area I would
>really appreciate a people list so as to to appreciate more the goings
>on of the arguments bouncing around this list.

>For example:

>Fred Bloggs: name & address

>Fred's email and webpage

>Fred's direct interest in list
>     (e.g. just eaves-dropping, likes new siting reports)

>Fred's area of expertise in list contributions
>     (e.g. film analysis, abduction experiencer)

>Fred's affilliations that may be of a conflict of interest with list.
>     (e.g. collects tid-bits for publishing for profit - may have a )
>     (vested interest in sensationalizing events for monetary gain. )

>Fred's employment history of concern to the list
>     (e.g. airforce pilot, film technician, secret service agent)

>Pertinent comments (non-slandering and non-defamatory) by other list
>members who have dealt with Fred.

>Agreed reliability rating by the list members
>     ( say from  -5 for a known hoaxer or disnformant through to )
>     (            0 for an unknown quantity in this category to  )
>     (           +5 for utterly reliable informant/contributor   )
>     (              or specialist in the field                   )

>Other relevant categories

>I'll show you mine if you show me your's. Now there's a can of worms
>for you . . .  :-)

>Regards,

>Leanne Martin
>Computer Engineer @ WANG GLOBAL Australia


Leanne,

As always, your thoughts are well presented. In fact, your idea
about 'people facts' is a REALLY good idea and would be a
wonderful tool for the serious discussions here on the list.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure if there's a safe and fair way to
implement it.

As I've mentioned before, the list EBK provides is terrific.
Sometimes, the people participating aren't so terrific.

There seems to be a lot of emotion on the'net these days. While
I'd have no qualm about privately giving you my address and/or
phone number, the fact is you live in Australia; I the United
States. So, the risk would be minimal, at best (no offense). But
what about somone right in my own hometown? Do I trust them not
to go postal if I shoot down one of their deeply held and
cherished beliefs?

Seems risky.

Beyond that, the question of fairness beckons.

This 'people-list' you propose; who decides which person is
'trustworthy' and which are 'undesirables'?

For example:

Suppose those that feel Roswell is a hoax 'excommunicate'
everyone in support of it and give them a 'bad' people-facts
rating on your list. Then what if Roswell turns out to be real?
More to the point, wouldn't automatically disregarding
everything they have to offer actually DELAY finding out the
truth about Roswell, whether pro or con?

Unfortunately, all information (even bad information) should be
dealt with on its own merits without regard to the messenger
that brought it.

Why?

Well, consider the case of a man named DeForest. He was credited
with 'inventing' the amplification tube which allowed record
players, radios, talking pictures and a myriad of other sound
devices to be heard through speakers instead of headphones.

A pretty important event in the world of electronics, right?

However, his claim and his patent for the tube were challenged
in court because he could not, for the life of him, explain how
the damn thing worked! For better or worse, he had 'stumbled'
onto something that was revolutionary, even though he didn't
totally understand it.

Should his inability to explain what he KNEW to be true negate
the existence of his discovery? Granted, he had the device in
his hands as proof it existed; something even UFO believers
still find elusive. Which brings up a good point:

What would be used as the measuring stick for 'truth' when
giving people their 'ratings' for the list? After all, the
evidence in favor of the Roswell incident is just as compelling
as the evidence against it. Now, before everyone starts lighting
torches and storming through the village, consider this:

The airline industry maintains that flying is safer that
driving. As proof, they provide very concise data showing the
millions of miles traveled vs. loss of human life.

Pretty compelling stuff!

On the other hand, if you compare the millions of HOURS spent
driving vs. loss of human life, then the data looks much
different, indeed.

Which is correct? Who knows? And that's the point.

In all, I wish there was a way to implement the list you
describe, benignly. Unfortunately, like the aliens that no doubt
look down on us with shaking heads, I'm afraid it's beyond our
current state of development.


Live long and perspire,

Roger Evans
Producer/Director
MovieStuff    Houston, Texas    www.cyberjunkie.com/moviestuff





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

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:26:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:49:41 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:46:55 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


For a little perspective on the tone of ufological debate, we
might look at the past couple of issues of the NY Review of
Books. And no, not because there's been an exchange of letters
on abductions, following a foaming at the mouth review of two
abduction books.

Let's just skip that, and go to something really meaty, an
exchange of letters between two powerful figures in US foreign
policy during the past generation, William Bundy and Henry
Kissinger.

Heavy issues were at stake in this exchange. Heavier, in fact,
than most of the issues we discuss in ufology. The death of
millions of people in Cambodia and Vietnam during and after the
Vietnam war, and who was responsible for those deaths...serious
stuff, I'd say.

In fact, the disagreement between Kissinger and Bundy makes most
of the disagreements on this list look just laughable. If the
two men had written with even a hint of the personal attacks we
see here, their discussion might have gone like this:


Bundy: Kissinger is a murderer. He is personally responsible for
the deaths of millions of people. He planned the bombing of
Cambodia during the Vietnam war. That lead to the rise of the
Khmer Rouge, who then slaughtered millions of innocent
Cambodians.

Kissinger:  Bundy should talk. What a lying hypocrite! He's got
blood on his own hands, because he helped plan the Vietnam war
itself.


Now, maybe it would have been refreshing to see such polished
men of the world talk like that -- especially since I agree with
Bundy, and think Kissinger _was_ a kind of murderer -- but we
wouldn't have learned very much. So, much as I hate Kissinger, I
was fascinated to read his defense of himself on this and other
issues, and I was grateful for the sober and guarded tone of
both men's writing. I was able to concentrate on the meaning of
what they said, and on the evidence each presents for his point
of view. I felt like I'd been treated like an adult, and not
distracted by sarcastic personal attacks.

It's clear that Bundy and Kissinger don't exactly love each
other, and in private may even describe each other with all the
nastiness we see here on our list. But in public, they spared us
that. If ufologists practiced the same restraint, ufology would
be much better off.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                    'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 07:43:34 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:45:20 -0400
Subject: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?


Source: The IUFO Mailing List September 24

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg19023.shtml

Stig

*******

IUFO Mailing List

UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

From: "UFOSSI@ufossi.org"
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:14:35 +0000
Subject: IUFO: UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!


-> IUFO Mailing List

****RELEASE THIS UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN EVERYWHERE!****


***UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN****
ONGOING ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



THIS IS A UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN:
==============================
SEPTEMBER 24, 1998
10:51 PM THURSDAY
==============================
Official Statement From;
Billy Dee Founder Of
UFO Sky Searchers International (UFOSSI)
====================================

The following news release is an exclussive from UFOSSI by
permission from Donald Schmitt Top Investigator of the 1947 UFO
Crash at Roswell.

=============================================================

Don has told me their are many new things that have come out
surrounding the Roswell ongoing investigation's. I will inform
everyone as much as I possibly can and am permitted to
publically announce.

After the 19th of October, I will be available for interviews by
e-mail, from any one who wish's to ask me question's about the
ongoing Roswell investigation's. I may have some more
imformation at that time. But please understand, I will be
permitted to answer only a few question's and of how much I am
also permitted to say by Donald Schmitt in regards to the
Roswell investigation's.

The Roswell invistigation's that Don is involved with, are not
just going over old stuff. There is a lot of new things taking
place, and being a spokesmen for Don, I must respect his
direction's and guidelines. Think about it! I know a lot of
people are very excited about any new imformation about Roswell.

Now I am not trying to get everyone excited for nothing. There
is something on with the Roswell investigation's. Don told me
tonight, that several top Ufologists have been trying to get
answer's out of the research and investigative team. But as Don
said, "Don't worry Billy, they won't!" and Don has promised me
personally that UFOSSI will get the major news story on the
Roswell investigations and research in the future, BEFORE ANY
OTHER SOURCE OF NEWS! I am excited, to say the least.

And also keep in mind people! Because I am in the public eye,
and because several major news media's (CBS, CNN, ETC.) are at
times watching what UFOSSI knows and has, I am purposely being
kept in the dark by Don in regards to the ongoing Roswell
investigation's, for my safety, and so I am not being accused of
holding back secrets. All I know at this time. is that something
major will take place within a year or so, that will shake the
Roswell Ufo incident and cover-up to its foundation. Its that
big!

Be watching for further UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN up-date's about
Donald Schmitt's ongoing Roswell research and investigation's.

=============================================================

This news report may be reprinted, but only in full. No parts
of this news bulletin, including UFOSSI's header, signature
file, address, or mail trailer's may be removed or deleted from
the report.

UFOSSI and other designated organization's and certain people
retain exclussive rights to news and or imformation releases
from Don Schmitt. Anyone wishing to contact UFOSSI in regards to
this report may do so by writting to "BillyDee@ufossi.org".

Thank You

=========================================================

****UFO Sky Searchers International***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Our New Website
"http://www.eagle-net.org/UFOSSI"

To join or Un-Subscribe mail list
send your request to "UFOSSI@aol.com

Send Christian, Political and Personal Posts to
"BillyDee@ufossi.org"

Founder Billy Dee

UFO Sky Searchers
P.O. Box 91
Merrimac, Wis. 53561







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

                  UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 14:39:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:50:47 -0400
Subject: UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman

UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK

Saturday 24th Ocotber 1998

United Kingdom UFO Network special guest:

Stanton T. Friedman

Stanton will be answering your questions live in a moderated meeting
starting at 11pm (UK time) Saturday 24th October 1998.

Stanton will be connecting from New Brunswick, Canada.

Full connection details at foot of mail.

-- BIOGRAPHY --

Stanton Friedman is one of the leading UFO investigators with more
than thirty-seven years in the field. He has appeared on hundreds of
radio and TV programs including Larry King, Nightline, Unsolved
Mysteries, Art Bell Show and a previous guest on the UK.UFO.NW -IRC-
channel. He is probably one of the most well known ufologists in the
world.

Stanton Friedman is perhaps best known for his unrelenting research
into what has been termed the 'Cosmic Watergate'. He is the author of
Top Secret/Majic and along with Don Beliner, Crash at Corona.

---

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 to UK.UFO.NW 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

Select 'Live IRC chat' button.

-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. Below are a list of times you may find useful.

United Kingdom UFO Network world times.

Adelaide:       0730
Amsterdam:      midnight
Athens:         0100
Auckland:       2200 Sunday
Bangkok:        0500
Beijing:                0600
Berlin:         midnight
Brasilia:               1900
Budapest:       midnight
Cairo:          0100
Calcutta:       0330
Casablanca:     2200
Chicago:        1700
Copenhagen:     midnight
Dallas:         1700
Dublin:         2300
Havana: 1800
Helsinki:       0100
HongKong:       0600
Istanbul:       0100
Johannesburg:   midnight
Karachi:                0300
Lima:           1700
Lisbon:         2300
Madrid:         midnight
Manila:         0600
Montreal:       1800
Moscow: 0200
Nairobi:                0100
New Delhi:      0330
New York:       1800
Nuuk:           2000
Paris:          midnight
Perth:          0600
Pheonix:        1500
Reykjavik:      2200
Rio:            1900
Riyadh:         0100
Rome:           midnight
Santiago:       1800
Seoul:          0700
Singapore:      0600
Sydney:         0800
Tashkent:       0300
Tehran:         0230
Tel Aviv:       0100
Tokyo:          0700
Toronto:        1800
Vancouver:      1500
Zagreb:         1700


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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                          Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?

From: Gt McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 20:49:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:35:18 -0400
Subject: Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie?


>>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: The New Nazi-ET Lie!
>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 09:46:11 +0100

><snip>

>>All the evidence that I have got strongly suggests to both
>>myself, Bill Rose and the others associated with our research
>>that it was indeed the US Navy (Engineering Division) who were
>>most responsible for the early postwar sightings of metallic
>>discs which, in most cases, were operating well within the
>>boundaries of terrestrial technology. A gas turbine powered
>>XF5U-1, that AIR 100-203-79 suggest was operational in 1947/8,
>>would, according to several aviation writers have been able to
>>fly at very low speeds and would have had a flight envelope of
>>between 0-550mph....

>>A 'Project Sign' document in my possession indicates that the
>>USAF Intelligence people knew about tests of low aspect ratio
>>aircraft involved in 'boundary layer experiments' and that the
>>aircraft as built by none other than Chance-Vought.

>>Occasionally, new information on classified aircraft forces the
>>UFO community to look again at it's underlying raison d'=EAtre -
>>the theory of ET-human contact.

>Tim,

>What I can't figure out is how come silent-running >vehicles,
>invisible to radar, designed for atmospheric and space flight,
>capable of hovering and stationary and vertical flight, that
>reach tremendous speeds and acceleration (from 0  to 1500 knots
>in seconds), are able to outpace any known conventional craft
>and are almost invulnerable to enemy attacks have been kept in
>the cupboard for more than 50 years?

>Do you have any incentive on that?

>Serge Salvaille


Hello List and Serge,

Sorry about the screw up. I tend to write a proof before sending
the acutal message sometimes.

Okay, now my two bits worth.

First, the subject of the XF5U-1 or 'Flying Flapjack'. Vought
had built it after a proof-of-concept 'Flapjack' had been built
in 1942. This demonstrator was powered by Two 85 h.p. light
aircraft engines and fabric covered. It also was well known to
the aviation press at the time.

The XF5U-1 was mainly a Vought project with only a little Navy
funding, also it was a Piston engined aircraft with two Pratt &
Whitney R-2800's not turboprops. (I will get to this in a minute
but I'd much rather put my butt between two R-2800's of the
period than the Allison T40!).

Thanks to (Jet Fever) interservice rivalry for the latest
technology, the XF5U-1 did not fly, and was very publicly
scrapped in 1947.

As for the T40, it was a monument to why the large turboprop was
less than sucessful;Fuel problems, Propeller problems, Turbine
problems and too complex operating parameters led to the demise
of the T40.

I was used on many Navy projects the XFY-1 and the XFV-1 VTOL
(marginal, very marginal VTOL) fighters, the Convair R5Y
'Tradewind' flying boat, and others that usually were not
sucessful and in more than one case, ended up a smoking hole in
the ground.

All of the early Turboprops had problems, so did the jets, but
mainly due to the push of the Korean war in this country's quest
for speed the Jet came into its own - and pure jets became much
more (realtively speaking) reliable.

GT McCoy





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

                      Re: Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 12:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 16:53:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Russian 'UFO Crashes' Update


>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:27:42 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Russian UFO crashes updates

>I wonder how anyone could totally remove a crashed UFO that
>was longer than the CN Tower is tall from these remote Russian
>mountains.  No wonder nothing was seen in recent satellite
>images of the general area of the alleged UFO crash site.

>Kal's fragment looks very much like copper plumbing to me
>(two pipe pieces connected together with a 90 degree elbow
>fitting).  The fibers at one end seem to be pieces of pipe
>insulation.  Does this fragment look too Earthly to you
>too?

>Nick Balaskas

Nick,

I wouldn't place any credence on this piece of "evidence" that
Korff supposedly received somehow from the alleged downed
Russian UFO as having been connected with the alleged event.
This is because in his first book, Korff claimed that (when he
was 18 years old) Marcel Vogel entrusted to him half of his
metal sample he had analyzed from the Billy Meier case. Korff
stated that he received the sample from Vogel in May of 1980.
However, Vogel's analysis of it occurred in 1979, as noted in
Genesis III's video tape describing Vogel's findings, and it was
the very day after his lengthy analysis that the particular
sample mysteriously disappeared (as noted in Kinder's _Light
Years_, p. 251). So Vogel could not have given part of his
precious sample to Korff when it no longer existed. Moreover, in
both Kinder's book and Wendelle Stevens' books, this sample is
described as being silvery-golden in hue, not just the silvery
color of solder as Korff had indicated.

Instead, the piece of alloy that Korff had analyzed in his book
appears indeed to have been a chunk of just ordinary solder,
which Korff had acquired, but not acquired from Marcel Vogel.

It is simple enough to fabricate something from earthly
materials and say you received it for analysis by someone close
to the UFO scene, then show that the analysis proves it is of
earthly origin, and then hope to receive kudos from the
ufological community for having exposed a hoax. Obviously, in
any such instance, the complete story of how the analyst
obtained the sample has to be first rigorously verified,
especially if the claimant is noted for disrespecting the truth.

Jim Deardorff
Corvallis, Oregon
E-mail: deardorj@proaxis.com
Home page: http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                        Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?

From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 16:28:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:15:20 -0400
Subject: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?

Hi List-members,

Has anyone .gif or .jpg pictures for sending to me from the
KGB-UFO-program on TNT in view of the airplane & UFO encounters
at the beginning of the program?

Thanks

Werner










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

                               KGB Files Show

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 17:52:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:28:18 -0400
Subject: KGB Files Show


>From: Michel M. Deschamps <739411@ican.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Files Show
>Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 17:51:15 -0400

<snip>

>Nick

>I've seen those photos. They appeared in Volume 9, number 6 of
>UFO Magazine (UK) and later, in Volume 13, number 6. The
>photographs were purporting to show _an alien device_ which had
>been shot down by a Soviet ground-to-air missile. But in Volume
>13, number 6, you can clearly see that it was a prop built by
>construction workers to be used in a Polish film, "On Silver
>Globe". See March/April 1995 issue of UFO Magazine, pages 31 -
>33.

>Michel M. Deschamps

Thank you very much for this information Michel.

I do not have a copy of the March/April 1995 issue of UFO
Magazine. Does the article on pages 31-33 mention where else
these photos were published or who may have promoted them as a
real UFO in the West?  Does it also say anything about the
ill-effects witnesses are said to have suffered when they
approached this landed "UFO"?

It is important to know about this and other Russian/Soviet UFO
pictures which are not real UFOs but are promoted as such.

Thanks again.  Nick





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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:10:45 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:34:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 22:34:54 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:11:38 PDT
>>Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:13:36 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

>Since you don't doubt the poster's good intentions, then it's
>clear to me that you DO understand his or her intent. So why
>make an issue of it?

I'm afraid I don't follow you here.

>THAT is EXACTLY the sort of activity, I feel, most people on the
>list would like to see as a thing of the past. Beyond that, are
>you suggesting that people should be excused for being rude just
>because the subject of UFOs is a passionate topic for them?

Please reread what I have written - more than once - on the
necessity of civility in UFO (and, one hopes, all human)
discourse. My definition of "rude" discourse kicks in when one
poster calls another a jackass, a Nazi clone, or a charlatan, or
otherwise indulges in rhetoric that demonizes one's opponent.
But there are many grades of vigorous, aggressive debate and
rhetoric that I - and, I suspect from recent postings responding
to yours, most - would find acceptable, even entertaining and,
more important, illuminating.

>After all, this is not an oral debate, subject to sudden
>impulses and unintended breaches of civility due to the 'heat of
>the moment'. Anyone participating in this listing must sit down
>and THINK about what they are going to write. Or, at least, they
>SHOULD.

Absolutely.


>And finally, no one is suggesting that differences of opinion or
>open disagreements is unique to ufology. And no one wants
>everyone to think and talk the same way. On the contrary, the
>need to hear the nuances in each person's view makes 'getting
>rid of the static' even more important.

Agreed.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:31:30 -0400
Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


List:

This paper was written in response to a James Oberg paper which
won an award from a committee of UFO skeptics sponsored by a
whiskey manufacturer. It was subsequently published in the
British weekly New Scientist.

The rejoinder was accepted for publication but never printed,
apparently because of a strike which shut the magazine down that
fall. It later appeared in Frontiers of Science (November/
December 1980). It is a useful corrective to Oberg's
characteristically one-sided, self-serving view of things.

Ron Westrum, Ph.D., was and is a professor of sociology at
Eastern Michigan University.

---

The Promise Of Ufology
by Ron Westrum


In its October 11, 1979, issue New Scientist printed an article
by James Oberg entitled "The Failure of the `Science' of
Ufology." This article had won the 1000-pound New
Scientist/Cutty Sark Whiskey prize. In it Mr. Oberg argues that
although "ufology" may sound scientific, there is really very
little scientific about it. His essay contains many perceptive
and useful comments, but falls short of a truly objective
portrait of an area of study about which he appears to have some
serious misconceptions.

As a sociologist who has been professionally involved for
several years with UFO groups and UFO research, I believe it is
important to clear up some of the confusion to which Mr. Oberg
contributes and to give a more fair and judicious picture of the
nature of ufology.

Let me summarize Mr. Oberg's arguments briefly. Ufology, he
argues, has failed to become a science because its practitioners
are unwilling to abide by the rules of the scientific method.
They are careless about the authenticity of the cases they
publish and they have little interest in developing falsifiable
theories. Given these general observations, he feels that
ufology cannot be even a protoscience, since an indifference to
such issues automatically deprives it of any kind of scientific
status. He supports these contentions with examples of
exaggerated claims made mostly by the press but also by some
ufologists.

Let us consider how much truth there is in Mr. Oberg's claims.

What Is Ufology?

Ufology is the study of UFO sightings, a fraction of which
remain unexplained after competent investigation. It should be
observed that the great majority (about 90%) of reported "UFO
sightings" turn out to be explainable in terms of natural or
manmade phenomena. A small percentage are hoaxes.

The competent ufologist is therefore conversant with a wide
range of phenomena which can give rise to spurious reports. The
true objective of ufological activity, however, is the search
for cases which resist explanation. The careful study of these
cases and their patterns is the focus of ufology. If there is to
be any significant contribution to our knowledge of the universe
from ufology, it will come from such study of "unexplained"
cases.

Mr. Oberg claims that ufologists assert that such cases must be
the result of some exotic cause since they are unexplained. He
argues that in fact they are a hodge-podge which scientists have
no real need to explain. This is a serious misconception. It is
_patterns_ among unexplained cases which make them significant
to ufologists. Serious ufologists are not particularly
interested in collections of cases which bear little relation to
one another.

Science in general is a well-institutionalized activity in
Western society. Ufology is not. Ufologists seldom claim that
what they do is science; they do not possess a body of well-
tested principles and laws, verified by dozens of replicable
experiments.

Ufology is a proto-science, an area of study which aspires to
become a science but which, its practitioners recognize, has a
considerable distance to travel before this goal will be
reached. Major involvement of scientists in UFO research is a
recent development, less than a decade old. The amateur origin
of ufology is evident in the unevenness of ufological work. Some
researchers, particularly those with technical training, do
good, solid, careful work. Others pursue research in such a
casual manner that their results are worthless. One can, as does
Mr. Oberg, lump them all together and make the serious
researchers responsible for the faults of the non-serious ones,
or point to certain well-known gaffes and assert that these
demonstrate the unscientific quality of the field. The real
point, however, is not what the worst ufologists do, but what
the best do: is there good ufological practice as well as bad?

To respond to this question, we must confront two more serious
misconceptions on the part of Mr. Oberg. The first of these is
his assertion that most ufologists have a "total disregard for
the authenticity of evidence." This assertion, while dramatic,
merely demonstrates Mr. Oberg's lack of acquaintance with his
subject matter. He is apparently unaware that the great majority
of exposures of mistakes and hoaxes are the work of ufologists
and that debates over the authenticity of cases fill the pages
of ufological publications.

Even more serious is Mr. Oberg's misconception that "ufologists
reject the concept of `falsifiability' of scientific theories."
Ordinarily, of course, theories them- selves are not considered
falsifiable but rather hypotheses derived from them.
Nonetheless, if it were true that ufologists were unconcerned
about the falsifiability of hypotheses, Mr. Oberg's assertion
that ufology cannot be even considered a proto-science might
have some merit.

To demonstrate the falsity of his contention one has only to
open the _UFO Handbook_ (1979) written by Allan Hendry of the
Center for UFO Studies. Here one finds careful critical
examinations of data, hypotheses tested -- sometimes verified
and sometimes proven wrong -- and theories scrutinized. Can it
be that Mr. Oberg knows so little about ufology that he has
never heard of such eminently falsifiable hypotheses as
"orthoteny," the "Wednesday phenomenon," the "law of the times"
or the "inverse population density" hypothesis?

All of these had been examined (and in some cases rejected) in
the light of data of which Mr. Oberg appears unaware. That this
process is not yet institutionalized in refereed journals is
symptomatic not of ufology's unscientific aims, but rather its
nascent state.

What Can Be Learned from Ufology?

The most obvious answer to this question is that ufology may
reveal the existence of new natural phenomena. A great many
sightings investigated by ufologists appear to be natural
phenomena similar to the controversial "ball lightning." Since
the existence of this latter is still questioned by some
persons, it is evident that much remains to be discovered about
the properties of these plasmalike manifestations. Our main
evidence for them, however, is human testimony. Their transitory
and frightening nature usually allows them to escape the camera.
Even Philip Klass, the most prominent critic of ufology, feels
these phenomena should be more carefully studied, as he
recommends in his book UFOs -- Identified (1968).

The more exotic motive for studying UFO sightings is the
possible detection of artifacts of non-human intelligence. Even
after the "plasma" UFOs are eliminated from the "unexplained"
category, there still remains a residue of cases which include
features strongly suggestive of non-human intelligent origin.

Is it sensible to believe that artifacts of non-human
intelligence could reach our atmosphere? A priori speculation on
this issue is valuable. Ultimately, however, to use the phrase
of Albertus Magnus, "in these matters only experiment makes
certain." Looking through the UFO literature and finding
hundreds of cases with alleged physical effects, "humanoid"
sightings and kidnappings, it is difficult to avoid the feeling
that these are matters which ought not to be dismissed out of
hand, but should be carefully investigated.

Huge sums have been proposed to construct radio telescope arrays
to detect signals from intelligent life in distant solar
systems. One of them, Project Cyclops, was to have cost some
$116 _billion_. If we can consider this type of funding to
detect possible signals from life in distant star systems, we
can certainly contemplate spending more moderate sums to
investigate alleged manifestations of such life in our own
atmosphere.

Such research might present some problems not ordinarily met
with in the natural sciences. The object of investigation, after
all, could be intelligent -- even more intelligent than we are
-- and contrary to what many people simplistically assume, might
well engage in activities difficult for us to interpret.

One of the characteristics of intelligent life is its ability to
display strategic behavior. This might not necessarily make a
visit to the United Nations the first priority. As a sociologist
I am well aware of the difficulties of understanding human
behavior. The possible complexities of the behavior of
extraterrestrial intelligent life stagger the imagination.

Nonetheless, the potential payoffs from such research would make
it seem well worth the effort, if not indispensable. As an
intelligent species aware of the possibility of life elsewhere
we have no alternative but to be involved in ufology. The only
question is whether such research will be carried out with
adequate funds and scientific talent. Ufology has not failed, it
has just begun. Our effort should be not to stifle it, but to
push it further along the path from proto-science to scientific
discipline.








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

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:18:36 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 21:09:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 22:34:54 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:11:38 PDT
>>Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:13:36 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

>>Postings like this always puzzle me.  Though I do not doubt for a
>>moment the poster's good intentions, it's never clear whether he
>>or she objects to _all_ disagreement or simply to the sort of
>>dissent that sinks to slurs and ad hominems.

>>It's not even clear, since typically the distinction is not made,
>>whether the poster recognizes such a distinction even exists.


I'm not puzzled, just slightly intimidated.

If that's the intention of the mudslinging, it has succeeded. I
resent being "lectured to" by the likes of such people. Their
rantings and ravings come across as character flaws, not
scientific debate. I came here to learn, to understand better,
and it does become increasingly difficult to refrain from
hitting the "delete" key automatically.

I certainly question the explanations given from people who seem
to need psychiatric evaluation more than myself. And, since I am
one of several thousand individuals from around the world who
are now classified as "abductees" and "experiencers," and whose
mental stability is _always_ in question, not only from those
who think they have all the answers in both camps, but those who
clearly have none of the answers and are just trying to make a
buck, I would like to get back on track.

So, here's a question that you can latch onto, if you like. How
many of you believe that in 1954 a child of 9 would be capable
of "making up" _all_ of the nitty-gritty details we have been
discussing with regard to The Roswell Incident?

That should be some interesting questions to the fore. Let's
talk.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:28:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 20:52:14 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:44:06 PDT

>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

>><snip>

<snip>

>>Remove me from the list, please. Obviously, I'm not worthy.

>So Bob Todd has taken his marbles and gone home with
>them.

As usual, Clark assigns to my statements the most demeaning
interpretation possible in the hope it will produce a nasty
response against which he can rail, all the while pretending to
be the very model of the civilized discourse he claims to love
so much. In short, his interpretation is little more than a
vehicle intended to provoke a nasty response, and nothing more.
The intent is clear, and it invalidates his interpretation as
nothing more than a manipulative technique. As such,
it is not worthy of a response.

Nevertheless, I see no point whatsoever in continuing a debate
on the Roswell myth. If Clark and others want to believe an
alien spaceship crashed in New Mexico in July of 1947, I
couldn't care less. The debate is pointless. And I otherwise see
no reason to subject myself to Clark's snotty, snooty,
holier-than-thou insults just to please him. If Clark wishes to
interpret my withdraw from the debate as taking my marbles and
going home for a good snit, so be it. But know that Clark has an
agenda, and that he is a propagandist is every sense of the
word.

Likewise, any attempt to chase the charlatans and con men from
the UFO field is just as pointless. It can't be done, and I no
longer intend to waste my time trying. It simply doesn't matter
to me. I've wasted more than enough time on Roswell and the
Roswell con men. It's long past time to move on to something
productive for a change. And let me save Clark the trouble by
proclaiming myself that I am taking my marbles and going home
for a good snit, maybe two or three snits (they're cheaper by
the dozen).

>I guess the moral of the story is that some people
>can dish it out but they can't take it.

I can take anything Clark can dish out. But why would I _want_
to? It serves no purpose other than to entertain Clark, who
apparently has a lot of empty time on his hands.

Clark's provoking post clearly shows that he desires to continue
the exchange of insults. In fact, the _only_ purpose his posting
serves is to insult me, and to egg me on to respond to those
insults. Obviously, he _wants_ the nastiness to continue. While
this seems inconsistent with the righteous indignation he
expressed over my alleged use of ad hominem attacks (although he
has yet to explain how exposing the liars in the UFO field does
not help the field), I long ago accepted the fact that Clark is
an arrogant little hypocrite. He has demonstrated his hypocrisy
on this list numerous times in just the past several days.

So Clark can insult me all he wants, and pretend that I really
give a damn what he thinks of me. As hard as this might be for
him to learn, I didn't get involved with the UFO subject to gain
_his_ praise, or_ his_ approval, or wind up in and of _his_ (or
anybody else's) books. Stanton "I've Been To More Archives Than
Anybody Else In The World" Friedman just loves that kind of
stuff. I'm sure Clark has earned his gratitude by inserting his
name in strategic locations throughout his books. I wouldn't
know. I have two of Clark's books, but I haven't read either
one. Frankly, he is an excruciatingly boring writer, and I've
never found him to be terribly informative -- pretentious and
pompous, yes, but not very informative. I yawn just looking at
his books.

So, Clark can sling all the insults he wants. He can show us
what his brand of "civil discourse" really is like. He can show
us how he's superior to, and more sophisticated, and more
learned than all of us combined. Let's see him set the example
he wants everybody else to follow, but which, up until now, he's
had terrible difficulty following himself. Let him show us the
"noble" Jerome Clark. So far, all we've seen is his snotty,
snooty, sanctimonious side.

But don't expect a response from me. I mean, I'll be far too
busy having a snit or two. And after I've had my snits, I'll
move on to something far more productive than debating Roswell,
and satisfying Clark's enormous ego.

What a complete waste of time Roswell has been. The most I can
hope for is that those people who are keeping the myth alive
will waste even more of their time on it. I'm moving on.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm overdue for another snit. If I
don't have at least one snit every day, I'm cranky the whole
week.

Robert Todd
Waterboy






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

                      Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:01:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 22:28:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts


Dear Sirs and Madames,

As a true nuts-and-bolts sort of fellow, in the midst of all
this smarmy stuff about how relevant contactees and spiritualism
dovetail together, I wish to iterate the

Fundamental Questions Of UFOs:

1) Are they indeed anomalous?

2) From where do they originate?

3) Why are they here?


Faced with questions like this, one tends to forget about
personalities, who forgot to email whom and so on.

I hope your UFO congress in Grassy Plains ,BC is a great
success. Likewise in Grassy Plains, New Jersey.

Please do not send me any more pictures of the happy faces in
the Holiday Inn in Grassy Plains; even if the girl is very
attractive.

I have three questions which demand answers.

They are listed above.

Everything else is tertiary (at best).

Quarternary (sp) Intentions

- Larry Hatch

PS: A 'Spell-Checker' program either refines or rejects the
input. The user never knows which!









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

                      Re: Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto

From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:21:45 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 22:05:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto


>From: Daev Walsh - Blather <daev@blather.net>
>Subject: Blather: Klaatu Barada Nikto
>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 23:54:01 +0100
>To: blather@lists.best.com

>Last weekend, the BlatherGHQ TV was accidentally powered-up and
>tuned on to *The Day The Earth Stood Still*, a 1951 extraterrestrial
>contact movie directed by Robert Wise and adapted by Edmund North
>from Harry Bates' 1940 short story, *Farewell to the Master*.

Hello All,

Daev had a very interesting post concerning the classic film
The Day The Earth Stood Still'. It is fascinating how this film
holds up even after all these years.

I wanted to correct however several of the cast credits. I
happen to have this film in my collection and as an aside, I did
a live interview with Director Robert Wise on this very film on
my old show 'UFOs Tonite!' which by the way (shameless plug!) is
available on audio tape. Mr. Wise had some very interesting
things to say about this movie.


>He conducts a rather civilised existence, befriending the widowed
>daughter of the family, Helen (Patricia Neal) - who has influential
>connections - and her young son Bobby (Frances Bavier),

Should read _Billy Gray_. Frances Bavier was in the film, but
you may better recall her as 'Aunt Bee' on the Andy Griffith
Show.

>while the
>world outside goes berserk searching for the 'monster'. Bobby leads
>Klaatu to Professor Barnhardt (Billy Gray),

Professor Barnhardt was classic actor _Sam Jaffe_ who you really
oldsters may remember from the 1930's classic 'Gunga Din' . Hope
my spelling is Okay.

>"the smartest man on
>earth". To cut a long story short, Klaatu demonstrates his power by
>neutralising out all electrical power world-wide, including cars and
>telephones. But no one is harmed - aircraft in flight and
>hospitals are unaffected. This is a display of Klaatu's (or rather his
>superiors' *miraculous* power.

Kind of makes one think of the 1965 NYC and Eastern Seaboard
blackout.

>Dave (daev) Walsh

>2nd October 1998
>daev@blather.net


Best;

Don Ecker
UFO Magazine

-- Never attribute to malice that which can be better explained
by stupidity!

Don Ecker
UFO Magazine
ICQ# 19828127








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:05:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 10:28:17 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs
>>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0300

>>I think a few corrections are in order here, Neil and Leanne

>>l. I first found the pictures taken in Ramey's office in about
>>1979 and had prints made then by the Ft.W ST. so it really isn't
>>correct to say they have been languishing for 51 years.Check the
>>Roswell Incident by Moore and Berlitz.

>>2. There were many front page newspaper articles on July 8,
>>l947, in Evening papers from Chicago West. There was a very
>>large article in the Los Angeles Herald Express which even had
>>Ramey's explanation. Journalists were calling Roswell from all
>>over the country and expanding the story with new input such as
>>names etc.

>>3. There is a video Recollections of Roswell which has testimony
>>from about 27 witnesses some of whom are dead. 105minutes long

>>4. There is an RAAF base yearbook which allows us to verify many
>>positions at the base.

>>Don't be fooled by the attacks by the debunkers and other arm
>>chair theorists.They tend to ignore testimony they can't deal
>>with as the USAF did.

>>I personally believe that being able to read the memo in Ramey's
>>hand would be a very imprtant breakthrough.

>>We are getting close. It isn't easy.

>>STF


>Stan,

>I note that the deciphering of the telegram indicates that it
>makes reference to a site near Magdalena. This would appear to
>lend support to the story told by Santilli's cameraman.  I don't
>think anyone specifically related a crash site to Magdalena
>before this.  Am I right?

>Bob


Sorry Bob,

The Plains of  San Augustin are indeed SW  of Magdalena and are
Discussed in "Crash at Corona". Barney Barnett's story took
place there. A Postmistress in Datil told me the wreckage came
through at night on big trucks to Magdalena. Remember Ray didn't
mention General McMullen until he had my book either.

In 1947 Magdalena was a thriving mining town and was the
railhead to which ranchers from the Plains and Southwest of
there drove their cattle. Once the mines petered out and the
railhead was closed, the town nose-dived.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 22:06:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 11:11:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT
>Fwd Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:31:30 -0400
>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>List:

>This paper was written in response to a James Oberg paper which
>won an award from a committee of UFO skeptics sponsored by a
>whiskey manufacturer. It was subsequently published in the
>British weekly New Scientist.

>The rejoinder was accepted for publication but never printed,
>apparently because of a strike which shut the magazine down that
>fall. It later appeared in Frontiers of Science (November/
>December 1980). It is a useful corrective to Oberg's
>characteristically one-sided, self-serving view of things.
>
>Ron Westrum, Ph.D., was and is a professor of sociology at
>Eastern Michigan University.

>---

>The Promise Of Ufology
>by Ron Westrum

>Let me summarize Mr. Oberg's arguments briefly. Ufology, he
>argues, has failed to become a science because its practitioners
>are unwilling to abide by the rules of the scientific method.
>They are careless about the authenticity of the cases they
>publish and they have little interest in developing falsifiable
>theories. Given these general observations, he feels that
>ufology cannot be even a protoscience, since an indifference to
>such issues automatically deprives it of any kind of scientific
>status. He supports these contentions with examples of
>exaggerated claims made mostly by the press but also by some
>ufologists.

 <snip>

List,

Obviously Mr. Oberg would say that infra-red doesn't exist
because he can't see it; air because he can't hold it in his
hands and love because it won't fit in a box for future study...

The 'science' of UFOlogy is in its infancy, just as the science
of electronics was when Benjamin Franklin was flying kites in
the rain with a death wish. In fact it may very well be that,
had Franklin realized just how dangerous a stunt he was pulling,
he might have abandoned such research and we'd still be posting
using another of his inventions, the Pony Express!

The obstacle faced when investigatng UFOs is unique among all
other areas of science and research:

Like Franklin, we don't exactly know what we're looking for!

In addition, terrestrial units of measure regarding physics and
predictable results don't always apply. Therefore, we must
always be on the lookout for signs of activity that might fit
the 'profile' of alien visitation not only as we understand it,
but as we CAN understand it. As such, we invariably fall victim
to our own expectations and, sometimes, desires.

Granted, such an atmosphere will generate zealots and die-hard
believers that can give UFOlogy a bad reputation. However, such
rigidness isn't unique to a 'non-science' such as UFOlogy....

Edison, for example, understood very little, if anything, about
alternating current. Direct current, with it's opposing
polarities and predictable 'push-pull' characteristics was
Edison's power source of choice.

Tesla, who had dedicated his life to the study of alternating
current, tried in vain to convince Edison of the advantages of
AC. Not only did Edison NOT want to hear it, he and his
operatives began a 'smear' campaign to convince the public that
AC was 'dangerous'. They almost succeded. Many power generation
stations in the upper northeast area were direct current as a
result of this 'misinformation' campaign. Only later, when the
'science' of AC was recognized, did the public accept
alternating current as commonplace.

As an aside, the New York prison system wanted Edison to design
an electric chair for them. As the story goes, Edison refused,
claiming they should go and talk to Tesla if they wanted
electricity that could 'kill'. Horrified, Tesla also refused. So
the New York prison system constructed their own electric chair,
still following Edison's suggestion for 'deadly' AC. The first
prisoner to get the juice suffered greatly as the alternating
current proved ineffective enough to actually finish him off,
despite several grisly tries. Ironically, it was the ultimate
application of DC current that did the trick!

Wasn't Edison a scientist?

In a fashion. By his own admission, he was more of an
'observer'. If he saw something that seemed to be a practical
solution to a current need, he would act. The end result was
hundreds of patents with his name on them. But he was limited by
what he understood to be true and his beliefs in the tangible;
most everything he produced was mechanical in nature with the
natural laws of physics well on his side. His development of the
phonograph and the motionpicture camera, while conceptual in
nature, depended heavily on long accepted principles of sound
and light. (Having George Eastman as a buddy didn't hurt,
either.)

But when faced with a 'new' science, one he didn't or couldn't
understand, he fell back to almost paganistic beliefs and
practices.

And Edison was a _smart_ man.

Mr. Oberg should feel lucky to be half that smart.

Hats off to Jerome Clark for providing us with a great piece of
writing! I did not re-post the entire article by Mr. Westrum
(due to length), but it is _well_ worth the read.

There _are_ witches, I say! There _are_!

Roger Evans
MovieStuff
Houston, Texas    www.cyberjunkie.com/moviestuff






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:57:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 11:07:09 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 07:43:34 +0200
>Subject: Ground-Breaking Roswell Research?

<snip>

>IUFO Mailing List

>UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>From: "UFOSSI@ufossi.org"
>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:14:35 +0000
>Subject: IUFO: UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!


>-> IUFO Mailing List

>****RELEASE THIS UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN EVERYWHERE!****


>***UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN****
>ONGOING ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



>THIS IS A UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN:
 ==============================
>SEPTEMBER 24, 1998
>10:51 PM THURSDAY
 ==============================
>Official Statement From;
>Billy Dee Founder Of
>UFO Sky Searchers International (UFOSSI)
 ====================================

>The following news release is an exclussive from UFOSSI by
>permission from Donald Schmitt Top Investigator of the 1947 UFO
>Crash at Roswell.

Thank God he got permission from Schmitt to release this. That
was sarcasm, of course. No grin because this really isn't funny.


>Don has told me their are many new things that have come out
>surrounding the Roswell ongoing investigation's. I will inform
>everyone as much as I possibly can and am permitted to
>publically announce.

Yes, and Schmitt told me many things too, such as he didn't work
at the post office, he had a master's degree, he was in the
witness protection program, he was going to be a regular on the
Morton Downey, Jr. radio talk show, that Burl Ives was very
interested in his work, that he was a medical illustrator, that
he was a DEA agent, that he was a law enforcement officer... but
I digress.

>After the 19th of October, I will be available for interviews
>by e-mail, from any one who wish's to ask me question's about
the >ongoing Roswell investigation's. I may have some more
>imformation at that time. But please understand, I will be
>permitted to answer only a few question's and of how much I am
>also permitted to say by Donald Schmitt in regards to the
>Roswell investigation's.

Any one want to bet that he _won't_ have any additional
information?

>The Roswell invistigation's that Don is involved with, are not
>just going over old stuff. There is a lot of new things taking
>place, and being a spokesmen for Don, I must respect his
>direction's and guidelines. Think about it! I know a lot of
>people are very excited about any new imformation about
Roswell.

But you'll just have to take my word for it because Don Schmitt
has sworn me to secrecy.

> Now I am not trying to get everyone excited for nothing. There
>is something on with the Roswell investigation's. Don told me
>tonight, that several top Ufologists have been trying to get
>answer's out of the research and investigative team. But as Don
>said, "Don't worry Billy, they won't!" and Don has promised me
>personally that UFOSSI will get the major news story on the
>Roswell investigations and research in the future, BEFORE ANY
>OTHER SOURCE OF NEWS! I am excited, to say the least.

Of course you not trying to get everyone excited for nothing.
That' why there is so much information in this post. Let's hear
it for Schmitt... he has found the EIGHTH crash site.

>And also keep in mind people! Because I am in the public eye,
>and because several major news media's (CBS, CNN, ETC.) are at
>times watching what UFOSSI knows and has, I am purposely being
>kept in the dark by Don in regards to the ongoing Roswell
>investigation's, for my safety, and so I am not being accused of
>holding back secrets. All I know at this time. is that something
>major will take place within a year or so, that will shake the
>Roswell Ufo incident and cover-up to its foundation. Its that
>big!

Don't forget the MIB Billy. They're the ones you really have to
watch.

> Be watching for further UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN up-date's about
> Donald Schmitt's ongoing Roswell research and investigation's.

<snip of a whole bunch of other nonsense>

For those who think that we should all get along in the UFO
field, here is the reason we can't. Don Schmitt lied to us in
the past. He lied about many things and continues to lie about
it today. If we were in an academic field at a university and we
learned that a colleague had lied to us about his credentials,
we would drive him from the field. We would not listen to a
thing he had to say because he had lied to us in the past and it
is clear that our friendship and support meant nothing to him.
But, here we are with this nonannoucement about what Schmitt has
accomplished in the last few weeks.

I fail to understand how we can look at what he says and believe
a word of it. I fail to understand why anyone would want to hear
what he has to say, given his history. You can bet that the
scientific community, and the reporters are well aware of his
past. They see something like this and they apply it to all of
us.

Look at this release carefully. It tells us nothing. It is a
transparent attempt to promote Schmitt... but since he is a
liar, how can we believe anything he says.

Yes, I know that there are those who don't like this. They
consider it mudslinging, but is it really? If the man lied, then
isn't this merely a telling of the truth.

How much longer are we going to put up with this sort of crap.

KRandle

Please note that I have the courage to sign my name to this. I
don't get my friends to attack Schmitt as he does to me.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 23:27:41 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 11:13:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters

>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:18:36 -0600

><snip>

>I certainly question the explanations given from people who seem
>to need psychiatric evaluation more than myself. And, since I am
>one of several thousand individuals from around the world who
>are now classified as "abductees" and "experiencers," and whose
>mental stability is _always_ in question, not only from those
>who think they have all the answers in both camps, but those who
>clearly have none of the answers and are just trying to make a
>buck, I would like to get back on track.

In the paragraph I snipped above you mentioned a "scientific
debate." Where is your evidence, scientific or otherwise, that
the "mental stability [of experiencers] is _always_ in
question"? Even skeptics like the late psychologist Richard
Spanos have conceded that mental stability isn't the basic issue
at hand.

>So, here's a question that you can latch onto, if you like. How
>many of you believe that in 1954 a child of 9 would be capable
>of "making up" _all_ of the nitty-gritty details we have been
>discussing with regard to The Roswell Incident?

And what nitty-gritty, agreed upon details are those, exactly
(Glenn Dennis's, Jim Ragsdale's, Gerald Anderson's, Frank
Kaufmann's, Frankie Rowe's)? Is there any convincing scientific
evidence that the same aliens who allegedly clumsily collided
with one another in 1947 and subsequently crashed to earth are
the same greys, capable of passing through solid objects, who
are reportedly responsible for today's alleged abductions?

Do you have any _evidence_ of your own (or anyone else's)
experience that directly dates from 1954, as opposed to a much
later anecdotal memory of same -- however recovered?

>That should b[ring] some interesting questions to the fore.
>Let's talk.

>Sue


Interesting indeed. All that remains for a scientific debate is
scientific evidence from your end. Not a memory, not an anecdote
nor an allegation, but evidence.

When you're ready to talk, so am I.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 10:20:55 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 11:40:44 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings


>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:28:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 10:44:06 PDT

>>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:32:02 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:50:24 -0400
>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings
>>>>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 98 11:38:25 PDT

>>>Remove me from the list, please. Obviously, I'm not worthy.

>>So Bob Todd has taken his marbles and gone home with
>>them.

>As usual, Clark assigns to my statements the most demeaning
>interpretation possible in the hope it will produce a nasty
>response against which he can rail, all the while pretending to
>be the very model of the civilized discourse he claims to love
>so much. In short, his interpretation is little more than a
>vehicle intended to provoke a nasty response, and nothing more.
>The intent is clear, and it invalidates his interpretation as
>nothing more than a manipulative technique. As such,
>it is not worthy of a response.

I find it hilarious to read Waterboy Todd whining about having
his statements given "the most demeaning interpretation
possible." Todd is the master of the technique. My
interpretation of his motives is, however, one that will have
occurred to just about every list reader who read Todd's last
rant and the demand at its close that he wanted to be taken off
the list. Good to see, though, that he didn't really mean it.
One would hope it means that he doesn't believe the other
foolish, mean- spirited things he says.

>Nevertheless, I see no point whatsoever in continuing a debate
>on the Roswell myth. If Clark and others want to believe an
>alien spaceship crashed in New Mexico in July of 1947, I
>couldn't care less. The debate is pointless. And I otherwise see
>no reason to subject myself to Clark's snotty, snooty,
>holier-than-thou insults just to please him. If Clark wishes to
>interpret my withdraw from the debate as taking my marbles and
>going home for a good snit, so be it. But know that Clark has an
>agenda, and that he is a propagandist is every sense of the
>word.

Now, hold on, guy. I thought I was a bunkum artist, a Nazi
clone, a true believer, and God knows what all else. (For all I
know, you believe I'm complicit in the Kennedy assassination.)
How does "propagandist" fit in here? Or are you just getting
desperate for fresh insults?

>Likewise, any attempt to chase the charlatans and con men from
>the UFO field is just as pointless. It can't be done, and I no
>longer intend to waste my time trying. It simply doesn't matter
>to me. I've wasted more than enough time on Roswell and the
>Roswell con men. It's long past time to move on to something
>productive for a change. And let me save Clark the trouble by
>proclaiming myself that I am taking my marbles and going home
>for a good snit, maybe two or three snits (they're cheaper by
>the dozen).

No, guy, I think you're working yourself into a full- blown
tantrum. Must be nice, though, to live in a world in which
one's views are so manifestly correct that only "con men"
presume to disagree with them.

>So Clark can insult me all he wants, and pretend that I really
>give a damn what he thinks of me. As hard as this might be for
>him to learn, I didn't get involved with the UFO subject to gain
>_his_ praise, or_ his_ approval, or wind up in and of _his_ (or
>anybody else's) books. Stanton "I've Been To More Archives Than
>Anybody Else In The World" Friedman just loves that kind of
>stuff. I'm sure Clark has earned his gratitude by inserting his
>name in strategic locations throughout his books. I wouldn't
>know. I have two of Clark's books, but I haven't read either
>one. Frankly, he is an excruciatingly boring writer, and I've
>never found him to be terribly informative -- pretentious and
>pompous, yes, but not very informative. I yawn just looking at
>his books.

Ah, yes, Waterboy as literary critic. Let's see now. Besides
being a charlatan, a hypocrite, a liar, a Nazi clone, and a
true believer, I stand accused of being an "excruciatingly
boring writer" -- by someone who by his own admission has not
read my books! I think here we have the Todd approach in a
nutshell. And we're supposed to take this guy _seriously_?

With much amusement,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                      Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:20:50 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 11:36:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts


>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:01:50 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>Dear Sirs and Madames,

>As a true nuts-and-bolts sort of fellow, in the midst of all
>this smarmy stuff about how relevant contactees and spiritualism
>dovetail together, I wish to iterate the

>Fundamental Questions Of UFOs:

>1) Are they indeed anomalous?

>2) From where do they originate?

>3) Why are they here?

Larry,

If I were a professional philosopher, I'd no doubt have an easy
phrase with which to respond. Since I'm not, let me put this
way: Questions 2 and 3 basically require a positive response to
question 1. Otherwise, they're seemingly meaningless, at least
in a nuts and bolts way.

In other words, they only make 'sense' if the response to your
first question is something along the lines of "Mighty
anomalous, yes, therefore they must be ships from outer space,"
now let's ask where they're from and why.

Put another way, you've answered the first question to your own
satisfaction, then followed it with two 'questions,' any answer
to which can
only confirm your 'answer' to the first one.

>Faced with questions like this, one tends to forget about
>personalities, who forgot to email whom and so on.

If I were Jerry Clark I would say don't you mean questions like
"these"? The
who/whom issue I refuse to touch with a 10-ft. pole.

<snip>

>I have three questions which demand answers.

>They are listed above.

>Everything else is tertiary (at best).

>Quarternary (sp) Intentions

>- Larry Hatch


It's not good form to ask unanswerable or loaded questions and
"demand" an answer to same.

Because you might not get one.

But since you did ask, here are my answers:

1) Yes, UFOs are indeed anomalous and therefore they are
spaceships from another planet.

2) Where are they from? Why Zeta Reticuli, of course!

3) Why are they here? Haven't you read The Threat by David
Jacobs? To take over the planet (and your 401k), you ninny!

Any more questions?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:31:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 18:36:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:57:07 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 07:43:34 +0200
>>Subject: Ground-Breaking Roswell Research?


><snip>

>>IUFO Mailing List

>>UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>From: "UFOSSI@ufossi.org"
>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:14:35 +0000
>>Subject: IUFO: UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>->IUFO Mailing List

>>****RELEASE THIS UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN EVERYWHERE!****

>>***UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN****
>>ONGOING ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


>>THIS IS A UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN:
> ==============================
>>SEPTEMBER 24, 1998
>>10:51 PM THURSDAY
> ==============================
>>Official Statement From;
>>Billy Dee Founder Of
>>UFO Sky Searchers International (UFOSSI)
> ====================================

>>The following news release is an exclussive from UFOSSI by
>>permission from Donald Schmitt Top Investigator of the 1947 UFO
>>Crash at Roswell.

<snip>

Hi Kevin,

I wouldn't put much stock into anything that this breathless
director from UFOSSI had to say. Looks to me like he/she is all
pumped up by self importance. Note the reference to CNN, NBC
etc. being after him/her for information.

It doesn't take any time to come up with a name for some
organization, slap up a web page, make yourself the director and
then make "official" statements.

The whole thing reads pretty childish to me.


Stig usually comes up with some pretty interesting stuff, but it
must have been a slow day to have posted this one.

Yours in wonderment,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                        Listen The BBC World Service

From: ARUFON - Croatia <9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 17:04:36 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 18:27:40 -0400
Subject: Listen The BBC World Service


People I have just sent this for ARUFON Hamradio Group
(arufon@aol.com) so I am sending also to everyone else what I
have just intercepted: AGETI SSI


Hello for the ARUFON gang!!!

I have returned this morning from the Rijeka where I have done
UFO lecture...It was very good and the debates were excellent...

Now I am just listening BBC World Service via short wave (12,095
MHZ) and here is 14:12 GMT UTC time...

On BBC here is again programme about Ufology and they have
placed in the studio the great panel of ufologists and scientsts
who are debating about Ufology and other thinga. I am just
recording the programme. Now they are also talking about Peter
Sturrock and his statement in June from INternational panel of
scientist. The whole bunch of guys are debating about UFOs and
conclusion from Standford Universtity...

Tune to BBC World Service. It seems that the BBC is giving more
and more of their time towards Ufology in the recent time... It
is very ineresting to monitor this media as  Ufology progress
towards mainstrem debate...

I am recording the programe and I will try to make short review
with the list of the guest who were there when it will be
over...

I hope that BBC is re-broadcast this great programme which I am
listening right now...

NOTE: BBC World Service is also broadcasting via satellites...


73 de 9a4ag
04th of October 1998. / 14:15 GMT

Greetings from:

================================================================
AGETI - WORLD WIDE HAMRADIO GROUP
ANALYTICAL GROUP FOR EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL INFORMATIONS

----------------------------------------------------------------
MAIN SYSOP:                          |  POST ADDRESS:
9A4AG - GIULIANO MARINKOVICC - JIMMY |  ANTE STARCHEVICCA 25/C
                                     |  23000 ZADAR
                                     |  CROATIA, EUROPE
----------------------------------------------------------------
TELEPHONE:                           |  PACKET RADIO ADDRESS:
for international calls:             |  9A4AG@9A0YSI.SBK.HRV.EU
+385-23-430-970                      |
for calls inside Croatia:            |  E-MAIL ADDRESS:
023/430-970                          |  9a4ag@s55tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@clarc.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE MODE  |  AGETI WEB SITE ADDRESS (Created by 9a1cto):
                             |  http://public.srce.hr/~ivangloc/
AMPRn WW UFO channel 1947    |  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/3099/
                             |  9A4AG's HOME PAGE:
                             |  http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AGETI Is A Group Of Radio-Amateurs Who Are Exchanging World Wide
Informations, Views And News About The Extra-Terrestiral Subject!!!
==========================================================================






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                           Re: Snipers & Shooters

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:49:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:00:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Snipers & Shooters


>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 23:27:41 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters

>>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Snipers & Shooters
>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:18:36 -0600

>><snip>

<Additional snip>......

>>So, here's a question that you can latch onto, if you like. How
>>many of you believe that in 1954 a child of 9 would be capable
>>of "making up" _all_ of the nitty-gritty details we have been
>>discussing with regard to The Roswell Incident?

>And what nitty-gritty, agreed upon details are those, exactly
>(Glenn Dennis's, Jim Ragsdale's, Gerald Anderson's, Frank
>Kaufmann's, Frankie Rowe's)? Is there any convincing scientific
>evidence that the same aliens who allegedly clumsily collided
>with one another in 1947 and subsequently crashed to earth are
>the same greys, capable of passing through solid objects, who
>are reportedly responsible for today's alleged abductions?

Dennis,

A little off the subject here. I don't usually get involved in
the Roswell discussions [I leave that to you Americans to hammer
out] but in the above paragraph you mention Frankie Rowe and
Frank Kaufmann. Discovery Ca had the Mark Barasch (sp) segment
on last night about Roswell. I wondered then about Kaufmann and
Rowe's statements. I know about Glenn Dennis, Anderson and
Ragsdale etc., but what's the scoop on  Kaufmann and Rowe? Have
they recanted out tripped up or what?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                 Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

From: Bruce Lanier Wright <magnus@io.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 14:35:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:05:11 -0400
Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:28:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: David Rudiak's Pro-ET Roswell Postings

>As usual, Clark assigns to my statements the most demeaning
>interpretation possible in the hope it will produce a nasty
>response against which he can rail, all the while pretending to
>be the very model of the civilized discourse he claims to love
>so much.

Yah, well, that's as may be, but you *did* say you were leaving.
Change your mind?

> And I otherwise see
>no reason to subject myself to Clark's snotty, snooty,
>holier-than-thou insults just to please him.

You have quite a line in juvenile abuse yourself, sir.

> I have two of Clark's books, but I haven't read either
>one. Frankly, he is an excruciatingly boring writer, and I've
>never found him to be terribly informative -- pretentious and
>pompous, yes, but not very informative. I yawn just looking at
>his books.

Which you haven't read.  How did you determine the above, then?
Clairvoyance?

>So far, all we've seen is his snotty, snooty, sanctimonious side.

And you know, I've heard you've done worthwhile work, too,
but all you show around here is a high-schoolish snottiness
that would do the editor of a Star Trek fanzine proud.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                       Re: The Fort Worth Photographs

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 17:14:19 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:35:16 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:05:54 -0300

>>Stan,

>>I note that the deciphering of the telegram indicates that it
>>makes reference to a site near Magdalena. This would appear to
>>lend support to the story told by Santilli's cameraman. I don't
>>think anyone specifically related a crash site to Magdalena
>>before this. Am I right?

>>Bob

>Sorry Bob,

>The Plains of San Augustin are indeed SW of Magdalena and are
>Discussed in "Crash at Corona". Barney Barnett's story took
>place there. A Postmistress in Datil told me the wreckage came
>through at night on big trucks to Magdalena. Remember Ray didn't
>mention General McMullen until he had my book either.

>In 1947 Magdalena was a thriving mining town and was the
>railhead to which ranchers from the Plains and Southwest of
>there drove their cattle. Once the mines petered out and the
>railhead was closed, the town nose-dived.

>Stan Friedman

I suppose I should have tried to make myself clearer. Of course
I know where Magdalena is, and where the Plains are, since I
spent a week there talking to people. Basically, from the map I
have I'd say that Magdalena marks just about the Easternmost end
of the Plains of San Agustin, and the Plains proper are West of
Magdalena.

Now the Santilli cameraman's directions as forwarded to me in
our three-way phone hookup would place the crash site S and only
slightly W of Magdalena, and outside the plains proper, more in
the hilly country as you go downhill toward Socorro. He
described a "dirt track" leaving the main road and going South,
winding along the sides of hills and across canyons and leading
to the site some considerable distance from the main road. I
spent a lot of time looking for the road, and the rock gate
which marked it, and have to conclude that if it was ever there
it is not there today.

Barny Barnett's story seems to refer to something actually on
the plains, as I recall, but he may have been speaking more
generally than specifically in location.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 17:26:13 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:40:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

Regarding:

>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:14:09 -0400 (EDT)
>Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:51:40 -0400
>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk


Bob and list,

I never said that 'depth of field' and 'deep focus' are the same
thing.

I wrote:

'Still photographers around the world know that the wider the
lens, the deeper the focus and a 25mm lens is a VERY wide angle
lens.'

Obviously, the topic of discussion was maintaining focus which,
of course, works hand in hand with depth of field. The naturally
deep focus characteristics of a wide angle lens will provide a
greater area of usable focus than a longer, normal lens at the
SAME aperature. In your first response to my posting, you said
NOTHING about the normal lens having a faster maximum aperature,
though I would think such information vital to your stated
position.

Why wait till now to bring it up?

If indeed it was faster, then what did the cameraman say were
the exact aperatures available to him and on what lens
selection? You said there were three, I believe. I've yet to see
that information available from interviews. However, you may
have more information than the rest of us since you've been with
this from the beginning. How about sharing the exact lens info
with the list?

Beyond that, I beg to differ on several other points.

First, since you have a background designing optical equipment,
then you know that the smaller the format, the harder it is to
produce a wide angle lens with really dramatic characteristics.
Why? Because the smaller the format, the less image area is used
within the circle of illumination. The closer to the center you
get, the less 'bending' of the image occurs. Therefore, a 10mm
lens in the 16mm format will not distort the image the way, say,
a 28mm lens might on a 35mm still camera. While I do not doubt
the Roswell cameraman's claims of having used a 25mm lens, I do
doubt the reasoning behind it. The decision to use a 'normal'
lens instead of a 'wide' lens to avoid distortion would be valid
in a larger format such as 35mm where changes in short focal
lengths produce more dramatic results, but not in 16mm. Manual
or no manual, if he was an experienced camera man, he would know
this.

Second, the photographic realm is full of conceptual and
seemingly ambiguous terms that have no logical basis for their
names; 'fast' lenses, 'high' Fstops, 'slow' film. Perhaps it's a
'Texas' thing, but I've heard the terms 'angle of view' and
'perspective' used interchagably since I was knee high.
Obviously you consider this inaccurate, though I have no doubt
you knew what I was referring to. Calling it 'perspective' is no
more inaccurate than calling a wide angle lens 'short' when, in
fact, it might be physically longer than a normal lens.

Regarding such, you wrote:

>The normal lens for the camera was a 20 - 25mm, not a 10mm. The
>cameraman says he used the "normal" lens for most, and the
"tele" for some.

If I was gonna bust your chops for inaccuracy, I could easily
have made the interpretation that you were trying to describe a
funky 20-25mm zoom of some kind. Of course, this would have been
silly and most of the readers would not have known the
difference. But I understood the intent of what your were trying
to say and busting your chops would have been counterproductive
to the discussion. Likewise, the previous issue wasn't about
perspective or angle of view or what ever term you wish to deem
correct, so why sidetrack everything to point out a difference
in semantics that wasn't topic related?

By the way, the normal lens for the 16mm format is always 25mm. So your
statement that it was 20 - 25mm is ambiguous and incorrect, as any
cinematographer would know.

Also, you wrote:

>The lights would not have been overly bright in the room
>because the filming was not the FIRST priority, but a secondary
>consideration.

I'm sorry, but in my opinion, this just doesn't wash.

Reason this out:

Everyone is wearing containment suits (which they just happen to
have) and is concerned about 'infection' or 'contamination' or
something, so visibility is already compromised (as the
cameraman pointed out). Wouldn't it make sense that the doctors
would want as much visibility as possible to prevent things
like, say, _cutting_ themselves with a scapel through their
already clumsy gloves? Additional light would go a long way
toward that goal and would also have benefited the cameraman, as
well. To suggest that no one in the room other than the
cameraman needed more light is to ignore the natural needs of a
surgical environment, particularly that which deals with the
danger of contamination due to lack of visibility.

As I understand it, Super XX film was used. This film has an ASA
rating of 250. What can I say? ASA 250 is pretty darned fast for
close quarters in a small white room at a 60th of a second (for
24fps) and wide open. Pushed, it would reach ASA 500. Certainly,
with that much film speed, the cameraman could have stopped down
to pick up the badly needed depth of field on the 25mm lens he
so poorly chose. I mean, were they shooting in the DARK, for
pete's sake? If so, why?

And finally I wrote:

'...according to you the cameraman only pushed one roll but
still processed the others by hand, as well.'

I based that on your initial posting which read:

>Besides, only one label has the notation that it was push
>processed, and I don't think anyone has said all of the film
>was treated this way.

However, NOW you claim:

>This is not what I said. We only have photocopies of three of the
>film labels. Only one mentions push processing. That does not mean
>that it was the only roll for which this is indicated.

So which is it? Was only one roll pushed or were there others?
And if you have accurate info on this, why contradict yourself
in these two statements?

Beyond all this nonsense, my beliefs regarding the faulty wisdom
(and unliklihood) of trying to process and dry any motion
picture film in the field is unshaken, regardless of what army
manual Santilli and his camera crew may have consulted. The
cameraman was supposed to be experienced, so why is he going to
follow a manual when the methods described would obviously
produce such bad results? And what chapter? The one covering
unexpected documentation of alien dissection in an almost dark
room while wearing a restricting containment suit?

Please.

In closing, let me say that I have no intention of playing
semantic "king of the hill" with you. In addition, I find your
attitude about 'newcomers' a bit suspect.

What we need are facts like:

What were the focal lengths of the three lenses?
What were the maximum aperatures?
What was the footcandle reading in the room?
What kind of lights were being used? How many?
Was this a borrowed camera from the base or one that he used all
the time and was accustomed to? Did he keep it? (After all, he
kept the film!)
How many rolls WERE pushed? How many stops?

If these are the sorts of things that you know and can prove,
then share them all at once. Don't drag them out, one at a time,
from your coveted bag of tricks just to stay 'king of the hill'
when cornered in a discussion. Also, your self acknowledgement
as a 'rude, arrogant SOB as everyone here can tell you!'is
hardly an excuse for actually being a rude, arrogant SOB when
someone is trying to contribute to the list. It may be colorful,
even entertaining, but it hardly gives your arguments more
weight.

I look forward to the data.

Later,

Roger Evans






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 4

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:31:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT

I thank Jerome Clark for introducing the following paper to this
list. It does help to accentuate the modern day failure of the
'science' of ufology by failing to live up to its 1980 title:
"The Promise of Ufology".

>This paper was written in response to a James Oberg paper which
>won an award from a committee of UFO skeptics sponsored by a
>whiskey manufacturer. It was subsequently published in the
>British weekly New Scientist.

The above is typical Jerome Clark revisionism of history
presented as if factual. The award was composed of a panel of
scientists chosen by and sponsored by the NEW SCIENTIST magazine
which solicited any and all entries. One of the non-winning
entries, rumor has it, was by the famous nuclear physicist
Stanton T. Friedman who reads this list. Maybe he would be
willing to post his non-winning entry for the edification of the
list? The award money came from Cutty Sark. The contest had
nothing to do with UFO skeptics or skeptical organizations as
implied by Jerome Clark's revisionist rendition above, but by a
respected science magazine.

>The rejoinder was accepted for publication but never printed,
>apparently because of a strike which shut the magazine down that
>fall. It later appeared in Frontiers of Science (November/
>December 1980). It is a useful corrective to Oberg's
>characteristically one-sided, self-serving view of things.

>Ron Westrum, Ph.D., was and is a professor of sociology at
>Eastern Michigan University.

>The Promise Of Ufology
>by Ron Westrum

<snip>

Very eloquently written, making many predictions as to the
future of the science of ufology, but unfortunately none of
which have come true in the two decades since Ron Westrum's
paper. As a matter of fact, Ron Westrum himself apparently is no
longer active in UFO matters in the last few years since his
co-authorship of the Roper Report.

Ron Westrum lended his status as a social scientist and
co-authored a much publicised report and survey: 'Unusual
Personal Experiences: An Analysis of the Data from Three
National Surveys' conducted by the Roper Organization and funded
by the Bigelow Foundation and known by the short name of 'The
Roper Report' in 1992. Besides Ron Westrum, Ph.D., co-authors of
the report were Budd Hopkins and David Michael Jacobs, Ph.D.

'The Roper Report' was torn apart as bad science and
unjustified conclusions, not only by the skeptical and
scientific community, but also later within the UFO community.

From 'The MUFON Journal', #303, July 1993, 'UFO Abduction
Survey: A Critique' by Robert L. Hall, Donald A Johnson and Mark
Rodeghier:


Excerpt:

'Why Raise A Fuss?'
Any social scientist who understands survey research and
questionnaire design will immediately recognize the obvious
flaws in the H&J study. What happens, then when such research is
published and promulgated widely? Bluntly put, we lose
credibility. For many years, we who believe that UFOs are a real
and important phenomenon have faced difficulty getting many
scientists - physical, biological, and behavioral - to pay
serious attention to the phenomenon. Some scientists have taken
a personal interest but been unwilling to be publicly identified
with the subject for fear of ridicule. Others have been
closed-minded skeptics who refused even to take a serious look
at the evidence, much like the astronomers who refused to look
through Galileo's telescope. They 'knew' the telescope was
deceptive because it showed things that were inconsistent with
current scientific knowledge."


I re-typed the entire concluding paragraph to point out two things:

1. Ron Westrum's paper written in 1980 "The Promise of Ufology"
has not lived up to what ufology has delivered since then. (And
that includes Ron Westrum himself).

2. The objections raised by James Oberg in his paper are still
valid today. Even in the ufologists' condemnation of the Roper
Report, co-authored by Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, Ph.D., and
Ron Westrum, Ph.D., they still employ old arguments that are
more appeals to the ufo gallery and readership than consist of
any real logic as pointed out in James Oberg paper.

Another excerpt from the same article by Hall, Johnson and
Rodeghier:


"A bad piece or research has the opposite of the intended
effect: it reinforces the prior opiinion of our fellow
scientists that the whole UFO phenomenon is lacking in evidence
and that people who take it seriously are simply beings fools."


A further critique of the Roper Report can be found in JUFOS,
1992 for those interested, but for now back to Ron Westrum's
'The Promise of Ufology'.

>Major involvement of scientists in UFO research is a
>recent development, less than a decade old.

Since this was written in 1980, what major involvement by
scientists is Westrum referring? Hall, Johnson and Rodeghier in
their debunking of The Roper Report pointed out just the
opposite, ufology has had trouble getting science to look at the
alleged evidence. Sounds like maybe wishful thinking by Ron
Westrum to allude to some "major involvement of scientist."

>The amateur origin
>of ufology is evident in the unevenness of ufological work. Some
>researchers, particularly those with technical training, do
>good, solid, careful work. Others pursue research in such a
>casual manner that their results are worthless. One can, as does
>Mr. Oberg, lump them all together and make the serious
>researchers responsible for the faults of the non-serious ones,
>or point to certain well-known gaffes and assert that these
>demonstrate the unscientific quality of the field. The real
>point, however, is not what the worst ufologists do, but what
>the best do: is there good ufological practice as well as bad?

Unfortunately, ufology cannot use Ron Westrum as a good example.
He has not lived up to the 'Promise of Ufology' as examplified
by his co-authorship of The Roper Report.

>To respond to this question, we must confront two more serious
>misconceptions on the part of Mr. Oberg. The first of these is
>his assertion that most ufologists have a "total disregard for
>the authenticity of evidence."

Example: The Roper Report co-authored by social scientist Ron
Westrum, Ph.D.

>This assertion, while dramatic, merely demonstrates Mr. Oberg's
>lack of acquaintance with his subject matter.

But the advent of time is showing Oberg's prediction to be
closer than Westrum's promises to the real world reality of the
failure of ufology as a science.

>To demonstrate the falsity of his contention one has only to
>open the _UFO Handbook_ (1979) written by Allan Hendry of the
>Center for UFO Studies. Here one finds careful critical
>examinations of data, hypotheses tested -- sometimes verified
>and sometimes proven wrong -- and theories scrutinized.

One thing is for certain, no one can use Allan Hendry to support
the ETH. His name is involked only when it selectively suits an
argument that ufology is a 'science'. If ufologists had taken
Hendry's lead in their own approach to UFO reports, ufology
would be more respected today. But, Hendry has for the most part
been ignored by the present day UFO community as an admirer of
Allan Hendry, none other than Phil Klass has pointed out in his
newsletter.

>What Can Be Learned from Ufology?

>The most obvious answer to this question is that ufology may
>reveal the existence of new natural phenomena.

Here we are now two decades after the above was written. The key
word above is "may". What has been revealed by ufology in terms
of new natural phenomena? What leadership in this area as
ufology taken?

>A great many
>sightings investigated by ufologists appear to be natural
>phenomena similar to the controversial "ball lightning." Since
>the existence of this latter is still questioned by some
>persons, it is evident that much remains to be discovered about
>the properties of these plasmalike manifestations.

What lead has ufology taken since this paper was written?
Ufology has not supported independent researchers looking at
phenomenon not associated with the ETH. They have been
vehemently attacked, even on this list by none other than Jerome
Clark. It is hypocritical of Jerome Clark to present a paper to
this list pointing out what ufology could do, but that he has
been personallly and vocally violent against.

>Our main
>evidence for them, however, is human testimony. Their transitory
>and frightening nature usually allows them to escape the camera.
>Even Philip Klass, the most prominent critic of ufology, feels
>these phenomena should be more carefully studied, as he
>recommends in his book UFOs -- Identified (1968).

Okay, three decades now since Klass' suggestion. Has mainstream
ufology taken the lead and scientifically studied these
phenomena? CUFOS? MUFON? FUFOR? Anybody wants to step up and
claim support for other that ETH? I didn't think so.

Ron Westrum in his eloquent paper goes on with a continuing
appeal of what ufology could be and promises to the future.
Well, we are now almost twenty years into that future. Has
ufology changed any since Oberg's paper? Has the promise of
ufology been kept since Westrum's paper?

But more important, what is the so-called ufo community going to
tolerate as ufology for the future. So far they haven't had the
guts to clean their own house in any meaningful way.

What they have done is demonize people like Oberg, Klass,
Menzel, Condon, Sagan, recently Jeffries and Todd on this list.
Shoot the messengers and damn the messages while blaming the
real world for ignoring and not supporting ufology.

It doesn't seem to matter how many times ufologists are told
what it is that they have to do to for the study of the ufo
problem to gain acceptance and respect as a legitimate and
independent field of study in the real world. Philip Morrison
outlined it in very simple terms in his essay on the nature of
evidence in 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate', 1972, edited by Page
and Sagan.

Did ufology pay attention? Nope, it is still conjuring up demons
for its woes, demanding special dispensation for the rules of
scientific evidence, pointing ever greater conspiracies against
ufological reality, and failing to take responsibility for its
problems in continuous appeals to the gallery for sympathy and
support.

The promise of ufology has not been kept.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                        Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 18:04:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 01:22:08 -0400
Subject: Not 'Links' But People Facts


Dear Dennis:


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:01:50 -0700
>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>>Dear Sirs and Madames,

>>As a true nuts-and-bolts sort of fellow, in the midst of all
>>this smarmy stuff about how relevant contactees and spiritualism
>>dovetail together, I wish to iterate the

>>Fundamental Questions Of UFOs:

>>1) Are they indeed anomalous?

>>2) From where do they originate?

>>3) Why are they here?

>Larry,

>If I were a professional philosopher, I'd no doubt have an easy
>phrase with which to respond.  Since I'm not, let me put this
>way: Questions 2 and 3 basically require a positive response to
>question 1. Otherwise, they're seemingly meaningless, at least
>in a nuts and bolts way.

You are quite right of course,  Questions #2 and #3depend on #1.

Like so many, I would love to find some proof of #1 alone, and
then move on.

By my poorly worded message, written by the light of the full
moon, I intended to say that we have not yet settled quenstions
1, 2, 3 ... and that questions 42, 85 and 114,  contactee
studies etc., seem pretty shaky until we know more about the
first few.

>In other words, they only make 'sense' if the response to your
>first question is something along the lines of "Mighty
>anomalous, yes, therefore they must be ships from outer space,"
>now let's ask where they're from and why.

>Put another way, you've answered the first question to your own
>satisfaction, then followed it with two 'questions,' any answer
>to which can only confirm your 'answer' to the first one.

>>Faced with questions like this, one tends to forget about
>>personalities, who forgot to email whom and so on.

>If I were Jerry Clark I would say don't you mean questions like
>"these"? The who/whom issue I refuse to touch with a 10-ft. pole.

><snip>

>>I have three questions which demand answers.

>>They are listed above.

>>Everything else is tertiary (at best).

>>Quarternary (sp) Intentions
>
>>- Larry Hatch

>It's not good form to ask unanswerable or loaded questions and
>"demand" an answer to same.

Sorry, I get impatient at times!

I am just - LH

>Because you might not get one.

>But since you did ask, here are my answers:

>1) Yes, UFOs are indeed anomalous and therefore they are
>spaceships from another planet.

>2) Where are they from? Why Zeta Reticuli, of course!

>3) Why are they here? Haven't you read The Threat by David
>Jacobs? To take over the planet (and your 401k), you ninny!

>Any more questions?

Yes, 4) 5) and 6), but I think the first 3 needsome
verification first. <grin>

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:58:36 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:15:55 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: KGB Crashed Disc
>Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:34:18 PDT

>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 13:00:44 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: KGB Crashed Disk

><snip>

>Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:30:03 +0000
>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Fort Worth Photographs
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

>It's all very much like a historical version of a mixture of
>a "Crossword Puzzle" and "Scrabble".

>Now are "flying" and "disk" triple point words?<BG>

>Best Regards
>Neil.

>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 15:17:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>The RPIT (Roswell Photo Interpretation Team) is grateful for the
>intense interest shown in the team's preliminary "reading" of the
>Ramey Message in the Roswell Photos taken in General Ramey's 8th
>Air Force HQ offices on July 8, 1947, and for your suggestions.
>This is exactly the kind of help the Team is seeking... not only
>your best reading as to the EXACT WORDS but also what the MEANING
>of the MESSAGE might be! The Team is waffling on whether the word
>is actually "CRASH" or "DISK" -- realizing that this could have
>great bearing on the message. We are down to debating in some
>cases EACH LETTER!

>When it is realized that we all are working from 51-year old
>negatives that were developed in great haste due to the deadline
>time pressure -- who could ever have dreamed that there still
>would be hundreds of enlargements made from the negatives more
>than a half century later! -- and we are reading an image that
>even at 4x enlargement (16"x20") is still less than a inch in
>length, it is simply amazing that we can make out ANY words! (I
>really think that General Ramey could not be labeled as
>"careless" for "exposing" this message -- which he likely had not
>even read at the time -- when I was taking the picture from at
>least 10 feet away from him.)

>This all will take a lot of patience and persistence but with our
>combined efforts we just might finally solve the Mystery of the
>Century!

>James Bond Johnson

James Bond Johnson & List,

I wonder if the word "DISK" is spelled differently in
British and American (or Canadian/Australian) English;
i.e., should it be"DISC" - with a "C", or "DISK" - with a "K".

Specifically, what is the correct spelling in American? And,
how is this word likely to be spelled/written on the Ramey
message, i.e., as written by American military people?

Or, maybe both way of spelling is correct?

I guess this could be of some importancy for the correct
interpretation of the Ramey message.


Best Regards,

AWS







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                            Wave of '73 Web-Site

From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 01:51:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:06:47 -0400
Subject: Wave of '73 Web-Site

After several months of preparation, a website dedicated to the
UFO sighting wave of 1973 is prepared on the 25th-year anniversary
of the strange event.

The articles and reports on this site could not be possible were it
not for the gracious assistance of many researchers: Jerry Hamm,
Paul Burrell, Jeff Westover, Francis Ridge, Jerry Washington and
certainly many more.

The site is located at:
        http://home.fuse.net/task/WAVE73.htm
--
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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                              Re: Icelandic UFO

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 18:24:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 09:38:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Icelandic UFO


>De: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Para: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net>
>Data: S=E1bado, 3 de Outubro de 1998 13:42
>Assunto: UFO UpDate: Re: Icelandic UFO

>If you on the other hand have any new updates on "The Varginha
incident" I would be thankful for that.

>Respectfully yours,

>Petur Gudmundsson

>Iceland.




Dear Petur

I was deeply involved with the findings in Varginha mainly
because three of my co-editors conducted most of the
investigations about the capture of the 2 aliens. I have
published a series of articles in my magazine, UFO, which I will
be glad to send to you as a gift. I guess you don=B4t speak any
Portuguese, so I can attach a briefing on the case in English.
Please tell me if you are interested and give me your postal
address.


Mr. Vitorio Pacaccini is _one_ of the main researchers of the
Varginha Case (January 20, 1996). The others are:

Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues: ubirajara@fepesmig.br (This is the
researcher who actually discovered the case in the very first
place).

Claudeir Covo: covoinfa@sol.com.br (Who took part in almost all
the procedures of finding new witnesses and evaluating their
reports).

Sincerely,

A. J. Gevaerd
editor, Brazilian UFO Magazine
Private: gevaerd@ufo.com.br
Corporate: ufo@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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:09:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 09:43:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT

>I thank Jerome Clark for introducing the following paper to this
>list. It does help to accentuate the modern day failure of the
>'science' of ufology by failing to live up to its 1980 title:
>"The Promise of Ufology".


Can one classify a work in progress as a "failure"? I hadn't
realized that ufology had a deadline to beat to prove its worth,
or make its case. People are still interested, sightings still
occur. I wonder what predictions the medical field is making for
the development of complete cures for cancer. If they don't make
their deadlines, should they give up? Does that render all
previous research worthless?


>Very eloquently written, making many predictions as to the
>future of the science of ufology, but unfortunately none of
>which have come true in the two decades since Ron Westrum's
>paper.

Uh, to which "predictions" are you referring? I found one
statement that could be interpreted that way:

If there is to be any significant contribution to our knowledge
of the universe from ufology, it will come from such study of
"unexplained" cases.

OK, it hasn't happened yet. Hardly reason enough to give up and
go home.

>As a matter of fact, Ron Westrum himself apparently is no
>longer active in UFO matters in the last few years since his
>co-authorship of the Roper Report.

So what? Margeret Thatcher isn't Prime Minister anymore either.
Think she doesn't still keep up on current events? You seem to
be implying that we should disregard his paper simply because he
dropped out of the UFO scene. Perhaps he became fed up with
people not wanting to "look through the telescope".

>The award was composed of a panel of scientists chosen by
>and sponsored by the NEW SCIENTIST magazine which solicited
>any and all entries.

But did they publish any of the UFO researcher's work?

>The contest had nothing to do with UFO skeptics or skeptical
>organizations as implied by Jerome Clark's revisionist
>rendition above, but by a respected science magazine.

Again, so what? We should pay homage to Oberg's report because
it appeared in a respected science magazine? What about Westrum's
report:

>>It later appeared in Frontiers of Science (November/December 1980).


>>What Can Be Learned from Ufology?

>>The most obvious answer to this question is that ufology may
>>reveal the existence of new natural phenomena.

>Here we are now two decades after the above was written. The
key >word above is "may". What has been revealed by ufology in
terms >of new natural phenomena? What leadership in this area as
>ufology taken?

This line of reasoning has always puzzled me. Mainstream science
refuses to get involved, i.e. infuse money, equipment, time,
resourses, brains, whatever, then has the nerve to stand back
and gloat that ufology is struggling. Gee, I wonder why? Do they
really have to come up with the proof first? Then you don't
_need_ the damn scientists.

At this point, for those of you who have never read two of the
most pertinent and well written letters about skeptics, science,
and ufology, I refer you to Brian Zieler.

http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/discussion/Eth.htm

http://www.evansville.net/~slk/trickery.htm

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                             Undocumented Aliens

From: Rebecca <RSchatte@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 01:01:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 09:59:39 -0400
Subject: Undocumented Aliens


Houston Chronicle Archives
http://www.chron.com

Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: SUN 10/04/98
Section: A
Page: 29 MetFront
Edition: 2 STAR

Undocumented Aliens / `Ufologists' Hope Report Spursresearch Funding

By TODD ACKERMAN, Houston Chronicle Science Writer
Staff

When John Schuessler was investigating UFO reports in and around
Houston, he always knew he could count on one thing.

He'd get little help from local scientists.

Needing answers about, say, the physiological effects of
radiation or the physics of unusual occurrences, the longtime
Clear Lake aerospace engineer would have to turn to experts in
other cities.

"You'd think that in the nation's space center there'd be no
shortage of interest," says Schuessler, who retired and moved to
Colorado this summer. "But as soon as I mentioned my questions
concerned a UFO sighting, scientists didn't want to talk to me."

Schuessler hopes that is about to change. This summer, in the
first scientific review of UFO phenomena since 1970, a panel of
scientists concluded that some sightings are accompanied by
physical evidence so strong they deserve scientific study.

The story made front-page headlines around the nation. To the
intelligentsia, after all, UFOs have long been the stuff of
tabloids and the lunatic fringe, liable to culminate in mass
suicides like Heaven's Gate, better illuminated by ``The
X-Files'' than serious scientists.

The 50-page report, funded by millionaire Laurance Rockefeller,
stopped short of finding convincing evidence of extraterrestrial
intelligence or even any violation of natural law. But it
indicted the scientific community for a lack of scientific
curiosity.

Citing cases that included burns to witnesses, radar detection
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,
it called on scientists to overcome their fear of ridicule
associated with the topic and get funding to research such
occurrences.

Funding is the rub, of course. Even a report by respected
scientists isn't likely to make historically skeptical
government agencies and foundations suddenly pour forth with
major grants to study UFOs.

"But I think it'll crack the door open a bit," says Schuessler,
who delivered testimony to the panel regarding UFOs he has
investigated, including a famous 1980 case in Liberty County.
"And, symbolically, it means a lot to the `UFOlogy' community
and to those people around the world whose experiences have been
trivialized by science."

But if UFOlogists want practical results, they probably still
have their work cut out for them. Alan Holt, a NASA manager at
the Johnson Space Center who is sympathetic to their concerns,
says the scientific community would need 10 times more data than
the report presents before they would get interested.

UFO ridicule dates to the Korean War, when a CIA-sponsored study
debunked then-prevalent UFO reports. In that authoritative era,
its language was so harsh it had the effect of quieting the
controversy - the media stopped asking questions, people became
afraid to report sightings.

There were (and still are) easy explanations for most sightings:
Jupiter, Mars and Venus, comets, meteors, even the moon in its
red-hued gibbous phase, space debris, experimental aircraft,
model planes, fireworks, research balloons, kites. Others
require more expertise: ball lightning, swamp gas, mirages,
distant tornadoes, sunlight reflecting off flocks of birds and
swarms of insects. Some, of course, are hoaxes.

But according to UFOlogists, about 5 percent of reported
sightings involve none of those, and constitute some sort of
unidentifiable phenomena. This summer's report says those cases
merit more serious study.

The only investigation currently being done is typically by
UFOlogists like Schuessler, volunteers who've made a hobby of
researching the subject. They often are scientists, although the
fact that their work isn't funded by grants actually taints them
in the eyes of some colleagues. Skeptics, nicknamed debunkers by
the UFOlogists, call them "mystery mongers."

"The implication of claims about those unidentifiable sightings
is that if you spend a lot of time studying them you'll find
something remarkable," says Joe Nickell, an editorial board
member of the Skeptical Inquirer. "But more likely, they'll fall
into one of the identifiable categories."

Nickell says he has no problem with open-minded scientific
investigations into UFO sightings. But he questions the wisdom
of putting money into research that will inevitably yield cases
that are unidentifiable because there simply weren't enough
witnesses or the kind of evidence to resolve the matter.

The world's biggest center of UFOlogy is the Mutual UFO Network,
an international, grass-roots organization headquartered in
Texas that dispatches its volunteers to investigate sightings,
holds symposiums and publishes a quarterly journal.

MUFON is also the home, in Seguin, of a UFO museum - an
eccentric hodgepodge of alien toys and UFO books; of gift-shop
knickknacks and scholarly displays of UFO sightings; of mugs,
caps and T-shirts and laminated newspaper pages; of movie
posters and debris from an authentic NASA rocket.

It is the biggest UFO museum east of Roswell, N.M.

MUFON's roughly 3 ,500 members include a wide range of experts
and views - 217 have doctorates and 300 have master's degrees;
some are almost as skeptical as Nickell in assessing likely
explanations. Others, like MUFON Director Walt Andrus, are more
flamboyant.

Andrus, whose home doormat reads "Welcome, UFOs and Crews," says
the UFOs probably have an underwater Earth base and calls on the
U.S. government to "quit lying and tell the truth about UFOs."

"Theology is a matter of belief, not UFOs," says Andrus. "The
fact of the matter is, the evidence for UFOs is overwhelming.
We're receiving visitations from someplace. These UFOs didn't
originate here."

Such is the kind of discussion the makes the mainstream
scientific community cringe. A sampling of scientists at the
time expressed anxiety when this summer's report came out that a
topic with such a high "giggle factor" might blur the lines
between legitimate research and the "lunatic fringe."

Schuessler says he and others presenting UFO testimony to the
report's authors initially picked up that same vibe, an
"arm's-length" attitude that bespoke a kind of fear of being
contaminated. But Schuessler says that went away, and a mood of
true scientific discussion emerged as "the panel realized we
weren't kooks."

Schuessler's testimony focused on the physiological effect on
witnesses, particularly in the well-known Cash-Landrum case in
Liberty County. The 1980 incident involved two women and one's
7-year-old grandson. Their alleged encounter with a UFO left
them with permanent damage to the eyes; stomach pains, vomiting
and diarrhea; skin scarring, with loss of pigmentation;
excessive hair loss; loss of appetite, energy and weight;
fingernail shedding; increased susceptibility to disease; and
cancer.

The incident - Schuessler has written a book on it - is one of a
number of sightings that Schuessler says have made Texas a UFO
center. Others include an 1897 airship crash near Fort Worth in
which The Dallas Morning News reported that the recovered
pilot's body was "not of this world," sightings of lights in the
sky known as the Lubbock Lights and Marfa Lights, and a 1976
event near Tyler that Schuessler told the panel left the
witnesses with the experience of "shock."

So what will the report accomplish? Nickell says it'll be a blip
on the radar screen. And even its author, Stanford physicist
Peter Sturrock, says he doesn't think scientists are going to
jump into the field. But Schuessler is more hopeful.

"Scientists will happily do UFO research, just as they now do
fruit fly research, if the money's there to pay for it," says
Schuessler. "UFOlogy just needs some millionaires to endow
them."



Copyright notice:  All materials in this archive are copyrighted
by Houston Chronicle Publishing Company Division, Hearst
Newspapers Partnership, L.P., or its news and feature syndicates
and wire services. No materials may be directly or indirectly
published, broadcast rewritten for broadcast or publication or
redistributed in any medium. Neither these materials nor any
portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal
and non- commercial use.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:40:42 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:20:19 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?


>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:31:55 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:57:07 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 07:43:34 +0200
>>>Subject: Ground-Breaking Roswell Research?

>><snip>

>>>IUFO Mailing List

>>>UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>>From: "UFOSSI@ufossi.org"
>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:14:35 +0000
>>>Subject: IUFO: UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>>->IUFO Mailing List

>>>****RELEASE THIS UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN EVERYWHERE!****

>>>***UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN****
>>>ONGOING ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


>>>THIS IS A UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN:
>> ==============================
>>>SEPTEMBER 24, 1998
>>>10:51 PM THURSDAY
>> ==============================
>>>Official Statement From;
>>>Billy Dee Founder Of
>>>UFO Sky Searchers International (UFOSSI)
>> ====================================

>>>The following news release is an exclussive from UFOSSI by
>>>permission from Donald Schmitt Top Investigator of the 1947 UFO
>>>Crash at Roswell.

><snip>

>Hi Kevin,

>I wouldn't put much stock into anything that this breathless
>director from UFOSSI had to say. Looks to me like he/she is all
>pumped up by self importance. Note the reference to CNN, NBC
>etc. being after him/her for information.

>It doesn't take any time to come up with a name for some
>organization, slap up a web page, make yourself the director and
>then make "official" statements.

>The whole thing reads pretty childish to me.

>Stig usually comes up with some pretty interesting stuff, but it
>must have been a slow day to have posted this one.

>Yours in wonderment,

>Don Ledger

You're right about the UFOSSI director sounding too grandiose. As
usual I don't necessarily go along with the contents of the news
I am posting. My only purpose is disseminating information on
what's happening in the field of ufology.

Stig

[A case, perhaps, of taking a scatter-gun approach which, on a
bad day, can also hit the messenger? --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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 22:52:06 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:05:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT


Hi, everybody,

>>This paper was written in response to a James Oberg paper which

>>won an award from a committee of UFO skeptics sponsored by a
>>whiskey manufacturer. It was subsequently published in the
>>British weekly New Scientist.

>The above is typical Jerome Clark revisionism of history
>presented as if factual. The award was composed of a panel of
>scientists chosen by and sponsored by the NEW SCIENTIST magazine
>which solicited any and all entries. One of the non-winning
>entries, rumor has it, was by the famous nuclear physicist
>Stanton T. Friedman who reads this list. Maybe he would be
>willing to post his non-winning entry for the edification of the
>list? The award money came from Cutty Sark. The contest had
>nothing to do with UFO skeptics or skeptical organizations as
>implied by Jerome Clark's revisionist rendition above, but by a
>respected science magazine.

Ed Stewart is wrong, no surprise here. Even Jim Oberg, with whom
I corresponded on the subject at the time, did not dispute that
the judges were all UFO skeptics. I remember remarking at the
time that a pro-UFO paper had about as much chance of winning
this rigged contest as does a camel to pass through the eye of a
needle.

Stewart may have his virtues (not necessarily apparent in recent
postings), but a firm sense of UFO history is, alas, not one of
them.

>Very eloquently written, making many predictions as to the
>future of the science of ufology, but unfortunately none of
>which have come true in the two decades since Ron Westrum's
>paper. As a matter of fact, Ron Westrum himself apparently is no
>longer active in UFO matters in the last few years since his
>co-authorship of the Roper Report.

Ron Westrum remains interested in the UFO phenomenon and over
the years has written a number of splendid papers on the
sociology of science as it relates to controversies surrounding
anomalous phenomena. These have appeared in refereed academic
books and journals. It is probably safe to assume that Ed
Stewart has read none of them, sad to say. It's probably safe to
say he's heard of none of them.

>Ron Westrum lended his status as a social scientist and
>co-authored a much publicised report and survey: 'Unusual
>Personal Experiences: An Analysis of the Data from Three
>National Surveys' conducted by the Roper Organization and funded
>by the Bigelow Foundation and known by the short name of 'The
>Roper Report' in 1992. Besides Ron Westrum, Ph.D., co-authors of
>the report were Budd Hopkins and David Michael Jacobs, Ph.D.

There is no such word as "lended." We may agree or disagree with
the Roper panel's conclusion, but that is not the issue at hand.
I cannot help noting that, rather than dispute the points
Westrum makes in his reply to Oberg, Stewart tries to change the
subject.

>1. Ron Westrum's paper written in 1980 "The Promise of Ufology"
>has not lived up to what ufology has delivered since then. (And
>that includes Ron Westrum himself).

I am afraid I don't understand what point our friend is trying
to make here. In the years since then, a lot of good things have
happened to ufology, along with a lot of bad things. So? The
good things include the Sturrock panel (essentially validating
the concerns of serious ufology), JUFOS (a refereed scholarly
journal), Project 1947, serious, concerted international work on
UFO history, psychological surveys of close-encounter claimants,
the appearance of an unprecedented number of scholarly books and
papers on our subject, the publication next year of a pro-UFO
collection by a university press, the publication of Brad
Sparks's seminal work on the RB-47 case, and more. It appears
that Oberg's claims have been falsified.

>2. The objections raised by James Oberg in his paper are still
>valid today. Even in the ufologists' condemnation of the Roper
>Report, co-authored by Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, Ph.D., and
>Ron Westrum, Ph.D., they still employ old arguments that are
>more appeals to the ufo gallery and readership than consist of
>any real logic as pointed out in James Oberg paper.

It's amusing to see Stewart, who just two or three postings ago
was endorsing Waterboy Todd's listing as Mark Rodeghier as one
of the great villains of ufology, citing as a responsible
scientific authority. Do I smell a whiff of hypocrisy here? Or
more than just a whiff?

One of ufology's virtues is its tradition of self-criticism. Can
you imagine Jim Oberg, whom Stewart seems to adore as a
great intellectual and moral voice, _ever_ writing anything
critical of a fellow debunker? If you can, you can also imagine
a camel passing through the eye of a needle.

>Since this was written in 1980, what major involvement by
>scientists is Westrum referring? Hall, Johnson and Rodeghier in
>their debunking of The Roper Report pointed out just the
>opposite, ufology has had trouble getting science to look at the
>alleged evidence. Sounds like maybe wishful thinking by Ron
>Westrum to allude to some "major involvement of scientist."

Those who know more about UFO history than Stewart does will
recognize what Westrum is talking about here, though I fear he
was being unduly optimistic about the future. The 1970s, which
saw unprecedented involvement by scientists, gave cause for
future hope. For various and complicated reasons, not amenable
to the simplistic demonology with which Stewart seems so
strangely obsessed, things didn't work out. Whether anything
will happen in the wake of the Sturrock panel's recommendations
and conclusions remains, of course, to be seen. If Stewart were
better read in writing on the sociology of science, he would
understand that science's reluctance to take up UFO study is not
necessarily a function of the failings of ufologists but has
roots in the structure of science. Among other fine writers on
science's difficulty in coming to grips with anomalous phenomena
are Marcello Truzzi (Westrum's friend and colleague in the EMU
sociology department), Henry H. Bauer, James McClenon, David J.
Hufford, and others. Stewart would do well to step out of the
provincial world of ufology and look at the problem from a
larger perspective. All problems are not the result of demons,
human or otherwise.

>>The amateur origin
>>of ufology is evident in the unevenness of ufological work. Some
>>researchers, particularly those with technical training, do
>>good, solid, careful work. Others pursue research in such a
>>casual manner that their results are worthless. One can, as does
>>Mr. Oberg, lump them all together and make the serious

>>researchers responsible for the faults of the non-serious ones,
>>or point to certain well-known gaffes and assert that these
>>demonstrate the unscientific quality of the field. The real
>>point, however, is not what the worst ufologists do, but what
>>the best do: is there good ufological practice as well as bad?

>Unfortunately, ufology cannot use Ron Westrum as a good example.
>He has not lived up to the 'Promise of Ufology' as examplified
>by his co-authorship of The Roper Report.

A dumb, cheap shot. Controversy and dispute are part of the
process of science, as Ed would know if he were better read in
scholarly literature. The simple fact that one's views have been
criticized does not discredit what one has said in a particular
paper, much less the larger body of that scholar's work, or mean
that one is therefore wrong. Such criticism and debate are part
of the process of truth-seeking.  The most generous reading of
Stewart's argument here is that he is extremely naive.

>>This assertion, while dramatic, merely demonstrates Mr. Oberg's
>>lack of acquaintance with his subject matter.

Well said, Dr. Westrum.

>But the advent of time is showing Oberg's prediction to be
>closer than Westrum's promises to the real world reality of the
>failure of ufology as a science.

Ed, maybe you could help me here. Would you be so kind as to
provide us with names (preferably coupled with citations) of
serious ufologists -- you know, the sort who get published in
JUFOS, IUR, the Journal of Scientific Exploration -- who have
called ufology a "science?" No ranting or name-calling, just a
simple list, and no confusion of "protoscience" with "science."
I look forward to your response.

>>To demonstrate the falsity of his contention one has only to
>>open the _UFO Handbook_ (1979) written by Allan Hendry of the
>>Center for UFO Studies. Here one finds careful critical
>>examinations of data, hypotheses tested -- sometimes verified
>>and sometimes proven wrong -- and theories scrutinized.

>One thing is for certain, no one can use Allan Hendry to support
>the ETH. His name is involked only when it selectively suits an
>argument that ufology is a 'science'. If ufologists had taken
>Hendry's lead in their own approach to UFO reports, ufology
>would be more respected today. But, Hendry has for the most part
>been ignored by the present day UFO community as an admirer of
>Allan Hendry, none other than Phil Klass has pointed out in his
>newsletter.

My impression is that Hendry has most often been cited when such
citation "selectively suits an argument" that ufology is a
pseudoscience -- i.e., in the debunking literature and polemic.
I knew Allan Hendry well. We were good and close friends when we
both lived in the Chicago area, and I can tell you bluntly that
Hendry detested debunkers and thought of "none other than Phil
Klass" as a joke. See, for example, my article "Phil Klass vs.
the UFO Debunkers," February 1981 Fate. (It's also posted on the
internet on the Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate website.)
Allan went out of his way not to include Klass's books (or
Menzel's) in the recommended reading section in The UFO
Handbook. He did not take Klass seriously in the way he took the
best ufologists seriously.

>Here we are now two decades after the above was written. The key
>word above is "may". What has been revealed by ufology in terms
>of new natural phenomena? What leadership in this area as
>ufology taken?

There is, as Ed should know, a whole school of ufology arguing
that UFOs are new or little-understood natural phenomena. A
number of books argue as much in interesting fashion. I don't
agree with their conclusions, but I certainly feel they are a
worthwhile contribution to the ongoing discussion. I can just
see my friend Paul Devereux tearing his hair out at Stewart's
words.

>What lead has ufology taken since this paper was written?
>Ufology has not supported independent researchers looking at
>phenomenon not associated with the ETH. They have been
>vehemently attacked, even on this list by none other than Jerome
>Clark. It is hypocritical of Jerome Clark to present a paper to
>this list pointing out what ufology could do, but that he has
>been personallly and vocally violent against.

In fact, there are a whole lot of anti-ETH ufologists out there.
They have criticized pro-ETH ufologists, and pro-ETH ufologists
have criticized them back. So what? Nope, sorry to disappoint
you, guy, but except for you and Todd, none of us has felt the
need to call those with whom we disagree Nazi equivalents,
propagandists, con men, liars, religious zealots, charlatans, or
comparatively nasty and nwarranted names. We leave that sort of
rhetorical violence to the likes of you and your pal Todd.

>Okay, three decades now since Klass' suggestion. Has mainstream
>ufology taken the lead and scientifically studied these
>phenomena? CUFOS? MUFON? FUFOR? Anybody wants to step up and
>claim support for other that ETH? I didn't think so.

I don't understand what's being said here. Is Ed Stewart
honestly claiming that nobody dares support non-ETH UFO
theories? What planet is this guy living on, anyway?

>Ron Westrum in his eloquent paper goes on with a continuing
>appeal of what ufology could be and promises to the future.
>Well, we are now almost twenty years into that future. Has
>ufology changed any since Oberg's paper? Has the promise of
>ufology been kept since Westrum's paper?

See some paragraphs above. As in the real world, there is good
news, and there is bad news. UFO sightings continue, and ufology
continues. Let's see what the future brings, and let's hope that
those who stay with it keep their heads about them -- as the Ed
Stewarts, who make themselves part of the problem and not,
sadly, part of its solution, appear unable to do.

>But more important, what is the so-called ufo community going to
>tolerate as ufology for the future. So far they haven't had the
>guts to clean their own house in any meaningful way.

Not so, unless by cleaning house you mean shooting people you
don't agree with or trying to have them jailed. This is a free
country. People can say what they wanted, however dumb.

What ufology can do, and has done, is freely exercise
self-policing and internal criticism. That goes on every day on
this list, and there is a whole lot of UFO writing to that
effect. The same, of course, cannot be said for the debunkers,
who would rather die than even mildly criticize even the most
wretched excesses of their fellows. (I have written about my
bizarre experience in trying to get leading debunkers to
disassociate themselves from Klass's bizarre equation of
ufologists with Soviet agents. I'd be glad to repeat the story
if anybody's interested. It tells you all you need to know about
professional debunkers. Not to be confused, by the way, with
honest skeptics.)

>What they have done is demonize people like Oberg, Klass,
>Menzel, Condon, Sagan, recently Jeffries and Todd on this list.
>Shoot the messengers and damn the messages while blaming the
>real world for ignoring and not supporting ufology.

Actually, as usual Ed has reality turned on its head. Ufologists
don't like Oberg, Klass, Menzel, Condon, Sagan, and Todd. Why
should they? These guys traffic in the nastiest sort of
demonization of ufologists. Individually or separately they've
called us crypto- fascists, pseudoscientists, mental cases,
Communist equivalents, charlatans, self-serving promoters, and
the like -- in other words, he kinds of vituperative phrases Ed
prefers to rational discourse. No wonder he likes them.

Incidentally, Kent Jeffrey is not one of the above. Kent is a
decent man who understands that honest people can disagree about
difficult, controversial issues. His paper on Roswell is a model
of restraint and thoughtful argument. Jeffrey's interesting
"Roswell -- Anatomy of a Myth" was published in the June 1997
issue of the MUFON UFO Journal. Equally interesting rejoinders
appeared in the same publication (in a series by Robert J.
Durant) and in IUR (Robert Galganski). I personally found these
exchanges among the most articulate and enlightening I've seen
in the long Roswell debate, and I recommend all of these
articles to thoughtful and curious ufologists. It is a standard
to which all of us, on any side of any UFO issue, would do well
to aspire. Including Ed Stewart.

>It doesn't seem to matter how many times ufologists are told
>what it is that they have to do to for the study of the ufo
>problem to gain acceptance and respect as a legitimate and
>independent field of study in the real world. Philip Morrison
>outlined it in very simple terms in his essay on the nature of
>evidence in 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate', 1972, edited by Page
>and Sagan.

>Did ufology pay attention? Nope, it is still conjuring up demons
>for its woes, demanding special dispensation for the rules of
>scientific evidence, pointing ever greater conspiracies against
>ufological reality, and failing to take responsibility for its
>problems in continuous appeals to the gallery for sympathy and
>support.

Again, so much foaming at the mouth. In ufology, as in all areas
of controversy and dispute, it is the best research, the best
evidence, and the best arguments that are at issue, not the
worst. I am afraid that where this last is concerned, Ed Stewart
and Bob Todd, who have let their emotions (and, it seems, their
hatreds and resentments) cloud their reason. Too bad. Ufology
needs all the help it can get, and people like these are only
making our problems worse.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:04:20 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:33:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 17:26:13 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>Regarding:

>>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:14:09 -0400 (EDT)
>>Fwd Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:51:40 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>Bob and list,

OK, I think we are both just wasting our time and talking past
one another without producing anything useful to this list. I'll
touch on some of your points, where I think something useful can
be added. I really don't have time to respond to all this point
by point stuff you seem so intent on posting.

>I never said that 'depth of field' and 'deep focus' are the same
>thing.

>I wrote:

>'Still photographers around the world know that the wider the
>lens, the deeper the focus and a 25mm lens is a VERY wide angle
>lens.'

Depth of field is determined by distance to subject, lens
aperture and focal length of lens as well as assumed diameter of
the circle of least confusion. As Sidney Ray points out in the
standard textbook _Applied Photographic Optics_, the term depth
of field "...applies only to the object space and should not be
confused with the related depth of focus which applies only to
the conjugate region near the focal plane in the image space."
You say "the wider the lens, the deeper the focus", when, in
fact just the opposite is true. Depth of focus maintains an
inverse relationship to depth of field.

>Obviously, the topic of discussion was maintaining focus which,
>of course, works hand in hand with depth of field. The naturally
>deep focus characteristics of a wide angle lens will provide a
>greater area of usable focus than a longer, normal lens at the
>SAME aperature. In your first response to my posting, you said
>NOTHING about the normal lens having a faster maximum aperature,
>though I would think such information vital to your stated
>position.

I said nothing about the normal lens having a faster maximum
aperture because that is self evident to a
photographer/cinematographer. Normal lenses are almost always
faster than wide angle or tele designs. And I brought this up
several years ago.

>Why wait till now to bring it up?

I brought it up years ago. My associate Bob Mayer who works for
me at Shutterbug used to work for Bell & Howell in the 50s. He
provided me with reams of information about what cameras and
lenses were available in the mid and late 40s. Most of the
normal lenses offered were in the f/2 to f/1.9 range, while the
wide angles and telephotos were in the f/4 to f/5.6 range.

>If indeed it was faster, then what did the cameraman say were
>the exact aperatures available to him and on what lens
>selection? You said there were three, I believe. I've yet to see
>that information available from interviews. However, you may
>have more information than the rest of us since you've been with
>this from the beginning. How about sharing the exact lens info
>with the list?

This, too, is old news. Study of the film shows a depth of field
and perspective correct for a 25 mm lens set for a hyperfocal
distance of six feet and used wide open.

>Beyond that, I beg to differ on several other points.

>First, since you have a background designing optical equipment,
>then you know that the smaller the format, the harder it is to
>produce a wide angle lens with really dramatic characteristics.
>Why? Because the smaller the format, the less image area is used
>within the circle of illumination. The closer to the center you
>get, the less 'bending' of the image occurs. Therefore, a 10mm
>lens in the 16mm format will not distort the image the way, say,
>a 28mm lens might on a 35mm still camera. While I do not doubt
>the Roswell cameraman's claims of having used a 25mm lens, I do
>doubt the reasoning behind it. The decision to use a 'normal'
>lens instead of a 'wide' lens to avoid distortion would be valid
>in a larger format such as 35mm where changes in short focal
>lengths produce more dramatic results, but not in 16mm. Manual
>or no manual, if he was an experienced camera man, he would know
>this.

This whole paragraph is optical gibberish. It is not harder to
design wide angle lenses for 16 mm or any other film size. Why
you would think so is beyond me. It is harder to _manufacture_
such lenses because the tolerances are much tighter.I used to
use a 1.9 mm f/1.9 ultra wide on my Eclair ECL when I was
shooting 16 mm and wanted a really dramatic wide angle look. I
shot one lengthy segment with this lens while lying upside down
in the passenger seat of a race car with my head on the
floorboard shooting up at the driver. His hand on the gear shift
lever was very big and dramatic, and made a nice visual
impression.

I just shot some stuff two weeks ago with Nikon's latest digital
still camera and a fisheye lens. The image sensor on this camera
is smaller than a 16 mm film frame, but the full fisheye effect
is there.

You are not using more of the center of the image circle when
working with such lenses. The lenses are _designed_ to yield a
small image circle in the first place. This is not difficult.

Using a normal lens, that is one roughly equal in focal length
to the diagonal measurement of the film frame, will _always_
reduce distortion over a wide angle which is shorter in focal
length than the diagonal of the film frame. This works in every
format, whether Super-8 or 8 X 10 inch view camera, or anything
else.

One of the lenses I was involved in the design of is a 30 mm
f/2.8 ultra wide angle projection lens for use on Kodak Carousel
and Ektagraphic projectors. By taking the exact same design and
making everything smaller we could have made it for 16 mm
projection. This lens, BTW, is sold under the name of
Schneider-Kreuznach, who have some small reputation in this
industry.

>Second, the photographic realm is full of conceptual and
>seemingly ambiguous terms that have no logical basis for their
>names; 'fast' lenses, 'high' Fstops, 'slow' film. Perhaps it's a
>'Texas' thing, but I've heard the terms 'angle of view' and
>'perspective' used interchagably since I was knee high.
>Obviously you consider this inaccurate, though I have no doubt
>you knew what I was referring to. Calling it 'perspective' is no
>more inaccurate than calling a wide angle lens 'short' when, in
>fact, it might be physically longer than a normal lens.
>

Angle of view and perspective are two different and totally
unrelated terms. I've never heard anyone other than a complete
novice confuse the two. Angle of view changes with focal length.
Perspective is governed only by the distance from the film to
the subject.

Actually, most of these terms are quite logical if you
understand their derivation. 'Fast' in reference to lenses goes
back to the days of Waterhouse stops when a Waterhouse stop with
a big hole in it meant you had to take the lens cap off and put
it back on fast. Slow and fast with regard to film have similar
derivations.

>Regarding such, you wrote:
>
>>The normal lens for the camera was a 20 - 25mm, not a 10mm. The
>>cameraman says he used the "normal" lens for most, and the
>"tele" for some.

>If I was gonna bust your chops for inaccuracy, I could easily
>have made the interpretation that you were trying to describe a
>funky 20-25mm zoom of some kind. Of course, this would have been
>silly and most of the readers would not have known the
>difference. But I understood the intent of what your were trying
>to say and busting your chops would have been counterproductive
>to the discussion. Likewise, the previous issue wasn't about
>perspective or angle of view or what ever term you wish to deem
>correct, so why sidetrack everything to point out a difference
>in semantics that wasn't topic related?

>By the way, the normal lens for the 16mm format is always 25mm. So your
>statement that it was 20 - 25mm is ambiguous and incorrect, as any
>cinematographer would know.

Wrong. The definition of a normal lens is one roughly equivalent
to the diagonal of the image area. It is usually expressed as a
range of focal lengths, since it is a rough measurement, not a
precise one.

>Also, you wrote:

>>The lights would not have been overly bright in the room
>>because the filming was not the FIRST priority, but a secondary
>>consideration.

<snip>

>As I understand it, Super XX film was used. This film has an ASA
>rating of 250. What can I say? ASA 250 is pretty darned fast for
>close quarters in a small white room at a 60th of a second (for
>24fps) and wide open. Pushed, it would reach ASA 500. Certainly,
>with that much film speed, the cameraman could have stopped down
>to pick up the badly needed depth of field on the 25mm lens he
>so poorly chose. I mean, were they shooting in the DARK, for
>pete's sake? If so, why?

ASA 250???? Where did this come from????

>And finally I wrote:

>'...according to you the cameraman only pushed one roll but
>still processed the others by hand, as well.'

>I based that on your initial posting which read:

>>Besides, only one label has the notation that it was push
>>processed, and I don't think anyone has said all of the film
>>was treated this way.

>However, NOW you claim:

>>This is not what I said. We only have photocopies of three of the
>>film labels. Only one mentions push processing. That does not mean
>>that it was the only roll for which this is indicated.

>So which is it? Was only one roll pushed or were there others?
>And if you have accurate info on this, why contradict yourself
>in these two statements?

There is nothing contradictory in my statements. READ them, man!
I said that only one label noted that the film was pushed.
That's all we know.

<snip>

>In closing, let me say that I have no intention of playing
>semantic "king of the hill" with you. In addition, I find your
>attitude about 'newcomers' a bit suspect.

I am not playing semantics games, just asking you to SAY what
you mean instead of writing so vaguely. I make my living these
days primarily from writing and editing, and I have established
a reputation for writing clearly. I demand that others who work
for me do likewise. I know it is impossible to impose standards
here, but a lot of the wasted time here could be eliminated if
people would just say what they mean, clearly and accurately,
the first time.

>What we need are facts like:

>What were the focal lengths of the three lenses?

Not known. Many lenses were available. The cameraman says he
can't remember exactly what was on the camera, but recalls using
a normal lens for most of the filming, and a telephoto for a
portion of it. This squares with what we see in the film, with
most of it appearing proper for a lens of about 25 mm and some
few short segments appearing like they were shot with something
in the 50 to 60 mm range.

>What were the maximum aperatures?

Not known. Most likely f/2 or f/1.9 for the normal lens, f/4 or
f5.6 for the telephoto.

>What was the footcandle reading in the room?

Not known.

>What kind of lights were being used? How many?

Two large 'operating room' style fixtures with incandescent
bulbs. Easily determined by the reflections.

>Was this a borrowed camera from the base or one that he used all
>the time and was accustomed to? Did he keep it? (After all, he
>kept the film!)

He says he brought the camera with him from Washington. It was
military issue, and one of several that he used. He also shot
the outdoor footage with a different camera, or with this one
with an electric motor added. The outdoor footage is all shot
from a tripod and contains segments longer than could be shot
with the spring drive in the camera. The camera could accept an
accessory electric motor which was powered from a car battery.

>How many rolls _were_ pushed? How many stops?

Not known. Only one label indicates push processing. You can see
all three film labels in our book 'Beyond Roswell' or on our CD
ROM. I don't recall if they are on the web site, but they may
be.

http://www.beyondroswell.com

BTW, I get _no_ royalties from this book, and have received none
from the CD ROM or web site, so it makes no financial difference
to me if people buy them or not.

>If these are the sorts of things that you know and can prove,
>then share them all at once. Don't drag them out, one at a time,
>from your coveted bag of tricks just to stay 'king of the hill'
>when cornered in a discussion. Also, your self acknowledgement
>as a 'rude, arrogant SOB as everyone here can tell you!'is
>hardly an excuse for actually being a rude, arrogant SOB when
>someone is trying to contribute to the list. It may be colorful,
>even entertaining, but it hardly gives your arguments more
>weight.

I never said that I can prove _anything_. All we have is video
made from purported 16 mm film, photocopies of film box labels,
the cameraman's statements, and a lot of information supplied to
me and others by Ray Santilli. We have no hard proof that there
IS any film or that there is a cameraman. Proof of something is
what I have invested all of this time (and money) trying to
find. I'm not sure where this "king of the hill" nonsense comes
from. Maybe you think I look like Hank Hill????? I'm just one
person who has tried to find the truth on this. Michael
Hesemann, Philip Mantle, Theresa Carlson, and many more have
done much more than I have on this.


I'm not asking for or looking for an excuse to be me.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 14:26:05 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:58:36 +0100
>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>James Bond Johnson & List,

>I wonder if the word "DISK" is spelled differently in
>British and American (or Canadian/Australian) English;
>i.e., should it be"DISC" - with a "C", or "DISK" - with a "K".

>Specifically, what is the correct spelling in American? And,
>how is this word likely to be spelled/written on the Ramey
>message, i.e., as written by American military people?

>Or, maybe both way of spelling is correct?

>I guess this could be of some importancy for the correct
>interpretation of the Ramey message.

>Best Regards,

>AWS


I can't speak with authority about 1947 usage.  In the publishing
business we use 'Webster's Dictionary of English Usage' as the
authority in cases like this, but they do not even have an entry
on these words.

'Disk' seems to be the most common spelling used today by Americans,
but I still see 'disc' used as well.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 98 11:50:33 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 14:28:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 22:52:06 PDT

>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 98 17:01:57 PDT

List,

At the risk of being accused of self-promotion, please let me
recommend the new (Fall) issue of International UFO Reporter,
which among other goodies carries an illuminating lead article
by Michael D. Swords and Mark Rodeghier reporting on their
firsthand experience with the Sturrock panel (pp. 3-8).
Implicitly the article reminds us of what, all problems and
obstacles notwithstanding, we have been able to accomplish with
our very limited resources.  Ufologists just love to knock
themselves; it's harder to acknowledge that, every once in a
while, we do things right.

Particularly relevant to the current list discussion of
ufology's scientific potentials and its frustrations in
realizing them are Rodeghier's insightful observations on
pp. 6-7.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:57:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 14:40:22 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


Asgeir Waehre Skauhaug,

Thank you for your comments re the various word spellings. You
are correct that there are differences even between US civilian
and military spelling in some cases -- or as even how to tell
time (0800 vs 8 a.m.)!

As a matter of fact, I had an email exchange this morning with
our fine UK RPIT (Roswell Photo Interpretation Team) member Neil
Morris over the possible spelling of his read on the word
"convay". I advised him that my valued "Dictionary for the
American Colonies" (1947 ed.) lists "convey" but not "convay".

Now I will have to search for my well-worn "Dictionary for US
GIs" to check on the spellings of these important words which
may help solve the Mystery of Roswell.

James Bond 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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:30:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 14:24:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change


>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:26:59 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Ufology - Some Things Never Change

>The following award winning essay on ufology was written almost
>20 years ago. How much of this essay is still apropos today?
>Towards the end of the essay it asks where ufology will be in 30
>years? Twenty years have past since then. Yet, not much in
>ufology as changed since then. Read it and make your own
j>udgement call.  Where will ufology be ten years from now? To
>>follow the lead of its illuminaries in the past and do nothing.

>Ed Stewart

----------


>From: JamesOberg@aol.com

>New Scientist magazine, London, October 11, 1979>

>The failure of the 'science' of ufology, by James Oberg>

>The winner of the 1,000 pound 'New Scientist'/Cutty Sark Whisky
>essay on unidentified flying objects criticizes UFO believers
>for their unscientific approach. Just because scientists cannot
>explain every "sighting" does not mean that UFOs exist.

<snip>

I don't know why this is being brought back as an example of
logic and rationality in the face of rampant illogic and
credulousness that skeptics would have us believe characterize
ufology.

This essay was written at about the same time that Mr. Oberg was
writing magazine articles in which he claimed that all astronaut
sightings were explainable even though he knew, and had admitted
"in public" (James Moseley's newsletter), that the Gemini 11
astronaut sighting was (and still is) unexplained.

As of this time Oberg had investigated only astronaut sightings
(so far as I know; at least I am not aware of his publishing any
non-astronaut investigation). Hence he was relying upon the
opinion of Klass, etc. regarding non-astronaut sightings.

He may have gotten an award, but the real question is, was he
any where near correct in his implication that there is nothing
really unexplainable.

In a 1985 "semi-debate" with me he argued that witness testimony
can't  be  believed. Then he proceeded to identify, with a good
level of certainty, a series of sightings from Chile. By
comparing the witness descriptions with a few photos and expert
verbal descriptions of the "staging" of rockets in the process
of launching satellites (ejected rocket fuel blooms outward and
is illuminated at high altitude creating a "fantastic scene") he
concluded that the witnesses happened to see the staging of
several Soviet rocket launches at a time when the sun was
optimally illuminating the high altitude fuel dumps.

In other words, on the one hand he argued that witness
descriptions can't be believed, yet he used witness descriptions
to lead himself to the solution to those sightings.

So, his bottom line argument is.... if the witness describes
something that can't be identified (UFO)... the witness
description is inaccurate (useless, wrong, incomplete), but if
the sighting _can_ be identified the witness description is
accurate.

Logic wins again.

But the Razor is a double-edged sword... it cuts both ways. So,
before we find Jim hoisted on his own petard... let us offer

Three cheers for Oberg..

and now let's get back to the real 'business' of ufology






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                      Re: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:27:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:12:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?


Date: Tue, Oct 5 1998 22:25:00 CET
From: achimkoch@compuserve.com <Joachim Koch>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: UFO UpDate: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?

>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 16:28:54 -0400
>From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Images from TNT KGB UFO Show?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi List-members,

>Has anyone .gif or .jpg pictures for sending to me from the
>KGB-UFO-program on TNT in view of the airplane & UFO encounters
>at the beginning of the program?<

Dear Mr. Walter,

We usually don't support your debunking in Germany but if you
want to read something about the KGB UFO files in German language
you should go to: http://www.ufos.de

With the permission of TNT we show one 'still' there. It shows the
debris among the trees.

We also recommend that you should look at:

http://tnt.turner.com/copyright/index.html

and the copyright disclaimer of Alex Hefman at:

http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb/

Joachim Koch, Berlin






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 13:35:42 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:52:33 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:40:42 +0200
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:31:55 +0100
>>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:57:07 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Ground-Breaking' Roswell 'Research'?

>>>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 07:43:34 +0200
>>>>Subject: Ground-Breaking Roswell Research?

>>><snip>

>>>>IUFO Mailing List

>>>>UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>>>From: "UFOSSI@ufossi.org"
>>>>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:14:35 +0000
>>>>Subject: IUFO: UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN! ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!

>>>>->IUFO Mailing List

>>>>****RELEASE THIS UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN EVERYWHERE!****

>>>>***UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN****
>>>>ONGOING ROSWELL INVESTIGATIONS!
>>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>>>>THIS IS A UFOSSI NEWS BULLETIN:
>>>==============================
>>>>SEPTEMBER 24, 1998
>>>>10:51 PM THURSDAY
>>>==============================
>>>>Official Statement From;
>>>>Billy Dee Founder Of
>>>>UFO Sky Searchers International (UFOSSI)
>>>====================================

>>>>The following news release is an exclussive from UFOSSI by
>>>>permission from Donald Schmitt Top Investigator of the 1947 UFO
>>>>Crash at Roswell.

>><snip>

>>Hi Kevin,

>>I wouldn't put much stock into anything that this breathless
>>director from UFOSSI had to say. Looks to me like he/she is all
>>pumped up by self importance. Note the reference to CNN, NBC
>>etc. being after him/her for information.

>>It doesn't take any time to come up with a name for some
>>organization, slap up a web page, make yourself the director and
>>then make "official" statements.

>>The whole thing reads pretty childish to me.

>>Stig usually comes up with some pretty interesting stuff, but it
>>must have been a slow day to have posted this one.

>>Yours in wonderment,

>>Don Ledger

>You're right about the UFOSSI director sounding too grandiose. As
>usual I don't necessarily go along with the contents of the news
>I am posting. My only purpose is disseminating information on
>what's happening in the field of ufology.

>Stig

>[A case, perhaps, of taking a scatter-gun approach which, on a
>bad day, can also hit the messenger? --ebk]

Perhaps this is a case where I was "shooting the messenger" Errol. It
never hurts to know who is out there spouting off, and possibly
embarrassing the field and the rest of us with their self serving
importance.

Stig is right, "Better the devil you know....."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 13:48:37 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:07:59 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:58:36 +0100
>>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>>James Bond Johnson & List,

>>I wonder if the word "DISK" is spelled differently in
>>British and American (or Canadian/Australian) English;
>>i.e., should it be"DISC" - with a "C", or "DISK" - with a "K".

>>Specifically, what is the correct spelling in American? And,
>>how is this word likely to be spelled/written on the Ramey
>>message, i.e., as written by American military people?

>>Or, maybe both way of spelling is correct?

>>I guess this could be of some importancy for the correct
>>interpretation of the Ramey message.

>>Best Regards,

>>AWS

>I can't speak with authority about 1947 usage.  In the publishing
>business we use 'Webster's Dictionary of English Usage' as the
>authority in cases like this, but they do not even have an entry
>on these words.

>'Disk' seems to be the most common spelling used today by Americans,
>but I still see 'disc' used as well.

>Bob


My good old (1950s vintage) Merriam Webster dictionary lists
both disc and disk. Under 'disc', it merely says "Disk; -
preferred spelling in some senses."... then refers you right
back to 'disk' for the full definition.

Personally, I prefer 'disk', although either spelling appears
acceptable.

-  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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                          Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 18:32:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:16:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site

>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 01:51:58 -0400
>From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Wave of '73 Web-Site

>After several months of preparation, a website dedicated to the
>UFO sighting wave of 1973 is prepared on the 25th-year anniversary
>of the strange event.

>The articles and reports on this site could not be possible were it
>not for the gracious assistance of many researchers: Jerry Hamm,
>Paul Burrell, Jeff Westover, Francis Ridge, Jerry Washington and
>certainly many more.

>The site is located at:
>       http://home.fuse.net/task/WAVE73.htm
>--
>UFO Research
>http://home.fuse.net/task/


I looked your site over, and it looks pretty good, _but_,
unfortunately, even though I know at least one of the Researchers
listed above, personally, and know of another one, Neither asked
me to contribute to your data base.

Too bad... I happen to have first-hand investigative reports and
pics of such things as cattle mutes, landing trace evidence,
etc...

Sigh...but, since ufology is so narrow minded, I guess I will
just keep it to myself... sorry. <shrug>

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 15:00:06 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:01:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk


>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:04:20 -0400 (EDT)
>Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:33:33 -0400
>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

Bob and list,

I agree. Lets see if we can clear up some of the 'techno-speak'
for the benifit of the readers and get on to the issues at hand.

Earlier I wrote:

>>First, since you have a background designing optical equipment,
>>then you know that the smaller the format, the harder it is to
>>produce a wide angle lens with really dramatic characteristics.

Your response was:

>This whole paragraph is optical gibberish. It is not harder to
>design wide angle lenses for 16 mm or any other film size. Why
>you would think so is beyond me. It is harder to _manufacture_
>such lenses because the tolerances are much tighter.

Okay, you win. I didn't use the word 'manufacture' I used the
word 'produce'. My point is that, given a limited budget as the
military might have in the 40's, the cameraman is not going to
have a very exotic lens selection. I've got boxes of C mount
wide angle lenses produced in the 40's and 50's for 16mm and the
really dramatic wide angle lenses didn't come around until the
mid 60's, as far as I can tell. (I could be wrong)

Now I'm not saying that there were no wide angle lenses then.
What I'm saying is that the typical lenses I have from the 40's
and 50's don't distort the image as much as the ones designed to
do that in the 60's and later. In fact, I have two 10mm lenses,
one dating back to 1958 and another manufactured in 1977 that
look totally different from each other. The one from 1958 is
VERY flat, distortion-wise (if that's a term), compared to the
really dramatic curves produced by the later lens. I might also
mention that the older lenses are noticably larger, which might
account for a larger circle of illumination. I have always
attributed this to the difficulty in manufacturing, as you
mentioned above.

Therefore, in the context of what might have been available in
the mid to late 40's, it seems reasonable to me that the
cameraman's concerns about distortion would have been unfounded.

Moving on, earlier I wrote:

>>By the way, the normal lens for the 16mm format is always 25mm. So
>>your statement that it was 20 - 25mm is ambiguous and incorrect, as
>>any cinematographer would know.

Your response was:

>Wrong. The definition of a normal lens is one roughly equivalent
>to the diagonal of the image area. It is usually expressed as a
>range of focal lengths, since it is a rough measurement, not a
>precise one.

Well, what can I say? If I pick up the phone and call any number
of rental houses to book a 16mm Arri SR3 and tell them to
include a 'normal' prime lens, I'll get a 25mm _every_ time. I
don't know how much more precise you can get than mutual
consenses. Besides, did the Roswell cameraman answer the
question about which lens he used by saying it was a 20 - 25mm
lens? Or is this your opinion based on looking at the footage?
Perhaps I'm just not getting this.


Moving on, you earlier wrote:

>>>The lights would not have been overly bright in the room
>>>because the filming was not the FIRST priority, but a secondary
>>>consideration.

With all due respect, Bob, this issue is one that I feel is
important and should not be glossed over because it affects so
many other points. Again, to suggest that the cameraman in the
room would be the only person that would benefit from additional
light makes no sense. Based on my own experience in the
operating room shooting documentary footage long ago (on Kodak
ECO, no less!) the doctors always wanted a very bright working
area to increase visibility and the ability to focus close up
while working on the patient. In fact, the lights were so bright
that only minimal fill was necessary, even with the ECO ASA of
only '8'!

Along this logic I wrote:

>>As I understand it, Super XX film was used. This film has an ASA
>>rating of 250. What can I say? ASA 250 is pretty darned fast for
>>close quarters in a small white room at a 60th of a second (for
>>24fps) and wide open. Pushed, it would reach ASA 500. Certainly,
>>with that much film speed, the cameraman could have stopped down
>>to pick up the badly needed depth of field on the 25mm lens he
>>so poorly chose. I mean, were they shooting in the DARK, for
>>pete's sake? If so, why?

Your response:

>ASA 250???? Where did this come from????

From the American Cinematographer's Handbook which lists Kodak
Double X film as having an ASA of 250. To be totally honest,
I've never shot the stuff nor have I held a roll in my hands,
but the ASA of 250 is what's listed. If it's wrong, then what
was/is the ASA of Super XX? Or are Super XX and Double X two
totally different film stocks?

And finally I wrote:

>>'...according to you the cameraman only pushed one roll but
>>still processed the others by hand, as well.'

Again, I based that on your initial posting which STILL reads:

>>>Besides, only one label has the notation that it was push
>>>processed, and I don't think anyone has said all of the film
>>>was treated this way.

Clearly, you indicate your feeling only one roll was pushed.

Later, this position seemed to change to:

>>>This is not what I said. We only have photocopies of three of the
>>>film labels. Only one mentions push processing. That does not mean
>>>that it was the only roll for which this is indicated.

Here you imply that other rolls may have been pushed, also.

When I pointed this out this contradiction you responded:

>There is nothing contradictory in my statements. READ them, man!
>I said that only one label noted that the film was pushed.
>That's all we know.

Ironically you insist the following:

>I am not playing semantics games, just asking you to SAY what
>you mean instead of writing so vaguely.

I don't how much more vague you can get than the above
statements.

The following was good info:

>>What were the focal lengths of the three lenses?

>Not known. Many lenses were available. The cameraman says he
>can't remember exactly what was on the camera, but recalls using
>a normal lens for most of the filming, and a telephoto for a
>portion of it. This squares with what we see in the film, with
>most of it appearing proper for a lens of about 25 mm and some
>few short segments appearing like they were shot with something
>in the 50 to 60 mm range.

>>What were the maximum aperatures?

>Not known. Most likely f/2 or f/1.9 for the normal lens, f/4 or
>f5.6 for the telephoto.

>>What was the footcandle reading in the room?

>Not known.

>>What kind of lights were being used? How many?

>Two large 'operating room' style fixtures with incandescent
>bulbs. Easily determined by the reflections.

>>Was this a borrowed camera from the base or one that he used all
>>the time and was accustomed to? Did he keep it? (After all, he
>>kept the film!)

>He says he brought the camera with him from Washington. It was
>military issue, and one of several that he used. He also shot
>the outdoor footage with a different camera, or with this one
>with an electric motor added. The outdoor footage is all shot
>from a tripod and contains segments longer than could be shot
>with the spring drive in the camera. The camera could accept an
>accessory electric motor which was powered from a car battery.

>>How many rolls _were_ pushed? How many stops?

>Not known. Only one label indicates push processing.

Ultimately you declared:

>I never said that I can prove _anything_. All we have is video
>made from purported 16 mm film, photocopies of film box labels,
>the cameraman's statements, and a lot of information supplied to
>me and others by Ray Santilli. We have no hard proof that there
>IS any film or that there is a cameraman.

Earlier, you said you went out to Arizona to check out the
cameraman's story. I'm confused. Did you talk to him or was the
info second hand?

So there's a lot we don't know; and that's reasonable. I asked
if the camera man still had the camera since a test could be
performed to see if the framelines of the Santilli film match
those of the cameraman's camera. Perhaps you've already done
this (assuming the film is available for inspection).

More to the point, the lack of hard technical data makes any
assumptions regarding what lens was used and how the film was
handled somewhat sketchy. Basically, we're both guessing.
However, I agree with you that it looks like it was shot with a
'normal' lens and under low light. What we seem to dissagree on
is why. While it might fit the description of how a film would
have been produced following the army manual for documentation,
that hardly means it was shot in the late 40's. After all, my
wife has a cookbook dating back to 1928. Following a recipe from
that book will not produce a cake that anyone would believe was
over 70 years old. In general, I find Santilli's 'cake' just as
suspicious.

Appreciate the data,

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                          Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie!

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:33:28 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:56:50 -0400
Subject: Re: The New Nazi-ET Lie!


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: The New Nazi-ET Lie!
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 09:46:11 +0100

>Perhaps the most dangerous and insidious development in
>modern-day UFO research are the attempts currently being
>undertaken by a small group of researchers to shore up the
>extra-terrestrial hypothesis by invoking a number of dangerous
>right-wing and occult theories.

>These relate to the supposed activities of the "Vril" society
>who, it is claimed, were responsible for imparting secret and
>magical knowledge to the Nazis from the late 1930s onwards. This
>made its' way into a number of secret technologies including the
>flying saucer. The occultists also appear to be claiming that
>extra-terrestrial knowledge was imparted to this group of Nazi
>losers...a worrying claim to say the least...

>A forthcoming edition of 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is set to present
>'evidence' that an ET craft crashed in Poland and was
>subsequently recovered by the Nazis and back-engineered no doubt
>into 'foo fighters' and hypersonic saucers. There appears to be
>no substantiation at all to support any of this evidence whereas
>both myself and other researchers approaching this question from
>an entirely factual and documentary basis have discovered the
>actual truth of the matter;


> - The construction of this new Nazi-ET myth is ultimately
>impossible to disprove because there is no evidence - if you see
>what I mean.

>A writer, one Robert Konstanty (does anyone know
>who this is) is making totally unverifiable claims.

>Perhaps the most dangerous and insidious development in
>modern-day UFO research are the attempts currently being
>undertaken by a small group of researchers to shore up the
>extra-terrestrial hypothesis by invoking a number of dangerous
>right-wing and occult theories.

>These relate to the supposed activities of the "Vril" society
>who, it is claimed, were responsible for imparting secret and
>magical knowledge to the Nazis from the late 1930s onwards. This
>made its' way into a number of secret technologies including the
>flying saucer. The occultists also appear to be claiming that
>extra-terrestrial knowledge was imparted to this group of Nazi
>losers...a worrying claim to say the least...

<snip>

Perhaps you are looking in the wrong place, or just not looking
at all. Just because you have not located evidence to back these
claims up, does not mean that it does not exist.

I appreciate that his claims, in part, contradict your hard
research. However, I agree, in part with your reserarch. But the
origin of the first disk concept I believe has come from the
recovery of disks of non human origin, and was copied reproduced
etc

Tim, why do you need to disproove something all the time?

For your information, with regard to your heading
'The New Nazi-ET Lie!'

This is not a new tack on things, I am pleased to inform you
that you are are wrong. OK folks jog your memory time.

At the end of the 70's or the beginning of the 80's a former CIA
man, Virgil Armstrong, claimed that during the second world war
the American inteligence were concerned that there was a
possibilty that the Third Riech may have had an alliance with an
extra terrestrial race.

If my memory serves me right he also claimed that in 1942 Hitler
had recovered a craft, and that the Germans were in the final
stages of testing this new craft that was going to change the
face of the second World war - with a top speed of 1700mph.

However, the second World war came to a conclusion in 1945 and
the rest is history.

<snip>

>Most interestingly, one version of
>this nazi-ET myth featured in an article written by a Mr. Bolnar
>for 'Alien Encounters' magazine provided no evidence beyond
>unnamed sources and speculation.

>He and other seem to be claiming that the 'alien craft' (?)
>'crashed' in Poland in 1938. The Germans didn't invade until
>1939 so why and how did they have the good fortune to get hold
>of it....?

<snip>

>With a big bunch of keys that opened every door in Poland

<snip>

>What does this tell us about some elements of the UFO community?

<snip>

That they have the right to have ther own ideas and opinions
even if they differ from your own

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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:20:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:34:49 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40

UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 40
October 5, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

SAUCER PHOTOGRAPHED
IN AUSTRALIA

     On Friday, September 11, 1998, at 10:30 a.m.,
Oswald Raeder, 58, a New Zealand tourist, was in
Surfers Paradise, Queensland, Australia when he
decided to take a photograph of the Dolphin Arcade
Building.  Looking down Cavill Avenue, Rader snapped
two color photos on his camera, aiming at the Dolphin
Building framed by a clear blue sky.
     But when the photographs were developed, they
shouwed something else in the picture, as well.
     The first image showed two puffs of smoke in
the sky.  The second, snapped seconds later, showed
a black saucer leaving the area.
     "Mr. Raeder, 58, accidentally captured the images
on a $10 (disposable) camera as he photographed the
Dolphin Arcade Building from the Search Rescue Service
Club in central Surfers Paradise."
     "'My idea was just to take a picture of the building,
as I do a lot wherever I go, because I love to look at
architecture,' he said, 'It's fascinating, but I'm not a UFO
fanatic.  In fact, I'm frightened that people will think I'm
made because I cannot explain this."
     "Roger Brown, operator of Surfers Paradise Photo
Express, said, 'It's just a matter of an unassuming guy,
not a professional photographer, who took his picture
and then found the object.  It could not be faked,
expecially with a disposable camera.  I'm certain they
are legitimate.'"
     "Wing Commander John Steinbeck (no relation to
the USA author--J.T.), spokesman for RAAF (Royal
Australian Air Force base) Amberley, confirmed that
there were no military aircraft near the area at that
time."
     "A Civil Aviation Authority spokesman said there
was no reported aircraft activity in the central Surfers
Paradise area early on Sept. 11th."
     Surfers Paradise is on the Queensland coast
about 480 kilometers (300 miles) north of Sydney.
(See the newspapers The Sunday Territorian and
the Sunday Mail for September 27, 1998.  Many
thanks to Diane Hamilton for forwarding the news
stories.)
(Editor's Note: For more on last week's big UFO
flap in Australia, see the other stories in this issue.)

BLACK HELICOPTERS CHASE
UFO IN NORTHUMBERLAND

     On Friday, September 18, 1998, at 8:15 p.m.,
the witness, A.Z.P., "noticed a large white light in the
sky.  It shone like a very bright star, but I knew it
could not be."
     Outdoors at his home in Sunderland, a port city
in Northumberland, UK, A.Z.P.saw that "it was a
cloudy night, and all the other stars were blocked out
by the cloud layer.  While I watched it (the UFO), there
was another smaller light directly underneath it, and, as
I got closer, I realized it was a helicopter.  The helicopter
suddenly turned and flew in a northerly direction."
     "Around two minutes after the first, another
helicopter went past in the same direction., and, five
minutes after that, another one did the same.  This is
unusual.  I have only ever seen one helicopter in the
Sunderland area at one time, and they could not have
been police helicopters because they did not have
searchlights scouring the ground."
     Thirty minutes later, he added, "the light continued
to move upwards out of the atmosphere, but it was
going extremely slowly, around a degree every ten
minutes.  A plane flew toward it around 9 p.m., but
it was not like any plane I have ever seen.  It flew
directly underneath the light, which was still moving.
It went past and did not circle the light."
     "I continued to watch it until 10 p.m. and then
saw a smaller light detach itself from the large light.
It hovered for a few seconds, before shooting off
into space."
    A.P.Z. saw the UFO again the next night,
Saturday, September 19, 1998, but did not observe
it for any length of time.
     Sunderland is located on the UK's North Sea
coast about 200 miles (320 kilometers) north of
London.  (Email Interview)

UFOs SIGHTED IN VICTORIA
AND TASMANIA

     On Friday, September 25, 1998, residents of
Berwick, Victoria, Australia "spotted a large orange
fireball crossing the sky from east to west" at
around midnight.  "It was only sighted for about
ten seconds."
     Between Thursday, September 24, and Monday,
September 28, 1998, a glowing UFO was seen
repeatedly over Currie, a town on King Island, just
north of Australia's island state of Tasmania.  The
UFO was visible from 7 to 8 p.m. on each of the
four nights.
     On Saturday, September 25, the UFO was
witnessed by Jill Munro and Christine Parker, both
residents of Currie.
     "'It freaked me out,' Ms. Munro, a former radio
journalist, said, 'I have been through the Bankstown
massacre and other events but never in my life have
I seen anything like this.  It takes a lot to throw me,
but someone must come and see this thing and tell
me what it is.'"
     "Ms. Munro said the object was definitely not a
burning can suspended from a garbage bag parachute,
as suggested by the National Space and Meteor
Hotline, nor was it reflected light."
     "Ms. Parker, who is a local councillor and librarian,
said the light formed a steady line rather than a ball.
It was below the cloud level and clearly visible."
     "She said the sighting was a hot topic of conversation
on the island, particularly among older people who
remembered Valentich's disappearance on October 21,
1978 as if it were yesterday."
(See the Daily Mail for September 29, 1998.  Many
thanks to Diane Hamilton and to Ross Dowe of
Australia/New Zealand 24-Hour UFO Hotline for
these reports.)
(Editor's Note:  Pilot Frederick M. Valentich took off
from Melbourne on October 21, 1978 on a night flight
across the Bass Strait to Tasmania.  While passing
King Island, he radioed Melbourne and said his
single-engine aircraft had been buzzed by a large
green UFO.  After several minutes, in which Valentich
described the horrifying aerial encounter, radio contact
was lost.  Neither Valentich nor his plane were ever
found.)

FRENCH UFO FLAP SWEEPS
NORMANDY, FINISTERRE

     Dozens of UFO reports flooded French research
groups last month following publicity surrounding two
incidents that took place on August 14, 1998.
     On August 14, 1998, witnesses in the Mezidon-
Canon arrondisement in Caen, a large city in the
department of Calvados, west of Paris, reported
seeing "a white stationary luminous phenomenon
hovering over the city for several minutes."
     The same night, at 11:50 p.m.witnesses in the
port city of Audierne, in the department of Finisterre,
saw a UFO "in the form of a triangle, with red lights
at each corner, and to the center possibly a
greenish-white strobe light.  A slide to the straight,
a slide to the left, very slow.  Low altitude, about
45 degrees above the horizon."
     The Audierne case is being investigated by
ufologists Thierry Larquet of Brest and Thierry
Garnier of Cercle Ufologique de Haute-Normandie.
     On August 21, 1998, Garnier was interviewed
by a journalist for Paris-Normandie concerning the
Audierne case.  As a result of the interview, he
received 31 UFO reports.  Of these, 20 appeared to
be genuine UFO sightings.
     The reports are summarized below:
     On August 30, a couple driving on Chaussee
(Highway) A29 spotted "two red spheres and a massive
rectangle" in Yervilles "going from north to south at an
average speed."
     On August 28, at 11:15 p.m., witnesses in Vernon,
a city in the department of Eure west of Paris, "noted
the sudden appearance of a yellowish sphere.  It
separated into two equal pieces, then reassembled
itself."
     On August 27, at 10:15 p.m., also in Vernon,
a "stationary yellowish sphere" appeared in the
southeastern sky, then disappeared.
     On August 21, UFOs were seen in three French
communities.
     In Orgeval, at 11:15 p.m., witnesses watched
"a stationary white sphere rotating in the northwestern
sky" for five minutes.
     In La Londe, at 11:45 p.m., "four white luminous
circles flew to the north and were seen intermittently
for five minutes."
     In St. Ouen de Tilleul, three white UFOs came
together in the sky, forming a triangle.
     A multi-community flap also took place on the
night of August 19.
     In Pavilly, a city in the department Seine-Maritime
northwest of Paris, "two white spheres" crossed the
sky at 1 a.m., accompanied by a "hissing noise."
     In La Neuville Champs d'Oissez,  "a white sphere
was seen in the west, the size of the rising sun,
which oscillated in a stationary position."
     In Maromme, at 11 p.m., "a large white sphere"
flew away and then returned very slowly, only to fly
away again minutes later.
     And, in Vernon, "a luminous yellow sphere was
seen in the southeast sky.  At first it was stationary.
Then it flew away to the west."
     Earlier in August, white spherical UFOs were
seen in St. Valery en Caux, La Haie Malherbe,
Grand Quevilly, Cantelen, Sotteville, Bouville and
St. Aubin les Elbeuf.  (Merci beaucoup au Thierry
Garnier de Cercle Ufologique de Haute-Normandie
pour ces nouvelles.)

GLOWING SPHERICAL UFO
SEEN NEAR ALICE SPRINGS

     On August 30, 1998, at 10 p.m., members of the
Baptist Church youth group were camped out in the
bush just north of Alice Springs, Northern Territory,
Australia.  "The group split up into three groups of
eight children, so to settle for a night of camp.  Each
group camped about 100 meters (110 yards) apart."
    "Then one group noticed a bright silver ball of
white light flickering and moving up and down.  It was
bigger than the stars around, so it stood out.  Then
they saw another white light coming in the same
direction."
     "The children all grouped together to watch the
dancing lights.  They watched them for around two
minutes, then the lights grouped and raced away at
fast speed."  (Many thanks to Australian ufologist
Keith Douglass and Errol Bruce-Knapp for this report.)

ELLIPTICAL UFO SPOTTED
OVER ROLLA, MISSOURI

     On Friday, September 2, 1998, at 7:45 p.m., while
at a church youth group meeting in Rolla, Missouri
(population 14,090), William B. and his friends took a
break and went out into the parking lot to listen to
some CD music.
     "Then I looked up and saw an elliptical object,"
Bill reported.  "It was very bright and shiny."
     Calling his compnions' attention to the UFO, he
"told my friends to look at it, and it split into two
equal parts.  Many times in the time we looked at it,
it appeared to move away, only to come right back
in a minute or so.  It must have been going very
fast because it was still going fast even at a distance.
Jets don't move like that."  (Email Interview)
     Rolla is on Missouri Highway 63 about 85 miles
(114 kilometers) southwest of St. Louis.

GIANT BIGFOOT TRACKS
FOUND IN SASKATCHEWAN

     Giant hominid tracks were found on a Native
American reserve near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan
(population 34,181) in late July 1998.
     "The discovery of a footprint a third of a metre
in length has members of a Saskatchewan reserve
looking for signs of an elusive creature steeped in
aboriginal (Native American) legend."
     "Curiosity seekers point out that the tracks
coincide with the disappearance of a dog and a
bull on the Beardy's and Okemasis First Nation
in northern Saskatchewan."
     "The prints were spotted July 26 by Janet
Gamble, who was jogging near her home."
     "'When I noticed the footprint, I looked
around to see it again, and stepped all over
another print,' Gamble said.  'Realizing what
I'd seen, I just panicked.'"
     "Gamble and her husband Dennis followed
the tracks which cut through the brush along
the side of the road."
     "Her husband and his brother videotaped
the tracks after realizing how easily they could
be washed away."
     "In an effort to determine the actual nature
of the footprints, the Gambles contacted the
RCMP, the University of Saskatchewan and
rserve (tribal) elders."
     "'The RCMP told us they couldn't do much
else (unless) something serious happened
like a mutilation,' said Dennis Gamble."
     "'The anthropology department of the
university didn't seem very interested,' he added."
     "Archie Baptiste of the Red Pheasant reserve
told them it was caused by Mistysen."
     "Baptiste said Mistysen, which translates to
big man or big person, are legendary creatures
that do not go near people and always hide."
     "Eugene Gandypie, a friend of the Gambles
who helped with the tracking, doesn't understand
why the RCMP aren't involved."
     "'Early in the spring, a nearby farm had a bull
go missing.  It was later found dead with several
bites taken out of it,' said Gardypie.  'Just this
past week (i.e. August 1, 1998--J.T.), another
bull has gone missing, and so has a Rottweiler
from another farm.'"
     "Gardypie said there were several droppings
in the area that he said were not animal or human."
     "'I don't know what it is, but with a 14-inch-by-
7-inch-wide print and a stride of 6 feet,' he said,
'It is definitely strange.'"
     Prince Albert is on Provincial Highway 2 about
87 miles (119 kilometers) north of Saskatoon.
(See the Citizen of Prince Albert, Sask. for
August 1, 1998.  Many thanks to Graham Conway
of UFO*BC and Lou Farrish of UFO Newsclipping
Service for this newspaper article.)

CROP CIRCLES APPEAR ON
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND

     Three crop circles were found last week on Prince
Edward Island in eastern Canada.
     The "triplet" formation was found near Tryon on
Monday, September 28, 1998, although the field's
owner, John Visser, said he thinks the circular
formation originally appeared in mid-August.
     "The attraction lies in John Visser's winter rye
grain field which runs along the Trans-Canada Highway.
There, visible from the highway, are three large crop
circles, all of which are connected by paths.  Two of
the circles measure just over 40 feet (64 meters) across
while the third measures over 50 feet (80 meters).
Within the circles everything has been completely
flattened, while nothing outside the circles or paths
that connect them has been touched, save by the feet
of the curious, hundreds of whom turned up after word
of the phenomenon spread through Tryon and
neighbouring communities."
     "Harry Craig, of Craig's Convenience Store in Crapaud,
says the circles have been the subject of conversation
and no small amount of speculation."
     "'Little green men?' says Craig with a grin, 'I don't
think so.  But it's strange.  I can't think of any piece of
machinery I know of that makes cuts so perfect.  The
two smaller circles are exactly the same size, and
the paths that connect them are all the same width.'"
     "Potato producer John Visser says the circles look
to have been made in the middle of August.  They were
first brought to his attention by a man in Bedeque who
spotted them while flying overhead in his private plane."
     "'I haven't the foggiest idea where they came from.
And I didn't see any tracks that would lead me to
believe that somebody brought equipment in there.
I don't believe in little green men from outer space,'
Visser said, 'And I'm not going to speculate, either.
As close as I come to speculation is being in the
potato business.'"  (See The Guardian of Prince
Edward Island for September 29, 1998, "Who, or
What, left Tryon's crop circles?"  Many thanks to
Mike Mella and Paul Anderson of Circles Phenomenon
Research-Canada for this newspaper story.)

MYSTERIOUS SKY BOOMS
IN WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA

     On Sunday, September 27, 1998, at 8:30 p.m.,
a loud "sky boom" was reported in Brownsville,
Pennsylvania (population 3,164), a town on
Highway 40 about 40 miles (64 kilometers)
south of Pittsburgh.
     According to ufologist Stan Gordon, the
boom was heard "over a 15-mile area" in both
Fayette and Washington counties.
     "One source told me that a family in
California Boro said their glass curio cabinet
'was rocked, with glassware falling and breaking.'
Another person in West Brownsville said the
blast jolted him out of bed."
     "According to researcher Jim Brown, 'Reports
were received by Brownsville Police around 8:30 p.m.
Sept. 27 regarding a loud boom.  The boom was
heard as far away as Smock, Pa. (population 950)
and also in Washington County."
     Brown interviewed two Brownsville police
officers.  One told him that "he heard what he
describes as a fizz just before the boom.  He
compared it to a 'launching.'  He agrees it was a
concussive sound."
     A search of the area by the Brownsville Police
and Fire Departments failed to turn up any evidence
of an explosion.
     On Friday, September 25, 1998, at 2 p.m.,
a "sky boom" occurred over Saltsburg, Pa.
(population 990), a town on Highway 286 about
20 miles (32 kilometers) east of Pittsburgh.
     According to Gordon, "A resident told me he
heard what sounded like a large explosion.  It
started with a very low-pitched explosion followed
by a long rumble at a higher pitch.  The rumble
continued for 15 to 30 seconds after the blast
and descreased steadily in intensity.  This person
talked to others who heard it 15 miles away."
(Many thanks to Stan Gordon for these reports.)
(Editor's Note: Saltsburg is just west of
Connellsville, Pa., the site of a two-month UFO
flap back in April and May of 1996.)

EARTH BUFFETED BY A
MAGNETAR EXPLOSION

     On August 27, 1998, at 5:22 a.m., Earth
was bombarded by an explosive wave of gamma
rays and X-rays from deep space.
     A "tremendous burst" of radiation "tore into
Earth's upper atmosphere last month, paralyzing
spacecraft and distorting radio transmissions,
astronomers said Tuesday," September 29, 1998.
     The blast wave lasted over five minutes and
registered most strongly over the Pacific Ocean
north of Hawaii.
     "It was the most powerful pulse known to have
struck Earth from a source outside the solar
system.  And it marked the first time that a
significant change in Earth's environment could be
traced to a distant star."
     "'In this five-minute flash, we saw as much
energy as we'd see coming out of the Sun for
the next 300 years, or roughly a billion-billion
times the energy of the world's nuclear arsenal,'
said Kevin Hurley, a physicist at the University
of California-Berkeley."
     The blast "was strong enough to temporarily
shut down two Earth-orbiting spacecraft and
push the sensitive detectors on five other
satellites to their maximum scales."
     "The pulse also briefly cut the range of
high-powered radio stations.  The radio signals,
which usually reach much farther at night
because of lower electrical levels in the
atmosphere, were reduced to their lower
daytime range."
     The source of the blast was a collapsed
neutron star known as SGR1900+14, which
is 20,000 light-years from Earth, in the
constellation Aquila (Latin for eagle--J.T.).
     SGR1900+14 is a magnetar, a neutron
star that rotates very rapidly, creating a very
intense magnetic field.  Billions of years ago,
the star exploded in a supernova.  Then it
collapsed into a neutron star about 12 miles
in diameter.
     As science writer Paul Hovenstern explained
in USA Today, the star's "outer crust is black
iron, and its fluid (liquid) interior of atomic nuclei
is so dense that a spoonful of the stuff weighs as
much as an aircraft carrier.  The star is just
12 miles across but weighs one-and-a-half times
as much as the sun."
     "The star spins rapidly, and the hotter elements
in its core rise to surface.  This creates an intense
magnetic field."
     Twenty thousand years ago, the magnetar
threw off its blast wave of gamma and X-rays,
which went racing across the galaxy like the
first ripple from a rock dropped in a pond
     "The discovery is 'a major breakthrough in
astrophysics,' said Chryssa Kouvelioutou of
the Universities Space Research Association."
(See USA Today for September 30, 1998,
"Star explosion's rays zap Earth's sky traffic,"
by Paul Hovenstern.)
(Editor's Comment:  When I saw the movie
Star Trek--Generations, with its "Nexus wave"
traveling across the cosmos, I never, ever
thought we'd see a similar phenomenon in
real life.  But here we are--once again, life
imitates art.  The magnetar's blast wave is
also a not-so-subtle reminder that the
universe can be a dangerous place.)

GALILEO PERFORMS CLOSE
FLYBY OF EUROPA

     On Friday, September 25, 1998, the spacecraft
Galileo began a close flyby of Europa, an ice-
covered moon in orbit around Jupiter.  At 11:56 p.m.,
NASA's robot explorer craft reached its closest
approach point, passing 2,226 miles (3,561
kilometers) above the Europa's frozen ocean.
     The flyby did not pass without incident, however.
"A fault projection program shut down the gyroscopes
Thursday" September 24, "after they either began
acting abnormally or the spacecraft thought they
had a problem, said project manager Jim Erickson."
     "'They aren't needed for the encounter,' he said."
     Galileo's star scanner was the primary navigational
tool during the flyby.
     "The chief impact of the gyro problem would be in
the quality of observation by an instrument called a
Near-Infrared Mapping Spectrometer (NIMS).  The
gyros increase the stability of the scan platform,
Erickson said."
     Launched back in 1989, Galileo arrived at
Jupiter on December 7, 1995.  Having completed its
primary mission of exploration in Jovian space, the
spacecraft is now surveying Io and Europa.
     Ice-covered Europa orbits Jupiter at a distance
of 416,877 miles (670,900 kilometers).  The moon
is 1,942 miles (3,126 kilometers) in diameter and
takes 3.55 Earth days to complete a rotation. It
was named for Europa, the princess of Phoenicia
who was kidnapped by the Greek god Zeus and
taken to Crete.  (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr.
for forwarding the NASA news release.)

from the UFO Files...

1978: SITUATION RED IN
          HONDURAS

     Twenty years ago, a UFO flap broke out in the
Central American nation of Honduras.  Here's one
of the most high-profile cases of that flap.
     "On October 14 (1978), at 6:10 p.m., a nationwide
blackout left communities helpless for twenty minutes
as reports of strange objects in the twilit skies
flooded radio stations and the newsrooms of
Honduran dailies."
     "The advertising manager of one newspaper,
Rogelio Bercian, happened to be among the
witnesses to the unusual phenomena.  At precisely
6:06 p.m., he declared in an article for Tegucigalpa's
La Tribuna that he was working on his car on the
vantage point of El Picacho hill when he became
aware of a strange object moving from south to
north at considerable speed."
     "It headed for a populated area at high velocity.
Fearing it was a conventional airplane, he paid close
attention to its maneuvers.  The object suddenly
executed a suicidal figure-eight maneuver.  Bercian
then realized he was looking at a colossal,
boomerang-shaped object with a brilliant light at
its center.  As it flew over Tocontin Airport (on the
outskirts of Tegucigalpa, capital of Honduras--J.T.)
electrical current died over the city.  Bercian saw
the streetlights grow dim before blacking out
altogether.  Other witnesses directly under the
flight path of the triangular UFO were able to
confirm Bercian's statement."  (See the book
CHUPACABRAS AND OTHER MYSTERIES by
Scott Corrales, Greenleaf Publications,
Murfreesboro, Tenn., 1997, page 201)

FUN UFO WEBSITES:
     Tony Matias is conducting two surveys on
the UFO experience, an Abduction Survey and
an Experience Survey.  If you are interested in
participating, you can contact Tony directly at
tmatias@teleport com, or visit the survey
website at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/
Station/8715
     Don't forget to visit our parent site, UFO INFO,
with its vast array of news, photos and features.
Drop in at http://ufoinfo.com
     Back issues of UFO Roundup are available
for reading or downloading at our webpage.
Check it out at http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

     Today in history, namely on October 5,
1848, one of the most notorious mystics of all
time was born near the old Danube canal in
Vienna to a leather goods merchant named
Karl List and his wife, Maria.
     He was Guido Karl Anton List, and his
visions rivalled those of his contemporaries,
Edgar Cayce and Grigori Efrimovich Rasputin.
But his name has been permanently tarnished
because his writings formed the philosophical
basis of Hitler's Third Reich and ultimately led
to the Holocaust.
    In addition to his involvement in "the
strangest day," Guido, an enthusiastic mountain
climber and folklorist, had two experiences with
"missing time" in his early life.
     The first took place on June 21, 1862.  While
touring the catacombs beneath St. Stephen's
Cathedral in Vienna with his father, 14-year-old
Guido wandered off and stumbled into a
mysterious underground crypt.  Here he met a
ghostly entity calling itself Wotan.
     Eight years later, on June 21, 1870, while
hiking on Geiselberg mountain, he had another
weird experience in which he walked through
mists into an unknown prehistoric city and
conversed with "sages, bards, warriors and
merchants in the market square."  The vision
convinced him that the Gieselberg had once
been "an island in a sea covering  Europe"
which had been settled by people from the
lost continent of Atlantis.
     List died on May 17, 1919, predicting
that 1923 and 1932 would be "pivotal years in
German history."  They were.

     And we'll be back next week with more
saucer news from around the planet, brought
to you by "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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:21:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 22:52:06 PDT

>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

More treats provided from Jerome Clark's ufological wisdom
maintaining the high ufological standards which have become
known throughout ufology:

>Ed Stewart is wrong, no surprise here. Even Jim Oberg, with whom
>I corresponded on the subject at the time, did not dispute that
>the judges were all UFO skeptics. I remember remarking at the
>time that a pro-UFO paper had about as much chance of winning
>this rigged contest as does a camel to pass through the eye of a
>needle.

Just because you say so? Just because you say you remember? You
have shown on this list a total disrespect for factuality even
going to the extent of writing Robert Todd's contributions out
of your history book and encyclopedia. That is as low as an
individual can commit themselves. You certainly don't have to
agree with somebody's contentions, but to erase any mention of
their contributions in an alleged historical/subject
encyclopedia shows a total disrect on your part for anyone that
shells out $140.00 for your product. You have shown yourself to
be intellectually dishonest omitting facts on one hand and
creating facts on another and you do it again on your latest
missive here which I will show.

>Stewart may have his virtues (not necessarily apparent in recent
>postings), but a firm sense of UFO history is, alas, not one of
>them.

The history you have fabricate yourself? You are right. I rely
on source material as much as possible, and not in your
contrived reality, never in what you say or write. You have
shown yourself to be unreliable.

>>Very eloquently written, making many predictions as to the
>>future of the science of ufology, but unfortunately none of
>>which have come true in the two decades since Ron Westrum's
>>paper. As a matter of fact, Ron Westrum Himself alpparently is no
>>longer active in UFO matters in the last few years since his
>>co-authorship of the Roper Report.

>Ron Westrum remains interested in the UFO phenomenon and over
>the years has written a number of splendid papers on the
>sociology of science as it relates to controversies surrounding
>anomalous phenomena. These have appeared in refereed academic
>books and journals. It is probably safe to assume that Ed
>Stewart has read none of them, sad to say. It's probably safe to
>say he's heard of none of them.

Again we see a total lack of intellectual integrity here on
Jerome Clark's part. Prior to the Roper Report, Ron Westrum had
many papers in the UFO field and some in the refereed academic
literature. But Jerome Clark knows as well as I do that since
1992, there has been a dearth of UFO related papers from Ron
Westrum both in and out of the UFO field. Of course he can shown
me wrong by giving us an example of Ron Westrum's contributions
in the social sciences refereed journals on UFO topics from 1993
to 1998? The ones Jerome Clark claims I never read. Well, save
thyself from your intellectual dishonesty and provide a source
reference 1993-1998 for what you have dishonestly claimed I have
never read? You can't do it, can you?

I checked the following multidisciplinary indexes which are
available also to anyone willing to search:

        General Science Index, 1988 -
        General Science Abstracts, 1993 -
        Index to Legal Periodicals, 1988 -
        Humanities Index, 1984 - Feb 1994
        Readers Guide Abstracts, 1990 -
        Social Science Index, 1983-1993
        Social Sciences Abstracts, 1994 -

Quess what? NO papers since 1992 by Ron Westrum. That makes
Jerome Clark intellecually dishonest once again on this list.
The point here is not what Ron Westrum has/has not done since
the Roper Report related to UFOs. The point is that I stated he
hasn't written about the UFO field since 1992 and Jerome Clark
had decided to manipulate a response as if Westrum has remained
active all this time. That is an example of Clark's intellectual
dishonesty, lack of integrity and apparent low disdain for the
readers and his apparent compelling need to rewrite UFO history
as he pleases trying to pass it off to the rest of us.  Of
course you can call Ron Westrum directly. Maybe he has written
something that is not in any of those multidiscipinary indexes.
His office hours are tuesdays and thursdays, 1:30 to 3:30 pm and
fridays 2:00 to 4:00 pm. His office number is (734) 487-1073.
Ask him, for what he has published 1993-1998?

>>Ron Westrum lended his status as a social scientist and
>>co-authored a much publicised report and survey: 'Unusual
>>Personal Experiences: An Analysis of the Data from Three
>>National Surveys' conducted by the Roper Organization and funded
>>by the Bigelow Foundation and known by the short name of 'The
>>Roper Report' in 1992. Besides Ron Westrum, Ph.D., co-authors of
>>the report were Budd Hopkins and David Michael Jacobs, Ph.D.

>There is no such word as "lended." We may agree or disagree with
>the Roper panel's conclusion, but that is not the issue at hand.

No, the Roper Report was simply a case of bad science. The real
issue is whether or not Ron Westrum's paper "The Promise of
Ufology" has withstood the test of time or not since it was
offered in rebuttal to Oberg's paper.

>I cannot help noting that, rather than dispute the points
>Westrum makes in his reply to Oberg, Stewart tries to change the
>subject.

Sorry, the subject is still the same. What contributions has
ufology made to the real world?

>>1. Ron Westrum's paper written in 1980 "The Promise of Ufology"
>>has not lived up to what ufology has delivered since then. (And
>>that includes Ron Westrum himself).

>I am afraid I don't understand what point our friend is trying
>to make here. In the years since then, a lot of good things have
>happened to ufology, along with a lot of bad things. So?

So? You wish to defend ufology on the basis that it is not
responsible for its own consequences, be my guest. That is
exactly one of the positions Oberg's paper points out to as one
of the reasons ufology can't seeem to get up. The point is not
what has/has not happened TO ufology. The point is what
responsibility has ufology taken on itsself for its own
condition?

>The good things include the Sturrock panel (essentially validating
>the concerns of serious ufology), JUFOS (a refereed scholarly
>journal),

Mighty fine things as viewed by the ufological community. So,
has there been any funding offered to the ufological community
from traditional funding sources based on the Sturrock panel or
is it too early to tell? I suspect it is too early to tell, Of
course the Sturrock panel didn't validate anything that dealt
with the ETH. As a matter of fact, it left the entire ET crowd
out on the cold. Time will tell whether the UFO community will
ultimately laud the Sturrock panel or view it as a wolf in
sheep's clothing. Specially since time seems to stand still when
it comes to ufological matters.

>Project 1947, serious, concerted international work on
>UFO history,

Major contributions here have been made by demon Robert Todd and
his associate, Barry Greenwood, another of Jerome Clark's
created demons. Anybody curious as to what I talking about, read
Jerome Clark's own words in his "historical" encyclopedia on the
CAUS and Barry Greenwood entry. Details at eleven! I am have
very thankful that Barry Greenwood's friend Jan Aldrich of
Project 1947 had/and has Barry Greenwood and Robert Todd as
friends for much of the Project and thus became a beneficiary of
real UFO history and not intellectually dishonest garbage
passing off as history.

>psychological surveys of close-encounter claimants,
>the appearance of an unprecedented number of scholarly books and
>papers on our subject, the publication next year of a pro-UFO
>collection by a university press, the publication of Brad
>Sparks's seminal work on the RB-47 case, and more.

Yup, more books the merrier, especially pro-UFO books. What a
fine thing!

>It appears
>that Oberg's claims have been falsified.

Must be so! Jerome Clark has proclaimed it so. Ufology has now been
recognized as a legitimate science and succedded to achieve equal
stature with all the other legitimate fields of study and acceptance by
the academia of the world. What a fine thing to happen! Ufologia has
triumphed after all!

Ooops! Wake-up call!

>>2. The objections raised by James Oberg in his paper are still
>>valid today. Even in the ufologists' condemnation of the Roper
>>Report, co-authored by Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, Ph.D., and
>>Ron Westrum, Ph.D., they still employ old arguments that are
>>more appeals to the ufo gallery and readership than consist of
>>any real logic as pointed out in James Oberg paper.

>It's amusing to see Stewart, who just two or three postings ago
>was endorsing Waterboy Todd's listing as Mark Rodeghier as one
>of the great villains of ufology, citing as a responsible
>scientific authority.

Mark doesn't have the guts to clean his own house. That is what I said.
He still employs you as editor of IUR after you have shown yourself to
be intellectually dishonest and lacking in integrity by the way that you
have attempted to re-write UFO history based, not on facts, but your own
individual pettiness.

>Do I smell a whiff of hypocrisy here? Or
>more than just a whiff?

I don't know what you smell like, ask your associates.

>>Since this was written in 1980, what major involvement by
>>scientists is Westrum referring? Hall, Johnson and Rodeghier in
>>their debunking of The Roper Report pointed out just the
>>opposite, ufology has had trouble getting science to look at the
>>alleged evidence. Sounds like maybe wishful thinking by Ron
>>Westrum to allude to some "major involvement of scientist."

>Those who know more about UFO history than Stewart does will
>recognize what Westrum is talking about here, though I fear he
>was being unduly optimistic about the future. The 1970s, which
>saw unprecedented involvement by scientists, gave cause for
>future hope. For various and complicated reasons, not amenable
>to the simplistic demonology with which Stewart seems so
>strangely obsessed, things didn't work out. Whether anything
>will happen in the wake of the Sturrock panel's recommendations
>and conclusions remains, of course, to be seen. If Stewart were
>better read in writing on the sociology of science, he would
>understand that science's reluctance to take up UFO study is not
>necessarily a function of the failings of ufologists but has
>roots in the structure of science. Among other fine writers on
>science's difficulty in coming to grips with anomalous phenomena
>are Marcello Truzzi (Westrum's friend and colleague in the EMU
>sociology department), Henry H. Bauer, James McClenon, David J.
>Hufford, and others. Stewart would do well to step out of the
>provincial world of ufology and look at the problem from a
>larger perspective. All problems are not the result of demons,
>human or otherwise.

The question still remains unanswered. What "major involvement by
scientists" has ufology been blessed with? Just because you say so, and
especially because you say so, or Ron Westrum alludes to it, doesn't
make it so. You present yourself as if in full control of the problem,
fully understanding its ramifications, causes and effects, with a vast
understanding of UFO history which dwarfs the capacity of mere
individuals like myself and others. Even previously claiming that the
problem has already been solved with arguments presented otherwise
'falsefied'. I am afraid all you have shown again is a an overwhelming
ego, total arrogance, and a pompous contempt for the readers of your
missive.

>>Unfortunately, ufology cannot use Ron Westrum as a good example.
>>He has not lived up to the 'Promise of Ufology' as examplified
>>by his co-authorship of The Roper Report.

>A dumb, cheap shot. Controversy and dispute are part of the
>process of science, as Ed would know if he were better read in
>scholarly literature. The simple fact that one's views have been
>criticized does not discredit what one has said in a particular
>paper, much less the larger body of that scholar's work, or mean
>that one is therefore wrong. Such criticism and debate are part
>of the process of truth-seeking. The most generous reading of
>Stewart's argument here is that he is extremely naive.

Actually the only reading of my argument that is honest is the
true real one that acurately reflects my words. Not some
fabrication on your part creating positions and motives never
stated by me, but existing only in your imagination and mental
constructs. You keep alluding to a 'body of work' from Ron
Westrum, but there has been NONE since the Roper Report. The
fact is that Ron Westrum attempted to argue that there was good
ufological science and bad ufological science only to produce
himself afterwards only bad ufological science. So, you have
examples to share with us of good ufological science before the
1980 "Promises of Ufology", share them. You keep pulling
references, never stated by me one way or the other, of Ron
Westrum's work prior to the Roper Report and allude that I am
disparaging that work. Not so. You profess to know the English
language but you continuously have a compelling need to
disregard what the person is argueing and creating your own
renditions and distortions which makes you intellectually
dishonest and lacking the integrity necessary to be regarded as
a historian. Besides, if ufology has produced good science that
will stand up to the scientific community and provide compelling
evidence that ufology is to be seriously considered, then stop
arguing and produce the evidence. What's the matter? Got nothing
to show the real world that measures up?

>>>This assertion, while dramatic, merely demonstrates Mr. Oberg's
>>>lack of acquaintance with his subject matter.

>Well said, Dr. Westrum.

>>But the advent of time is showing Oberg's prediction to be
>>closer than Westrum's promises to the real world reality of the
>>failure of ufology as a science.

>>>To demonstrate the falsity of his contention one has only to
>>>open the _UFO Handbook_ (1979) written by Allan Hendry of the
>>>Center for UFO Studies. Here one finds careful critical
>>>examinations of data, hypotheses tested -- sometimes verified
>>>and sometimes proven wrong -- and theories scrutinized.

>>One thing is for certain, no one can use Allan Hendry to support
>>the ETH. His name is involked only when it selectively suits an
>>argument that ufology is a 'science'. If ufologists had taken
>>Hendry's lead in their own approach to UFO reports, ufology
>>would be more respected today. But, Hendry has for the most part
>>been ignored by the present day UFO community as an admirer of
>>Allan Hendry, none other than Phil Klass has pointed out in his
>>newsletter.

>My impression is that Hendry has most often been cited when such
>citation "selectively suits an argument" that ufology is a
>pseudoscience -- i.e., in the debunking literature and polemic.
>I knew Allan Hendry well. We were good and close friends when we
>both lived in the Chicago area, and I can tell you bluntly that
>Hendry detested debunkers and thought of "none other than Phil
>Klass" as a joke. See, for example, my article "Phil Klass vs.
>the UFO Debunkers," February 1981 Fate. (It's also posted on the
>internet on the Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate website.)
>Allan went out of his way not to include Klass's books (or
>Menzel's) in the recommended reading section in The UFO
>Handbook. He did not take Klass seriously in the way he took the
>best ufologists seriously.

Now that we have had some more imput of historical commentary
and memory by Jerome Clark, it doesn't change, even if accurate,
the original statement that Phil Klass respected Allen Hendry.
As a matter of fact a couple of years ago I found myself at a
table with Richard Heyden, Eddie Bullard, James Moseley and Phil
Klass, a motley crew if there ever was one. I think we were
somewhat later briefly joined by Bob Girard. No demons, just
human beings showing mutual respect for each other. We
conversed, laughed, told jokes and had a merry good time for at
least four or five hours until we broke the session up. I have
other such sitdowns with Phil Klass and other ufologists, some
that are on this list and Project 1947. I bring this up to
affirm a strong point. Klass and other skeptics are not the
problem with ufology, nor the deamons that are continuously
presented on this list by UFO illuminaries looking for something
to blame for their own problems. The problem is within ufology
and the people that have keep it wallowing in its present
condition by refusing to clean itself up. Ufologists can shoot
as many messengers as they want, shrug responsibility for its
woes and blame whoever they want for its paralysis, and in the
end nothing will have changed.

>>Here we are now two decades after the above was written. The key
>>word above is "may". What has been revealed by ufology in terms
>>of new natural phenomena? What leadership in this area has
>>ufology taken?

>There is, as Ed should know, a whole school of ufology arguing
>that UFOs are new or little-understood natural phenomena. A
>number of books argue as much in interesting fashion. I don't
>agree with their conclusions, but I certainly feel they are a
>worthwhile contribution to the ongoing discussion. I can just
>see my friend Paul Devereux tearing his hair out at Stewart's
>words.

>>What lead has ufology taken since this paper was written?
>>Ufology has not supported independent researchers looking at
>>phenomenon not associated with the ETH. They have been
>>vehemently attacked, even on this list by none other than Jerome
>>Clark. It is hypocritical of Jerome Clark to present a paper to
>>this list pointing out what ufology could do, but that he has
>>been personallly and vocally violent against.

>In fact, there are a whole lot of anti-ETH ufologists out there.
>They have criticized pro-ETH ufologists, and pro-ETH ufologists
>have criticized them back. So what? Nope, sorry to disappoint
>you, guy, but except for you and Todd, none of us has felt the
>need to call those with whom we disagree Nazi equivalents,
>propagandists, con men, liars, religious zealots, charlatans, or
>comparatively nasty and nwarranted names. We leave that sort of
>rhetorical violence to the likes of you and your pal Todd.

I have called you intellectually dishonest and I DO so again by
your above statement. It is so intellectually lazy and dishonest
of you, which you seem unable to stop, to lump me and associate
me with expressions which I have never called you. The above is
a blatent apppeal to the gallery on your part and above all it
must be very sad for that gallery to see that you, one of the
ufological illuminaries, constantly must stoop so low to
blatenly spew out his intellectual dishonesty over the internet.
How many years have you been doing this to your target demons?
You came on this list attacking John Keel of all people, without
provocation on his part. As far I know, he is not even on the
internet. I don't recall a thread you have participated in that
hasn't resorted to exchanges in ad hominen attacks. On another
list, PROJECT-1947, I have seized participation after you
resorted to a disparaging attack on my mother on the thread and
the administrators failed to do anything. On this list, I don't
have to worry. Such attacks won't get past the administrator
before they get posted. What is your problem? Is your position
so weak that you have to resort to your levels of intellectual
dishonesty on the hopes it will will convince someone of
ufological reality? Whatever that is?

>>Ron Westrum in his eloquent paper goes on with a continuing
>>appeal of what ufology could be and promises to the future.
>>Well, we are now almost twenty years into that future. Has
>>ufology changed any since Oberg's paper? Has the promise of
>>ufology been kept since Westrum's paper?

>See some paragraphs above. As in the real world, there is good
>news, and there is bad news. UFO sightings continue, and ufology
>continues. Let's see what the future brings, and let's hope that
>those who stay with it keep their heads about them -- as the Ed
>Stewarts, who make themselves part of the problem and not,
>sadly, part of its solution, appear unable to do.

And the beat goes on...

>>Did ufology pay attention? Nope, it is still conjuring up demons
>>for its woes, demanding special dispensation for the rules of
>>scientific evidence, pointing ever greater conspiracies against
>>ufological reality, and failing to take responsibility for its
>>problems in continuous appeals to the gallery for sympathy and
>>support.

>Again, so much foaming at the mouth. In ufology, as in all areas
>of controversy and dispute, it is the best research, the best
>evidence, and the best arguments that are at issue, not the
>worst. I am afraid that where this last is concerned, Ed Stewart
>and Bob Todd, who have let their emotions (and, it seems, their
>hatreds and resentments) cloud their reason. Too bad. Ufology
>needs all the help it can get, and people like these are only
>making our problems worse.

Right On! It is all demon Robert Todd's and Ed Stewart's fault.
Jerome Clark has spoken. Ufology would just be able to stand up
and get on its feet if it wasn't for the likes of Todd and
Stewart.

There we have it: "The Promise of Ufology" by one of its active
present day ufological wisdom commentators eighteen years after
Ron Westrum tried to predict where it was headed.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                         BBC: A Question Of Science

From: Giuliano (Jimmy) Marinkovicc <9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 98 20:13:17 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:45:31 -0400
Subject: BBC: A Question Of Science

[Lightly edited --ebk]

SHORT REVIEW OF BBC SHOW. The length of the show was 45 minutes
so I guess that's too long for me to make a transcript (in the
sense of my time) so I present this short review of the
programme as I have promised.
================================================================

BBC WORLD SERVICE
BBC World Service
Bush House
The Strand
London UK

BROADCAST PROGRAMME: A QUESTION OF SCIENCE

RECORDED FROM SHORT WAVE FREQUENCY: 12,095 MHZ

TIME OF BROADCAST:

04th OF OCTOBER 1998. - SUNDAY (premiere)
14:01 - 14:45 GMT

05th OF OCTOBER 1998. - MONDAY (re-run)
08:15 - 08:59 GMT

A QUESTION OF SCIENCE is presented by John Wilson and produced by
Graham Eastern and Martin Redford

================================================================

RELATIONS BETWEEN PARA-SCIENCE AND MAINSTREAM SCIENCE

================================================================

1. PART OF THE SHOW:

- INTRODUCTION

- Introduction of subject (the current position of
Extra-terrestrial life, UFOs, telepathy, ESP, etc. in science)..
Host John Wilson asks "does science in our time have the
right tools to investigate those supernatural things?"

- THE X-FILES THEME music theme.

- Graham Eastern, BBC reporter also gives short introduction
to show. He says that The X-files and the influence of
paranormal subjects and aliens, are invading our homes. Media
programs, pop culture and other TV series are presenting
paranormal subjects today. But Graham asks do they stand on
solid ground. "Is the border between mainstream science and
para-science still sharp?"

- Graham is speaks about SETI and then BBC plays a clip from
astronomer Martin Griffiths of the Univerity of Wales. Martin
makes his comments. He says that we must continue to listen to
space because if we don't search, we will never know whether
extra-terrestrial intelligence really exists.

- Graham speaks about debate connected with intelligent space
craft. BBC plays a clip in which Philip Mantle from BUFORA
(British UFO Research Association) comments about UFOs. Philip
says that most UFO research is done by civilians who have the
skills of different disciplines - the primary function is to
record and investigate UFO sightings. A small number of UFO
sightings can't be explained by current science. Other sightings,
of course can have conventional explanations.

- Graham then says that many teams around the Earth are
investigating strange phenomena (telepathy, ESP, moving objects
with the mind, crop circles etc). BBC plays clip from the
interview with Robert Morris who is professor of para-psychology
at Edinbourgh University in Scotland. After 12 years of
research, Robert is convinced that something unusal is going on.
It is not a statistical anomaly and it is strange. But for someone
else it is hokus-pokus, and Robert has a message for skeptics:
"first read our research reports and then we would love to hear
your logic."

================================================================

2nd. Part Of The Show

- Conversation With The Guest Inside The Studio In London
  What Is The Science In Para-Science?

- Programme transfers to guests inside London studio.
  The guests are:
  Dr. Richard Wiseman,
  prof. John Durant of Imperial College London,
  Jane Watkins - editor of the magazine Fortean Times,
  linked from USA is prof. Robert Park from the University of
  Maryland
  and Dr. Susan Blackmoore who is linked from University of
  Western England.

- Host John Wilson wants to hear the comments from the guests
about John Morris' claims that unusal things exist. John is
also asking can those things be put in scientific categories.

- Susan says that there is no connections between telepathy and
extra-terrestrial life because extra-terrestrial life is
science.

- Jane says that that un-expected science is paranormal also.

- John Durant says that potential conventional science is
extra-terrestrial life, because we think that it is there, and
if we will find in the future that ET life doesn't exist then
that would be strange.

- Robert says that ET life is good for scientific research. That
is the real science and it is the most exciting frontier around.
But the other stuff, such as ESP, can't work. Robert says that
research has been done inside those areas for the last 150 years
and there hasn't been progress.

- Richard says also that there are groups which are doing bad
science but there are also small groups in those areas which are
trying to do a good science. So his conclusion is that a
scientific approach is possible in all those areas.

- John Durant says that bad science has also been done in the
conventional areas of science and that bad science has been
published in conventional journals. John also says that ESP and
UFOs are the things where you are dealing with the borders of
science and if any of those areas become truth the implications
would be so big because they are pushing the current perspective
of what we know. The effects will be so spectacular because
claims doesn't fit with today's picture of science. So they
would be revolutionary.

- Susan says that it is good that someone is doing those
investigations but it is very simple to investigate those
things. For example, she says, if you want to investigate
telepathy, simply put 2 people in 2 different rooms. I have
tried that 100 times, she says, but there are no results. Susan
is wonders why very few people have results there like Robert
Morris (mentioned earlier).

- Jane says that her magazine Fortean Times is recording strange
events and the magazine presents views from the both sides.
Debate must be active in those areas.

- Richard says that those claims are revolutionary ideas but
because of that we must be careful. But, Richard also says that
if those stories are not true, its interesting why
so many people believe in that.

- Jane says that scientists sometimes comment that people who
are doing super-natural research are mad, but one the other hand
they are glad that anyone is doing research because if its
confirmed that would be great.

- John Durant says that he is skeptical about those areas but he
is glad that there are some good scientists who are doing
research. He also says that we must know that those kind of
investigations are expenisive and it is very hard to get good
results. So its not suprising that people don't want to be
involved in it.

- Susan says that altough ESP events are not real experiances
its good that we are learning about those experiences from the
psychology side. She said it is interesting to monitor  people's
claim that they are abducted by aliens when in fact they aren't.

- Robert says that he agrees that these are fascinatings areas
but they are not going to be solved if we are going to look at
the strange lights in the sky (refers to psychological
characteristics of those events).

================================================================

3rd. PART OF THE SHOW

- SO CALLED EVIDENCE

- John Wilson asks why some scientists are convinced that there
is some hard evidence and good ground in those areas. He then
says that for example Peter Sturrock from Stanford University
has said in June that UFOs should be investigated. So John
asks why some scientists are ready to research UFOs and
flying saucers if the process is not going to be too expensive.

- BBC reporter Graham presents a short review of the Peter
Sturrock statement from end of June, 1998. Peter stated that
science can find new things and it can learn from UFO reports.
The investigation of the panel was supported by Mr. Rockfeller.
World Wide media broadcasted the news in June when astronomer
Peter Sturrock said that UFOs are serious thing.

- BBC plays a  clip recorded in June where Peter says that we
must investigate the psychological part of UFO claims together
with phycical evidence.

- After that BBC plays recorded interview with Dr. J. Malosh
from  The Lunar and Planetary Laboratory in Arizona. He is a
meteor expert. He says that he was invited, along with others,
to the meeting where the panel presented the best evidence
of UFOs. But Malosh says that the panel wasn't independent
because they have connections with UFO community. He said that
it was clear that they are not clean.

- Graham speaks about Peter Sturrock again. He says that
Sturrock is President of The Society For Scientific Exploration.
Other members of panel are convinced in theories of remote
viewing, cold fushion, reincarnation and warp drive - they are
'Star Trek' scientists.

- But then BBC again plays recorded statement from Peter
Sturrock where he says that UFO phenomenon was ignored and
ridiculed in the past. He says that in the past, a few hundred
years ago, people were convinced that meteors - "rocks from the
sky" and ball of lighting were a joke. But today we know that
they are real. So we could maybe learn something from UFOs in
the future altough we don't know what that is for now.

- BBC plays continuation of the recorded interview with Dr.
Malosh. He says that the so called "evidence" from scientific
panel is not so convincing and it is un-scientific. There is no
hard evidence or fragments from UFOs which could change our
mind. Malosh states that he will not devote his time any more to
UFO subject.

================================================================

4th. PART OF THE SHOW

- TOOLS OF SCIENCE

- John Wilson asks Robert Park and other guests for their views
about those events connected with the Scientific Panel and UFOs
and is it possible to investigate that phenomenon?

- Robert says that people see strange things sometimes. He also
says that if people want to see bears, they will see bears
although it will be a bush. He also says that inside ufology
there isn't  any good piece of information available. He states
that he doesn't know how  UFOs could be investigated in the
first place. "Are we going to put TV screens to monitor the sky?
I can't imagine how we could do that!"

- John Durant says that science has limitations. For example ET
life still isn't detected because for now the ultimate speed is
Light Speed and the distances in space are too big.

- John Wilson asks Susan how she looks at the so called evidence
inside para-science and is that "soft evidence".

- Susan says that she was a lucky enough to meet a man
who has claimed that he was abducted by aliens. He had
given her a  piece of metal and said, "here it is, a piece
of evidence!" He claimed that it was a alien implant and he
then said to Susan, "you are probably not going to test it in
the first place." And Susan has answered "why not, if it is true
that could be the revolution inside science." After that Susan
says that she has tested that piece with other scientists and
that it was   a ordenery dental filling.

(***Laughter in the studio from the hosts and from the other guests***)

- Susan continues and says that the point is that she has tested
that thing and that others helped because we wanted to see the
answer.

- John Wilson asks how could we be convinced then that something
is real.

- Richard answers that it is a relative view. It depends on the
views of the scientists. For UFOs it is hard to have the
procedure and tools for investigation because psychological
effects are also involved.

- John Wilson asks do personal beliefs effect the research
itself.

- John Durant answers that they do. Science is the process of
individuals who are offering their ideas and arguments.

- John Wilson concludes that UFO researchers are not so
eccentric then.

- Richard answers that if you look at the polls about UFOs,
majority now believe that UFOs are real. Those who do not
believe in UFOs are a minority now. But, he says, that is also
the way of aproach. If you believe in that stuff you will find
arguments and if you don't believe in that stuff you will also
find arguments.

- Robert says that science is a process which is open to new
claims. But, he says, the reason why some people are continuing
to investigate some areas where it is clear that they don't
exist, is because they were involved long time in that. They
have invested much emotion and money in that area and for them it
is hard now to admit that they have failed.

- John Wilson asks is the role of modern crusader attractive.
For example if you claim that you know something and all others
are saying it is not true then it is probably an interesting
role for crusaders and attractive.

- Susan answers that he started with that point "I have
knowledge and the rest of others are wrong". She started by
investigating Out of Body Experiences and telepathy because she
believed in that. But she said later she has changed her mind.
She also says that some people are not ready to change their
minds altough the evidence is suggests other conclusions.

- John Wilson then says that Graham has done the poll at Bush
house to see how ordenery people feel about para-science.

================================================================


5th PART OF THE SHOW

- RECORDED SURVEY

- BBC plays recorded "un-scientific survey" done by Graham Eastern.

- Most people surveyed state that they believe in strange events
and that they want to see better scientific work and
investigation of those subjects.

================================================================

6th. PART OF THE SHOW

- PARA-NORMAL INFLUENCE

- John Wilson asks does TV and radio form the views of the
general public and why do people believe in those subjects.

- Jane says that people always want to believe in something and
it seems that religion is not attractive for them any more. That
also may be linked with our past, imagination and younger days.

- Richard says that it could be s substitute for religion. He
also says that if you are emotionaly crushed (the death of
someone that you knew) then its easy to get hooked by that
field. Pop culture and media also has an influence and role in
that.

- John Wilson concludes that it is the chicken and egg problem.
What's happened in the past? Events or media influence? Then
John Wilson says that today science is so powerful so it is
sometimes attractive to say that there is no answer always for
everything and that could be also the reason. It is also
attractive to say "there is more."

- Robert says that 2 extremes exist. First are the people who
are afraid of science. They become connected with myths and ESP
and so on. At the other extreme are the people who love science
too much. Those are, he says, probably the UFO people. Both
groups are pseudo-science.

- Richard says that there are also some positive things in
the paranormal. When you have some strange experience you can
become interested in science if you want to solve your problem
and that event.

- Jane says that paranormal programmes have influence on the
opinion of the general public so maybe we will have more
scientific work in those areas in the future because the public
wants to know.

- Susan states that we must be very cautious with paranormal
areas because they are also dangerous. You can spend much money
on the astrologers and other people who are claiming that
they have some powers. So other effects are also there because
wrong decisions can be based on false data.

================================================================

7th. PART OF THE SHOW

- PROGRESS OF PARA-SCIENCE

- John Wilson concludes that ethics are in question inside
para-science. Then he asks the guests what they think there will
be any progress inside para-science in the future, for 50 to 100
years or it will be completly debunked.

- John Durant answers that he is glad that he can answer that
question because he will not be alive then. He thinks that
borders between science and paranormal will probably move but
there will also still be others who will believe in some
things that don't exist.

- Richard answers that maybe we will find out more because we
will have better tools in the future but he also conludes that
he wouldn't want to put money on that.

- Jane says that she and her magazine have been around for 25
years now and that she expects that in the future there will be
some new aproaches towards the problem and that we will learn
more about the un-conciousness and physical world.

- Robert Park concludes that there always will be people who
will be "alienated" from the world and who will believe some
weird stuff.

- Susan says that she will not research ESP any more because it
exist. But she says that maybe in the future we will much better
understand out of body experiance because we will understand the
brain then. But she conludes that there will  always be people
who will believe in souls and life after death and they will not
find answers there.

================================================================

8th. PART OF SHOW

- SIGNING OFF

- John Wilson conludes the program with the statement that
listeners should continue to ask the questions about
para-science. John signs off the show.

================================================================

9. PART OF SHOW

- CREDITS

================================================================

NOTE: Please note that the spelling of the names in this file is
not maybe exactly right. Unfortunately I have material only in
audio form so maybe the written names could contain some
errors. Please send corrections send to 9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org

Altough this BBC programme had more of a debunking slant than
progress for ufology, it is a fact that ufology is being
presented more and more by mainstream media. Scientific debates
about ufology are happening more and more. It is important that
we all are talking about the subject.

================================================================

RECORDED AND TRANSCRIBED BY:
================================================================
AGETI - WORLD WIDE HAMRADIO GROUP
ANALYTICAL GROUP FOR EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL INFORMATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------
MAIN SYSOP:                          |  POST ADDRESS:
9A4AG - GIULIANO MARINKOVICC - JIMMY |  ANTE STARCHEVICCA 25/C
                                     |  23000 ZADAR
                                     |  CROATIA, EUROPE
----------------------------------------------------------------
TELEPHONE:                           |  PACKET RADIO ADDRESS:
for international calls:             |  9A4AG@9A0YSI.SBK.HRV.EU
+385-23-430-970                      |
for calls inside Croatia:            |  E-MAIL ADDRESS:
023/430-970                          |  9a4ag@s55tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@clarc.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE MODE  |  AGETI WEB SITE ADDRESS (Created by 9a1cto):
                             |  http://public.srce.hr/~ivangloc/
AMPRn WW UFO channel 1947    |  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/3099/
                             |  9A4AG's HOME PAGE:
                             |  http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AGETI IS A GROUP OF RADIO-AMATEURS WHO ARE EXCHANGING WORLD WIDE
INFORMATIONS, VIEWS AND NEWS ABOUT THE EXTRA-TERRESTIRAL SUBJECT!!!
==========================================================================





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 17:32:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 23:39:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Ufology - Some Things Never Change

>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:30:41 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Ufology - Some Things Never Change
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>
>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:26:59 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Ufology - Some Things Never Change

Bruce Maccabee enlightens us with his commentary:

>I don't know why this is being brought back as an example of
>logic and rationality in the face of rampant illogic and
>credulousness that skeptics would have us believe characterize
>ufology.

Obviously, you don't agree with the picture that Oberg paints in
his essay.

>He may have gotten an award, but the real question is, was he
>any where near correct in his implication that there is nothing
>really unexplainable.

Actually, does is not what he states at all. He emphatically
takes the position that there will always reports that can't be
explained.

<snip>

Apparently you either haven't bothered to read the paper
carefully and instead wished to comment on matters outside of
the paper presented. May I suggest you use a separate thread for
those matters. For example, you can start a thread on Gemini-11
if you feel strongly about it?

>and now let's get back to the real 'business' of ufology

Ahhh! Now that is interesting. What is the real 'business' of
ufology? Since you dismiss out of hand the commentary by Oberg,
I surmise you feel all is well in ufology and progressing
accordingly. Care to share your insights?

Ed Stewart

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Book Reveals Secret UFO Investigation

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 03:54:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 23:49:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Book Reveals Secret UFO Investigation


[List Only, Please]

Source: The Press

http://www.press.co.nz:80/40/98100537.htm

For copyright reasons list only!

Stig

*******

New Zealand news from The Press - October 05, 1998

Book reveals secret UFO investigation

from The Press

WELLINGTON -- A book on New Zealand UFO sightings reveals the
air force, police, and other agencies secretly shared
information about a UFO scare off the Kaikoura coast in 1978.

They (the ministry) just made a complete shambles of the whole
affair.

--Peter Hassall

Upper Hutt writer


The NZ Files, by Upper Hutt writer Peter Hassall, covers
sightings of unidentified flying objects in New Zealand since
the 1880s, along with claims of alien abductions.

The book includes a Ministry of Defence report about sightings
of bright white lights off the Kaikoura coast in 1978 and 1979.
The lights were seen in December 1978 by two air freight pilots
and, in January 1979, Australian and New Zealand television news
teams filmed the lights.

The report, held at National Archives in Wellington, was not to
be released until 2004. However, Mr Hassall said that after an
Official Information Act request to view it, the ministry
allowed him to reproduce the entire report in his book.

He said the report explained the official line at the time was
that the air force, police, the Carter Observatory in
Wellington, and other agencies were not co-operating in
investigating the sightings.

Mr Hassall said the report detailed several meetings of the
agencies.

"They discuss how to deal with the problem of reports and they
all agree to co-operate and investigate secretly, but not tell
the public they were exchanging information," he said.

"Secretly they were trying to figure it out. No-one wanted to
deal with the problem of UFO reporting. They didn't know what to
do about them, partly through a lack of resources to adequately
investigate them."

The report concluded that the Kaikoura UFOs were Venus or
reflections from squid boat, train and car lights -- the same
explanation given publicly by scientists in 1979.

Mr Hassall said the report was a whitewash.

"Venus had not risen (over the horizon) when some of the
sightings were made," he said.

"No-one knows for sure what the Kaikoura sightings were. It
could have been an unusual natural phenomenon . . . they (the
ministry) just made a complete shambles of the whole affair."

Mr Hassall also viewed ministry reports on other sightings
detailed in the book. He said he remained "a fair-minded
sceptic" over whether even one was an alien spacecraft.

-- NZPA

Copyright =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 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                             Re: Looks Deceiving

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 20:22:52 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 23:45:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving

Hello list,

Fair warning; this is a rather 'train of thought' diatribe.

Here goes...

A funny thing happened recently that got me to thinkin'.

I was moving some things in storage when my friend and I came
across an old Panasonic top-load VHS deck. You know the type;
made in about 1982, _very_ heavy with rotary channel selectors
and stiff, mechanical 'keypads' for the play/rewind/record
functions? Also lots of chrome with a funky veneer wood finish.
Did I mention it was heavy?

My friend made the comment that it looked like a VHS deck made
in the 50's if there _were_ such a thing.

And he was right.

I can imagine 150 years from now, with VHS a dim memory, that
'experts' on antiques will be arguing, based on looks only,
about when VHS _really_ got started...

What has this got to do with UFO's, our favorite topic?

Well, there's been much debate about the 'science' and/or 'non
science' of ufology. Skeptics want tangible proof; something
they can hold in their hands or they don't even want to talk
about it. Believers will usually settle for something less; if
credible witnesses say they saw something, then it's open season
for debate.

Of course, reported sightings are a 'non-event' in that they
happened in the past, even if only minutes prior. Therefore, the
person reporting such an event can easily fall victim to their
own imagination just as people reporting a car wreck might
subconsciously digress from the facts and add a certain
'personalization'.

Does this mean they are not telling the truth?

Hardly. In fact, I feel that it's the 'personalizations' that
add the greatest credability to the reports. Like a car
accident, witnessing a UFO is a major event, made even more
important if several people see it at once. The average person,
wanting to be associated with something important, might alter
their version of things just enough to present the idea that
_they_ know something about the event that no one else does.

But, like any traffic accident, there are always those that _do_
_not_ veer from the specifics; the story they tell is straight,
with no sign of embellishment, regardless of what others
reporting the accident might be claiming. Of course, skeptics
will point out that such discrepancies are evidence that an
event such as a UFO sighting did not take place or that it is
fraudulent.

I dissagree.

As most police detectives will tell you, the story most
suspicious is the one that is told exactly the same by all the
suspects. The honest person has nothing to fear, so he/she tells
it like they want to. Trained investigators expect a certain
amount of deviation from the absolute truth. In fact, it's quite
often the contrast between the embellished version and the
non-embellished version that paints a complete picture of what
really DID happen.

So, what about that old Panasonic VHS top-loader?

Well, consider placing it in a livingroom setting from the
1950's and taking a picture. Would it be noticed in the final
print? Probably, but not right away. The styling would
camouflage (did I spell that right?) it long enough for a brief
inspection of the picture. A sleek, plastic modern VHS deck
would, of course, stick out like a sore thumb.

As silly as this might seem, if we think of these two VHS decks
as our typical UFOs, then the problem faced with reported
sightings as evidence becomes apparent.

Like the livingroom photo, there are things we expect to see
when we look up in the sky; clouds, stars, sun, moon, airplanes,
birds etc. Seeing something other than what's expected calls our
attention. Now, I'm hardly suggesting that UFO's are disguised
as airplanes, but we do seem to have an arrogant assumption that
if UFOs visit us, they will look like what we _want_ them to look
like.

It's not surprising, therefore, that while looking through
various books on UFO's, I noticed people reporting sightings in
the early part of this century described cigar shaped or air
ship type craft, people of the 50's described saucers, people in
the 60's described more delta shaped objects, 70's (disco time!)
groups of flashing lights, and so on.

A cynic might accuse aliens of being trendy.

But, in all fairness to those reporting sightings, this sort of
imagery is something that they were familiar with and could
easily describe during 'personalization'. More importantly, it's
imagery that was commercially popular and accepted by the public
of that time period. In short, it was hip. And don't forget how
important it is to be hip when talking about something like
UFOs!

Again, are they telling less than the truth?

No. But if sightings are to be addressed as a 'science', (and
lets face it, that's really all the 'evidence' we have) then we
have to stop making assumptions about the psychology of UFOs and
alien visitations.

The way I see it, we, as a race, either give visiting aliens too
much credit or not enough. Either they're smart enough to come
millions of light years or they're too dumb to use simple
techniques to mask their existence. After all, if I was an alien
and wanted to survey the Earth undetected, I might very _well_
use a craft that looked like an airplane! I mean, what
difference would the shape of a craft make traveling through
space?

Of course, this makes the supposition that the visiting alien
even _cares_ if he/she/it is noticed. An advanced race might think
us so insignificant that they would take no more effort to hide
from us than we do from the bugs in the grass. We just stomp
through the weeds, oblivious to any and everything in our path,
stopping occasionally to look at a spider's web, but not caring
if we are seen.

And don't even get me started on the issue of 'scale'. (How big
is an alien, anyway?)

Is this all just too silly? To a degree.

But when you take into account the 'now you see them' 'now you
don't' characteristics of reported sightings, then one has to
explore all the angles; even silly ones. In fact, faced with
such incredible opposition from the government and other forces
that obviously do not want us to learn the truth, we have to be
down right fearless when asking questions.

Because asking questions is the definition of 'research'. And
'research' officially becomes a 'science' when it starts
producing answers.

Personally, I think there are many out there fearing the day
Ufology becomes a 'science'.

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                 EM Effect Style Technology Sought By Police

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 19:04:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:19:27 -0400
Subject: EM Effect Style Technology Sought By Police


The following may be interesting to those interested (as I am)
in EM Effects from UFOs.

>From the US Justice Dept.'s  NCJRS listservs
<ncjrsadm@aspensys.com>

* Evaluation of Vehicle Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype
Devices: Phase III - Engineering Field Testing Solicitation

To curtail high-speed chases, NIJ is requesting applications for
prototype electromagnetic devices designed to stop motor
vehicles that are in motion. Approved applicants will provide
prototypes for field testing, with the hope of proceeding to
operational testing by law enforcement agencies. The NIJ
Solicitation, "Evaluation of Vehicle Stopping Electromagnetic
Prototype Devices: Phase III - Engineering Field Testing,"
provides information on application requirements and deadlines.

"Evaluation of Vehicle Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype
Devices: Phase III - Engineering Field Testing" (Solicitation)
(SL000298) is available on the NCJRS World Wide Web site
(http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/sl298.txt)

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                   Sightings In Mexico (Apizaco, Tlaxcala

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:22:25 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:13:15 -0400
Subject: Sightings In Mexico (Apizaco, Tlaxcala


Source: alt.ufo.reports, October 3.

Maybe some more witnesses for Jaime Maussan and Lee and Britt
Elders. As most of you will know, the video probably is one of
the three-part series made by the latter, with Maussan's help,
dealing with the UFO wave over Mexico in recent years.

Stig

*******

Sightings in Mexico (Apizaco, Tlaxcala)=BF
Author:=BF Joanne Cooley
Email:jec210@is6.nyu.edu
Date:1998/10/03
Forums:alt.ufo.reports


Hello group...

I have an aunt and many family members (cousins, grandfather,
aunts/uncles, etc) who are always telling my mom (who in turn
tells me about it) about the many sightings they've encountered
where they live (my mom first saw one once there growing up in
the 40's so it's pretty much unheard of to see things down in
these parts). They started seeing UFO-type sightings about 8
years ago, at an average of once a month or so, right near a
nearby dormant volcano, who's name I will only attempt to spell,
the Malinche, and near the Popocatepl (pronounced: poh poh ka tep
-- spelling??). Now the sightings are so frequent that no one
really cares about it anymore (according to locals and
relatives).

They've tried inducing others/outsiders to start some kind of
investigation, but nothing ever comes of it.  About four years
ago, I asked them to videotape whatever they could find on it.
When I finally got the tape, it was pretty lengthy, and instead
was a recent documentary that had come out not long after my
request. I guess they figured it would be easier to satisfy me
this way instead of providing a home movie -- these people are
farmer-types and the town (Apizaco) is relatively poor and rural
(though things are changing -- they recently had an airport built
nearby). Anyway, the documentary/video was on a sighting that had
occurred nearby Apizaco (and later on further out into Mexico
City and Puebla) on a day they had had a full eclipse (sometime
around 95?). Evidently many had caught the thing on home video
and even on national Mexican television.

The sightings are still very frequent (at the very least 1-2x per
month).

Just thought I'd add something to the sight if anyone is
interested in asking or following up!

Joanne





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 6

              Once-In-A-Generation Meteor Shower This November

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:26:36 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 06:50:41 -0400
Subject: Once-In-A-Generation Meteor Shower This November


Source: Reuters News Service via the Nando Times

http://www2.nando.net/newsroom/ntn/health/100598/health27_24905_noframes
.html

Stig

*******

Once-in-a-generation meteor shower coming this November

Copyright =A91998 Nando.net
Copyright =A91998 Reuters News Service

WASHINGTON (October 5, 1998 6:20 p.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) -
Sky-watchers get a once-in-a-generation chance to see a spectacular
show of shooting stars next month, astronomers said Monday. Sky and
Telescope magazine said a shower of meteors known as the Leonid stream,
which comes around only every 33 years, should be at its peak this
November.

"Every year around November 17, Earth's orbit around the Sun carries us
though the Leonid meteor stream, which originates from Comet
55P/Tempel-Tuttle," the magazine said in a statement.

Usually, the Earth passes through a thin area, with little to see. But
every 33 years, the Earth and the comet pass very close to one another
and it is possible to see the meteroids that accompany it.

"When our planet happens to pass through the debris trail shortly
before or after the comet has gone by, we plunge right through this
rich concentration of meteoroids, and the normal Leonid drizzle can be
replaced by a torrential meteor storm in which thousands of shooting
stars might flash overhead every minute," the statement said.

Meteoroids, usually only the size of a pebble or a grain of sand, cause
flashes of light in the sky that people often call falling stars or
shooting stars. The flash of light comes as the object hits the
atmosphere, causing a fire and usually burning up before it hits the
ground.

Satellites are vulnerable to the bits of rock and dust, which are
traveling at great speed and which, although tiny, can cause serious
damage. Many satellites and the Hubble Space Telescope will be turned
away from the direction of the shower.

The last great Leonid meteor storm was in 1966, so the Earth is due for
a good one this year or next. Sky and Telescope recommends that
sky-watchers get up just before dawn on Nov. 17 and 18 to see the show.

The best viewing opportunities this year, it says, will be in Asia.


Copyright =A91998 Nando.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 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                          Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site

From: Kenny Young <nospammy@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 01:10:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 06:46:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Wave of '73 Web-Site


>I looked your site over, and it looks pretty good, _but_,
>unfortunately, even though I know at least one of the Researchers
>listed above, personally, and know of another one, Neither asked
>me to contribute to your data base.

>Too bad... I happen to have first-hand investigative reports and
>pics of such things as cattle mutes, landing trace evidence,
>etc...

>Sigh...but, since ufology is so narrow minded, I guess I will
>just keep it to myself... sorry. <shrug>

>REgards, Mike

Mike;

I posted several announcements regarding this project within the
past few months requesting any information relevant to '73, and
was very grateful for those who responded. Had you been privvy
to these previous postings, notably to the CURRENT ENCOUNTERS
list, then I wouldn't have to deal with your odd message.

By and large, I am continually disappointed at the lack of
interest in this or other such projects by other researchers
that I know have such data, but who do not have similar views or
goals of 'sharing information.'

Respectfully, I had no previous knowledge of your interest or
research into '73, or else you would surely have received an
email from me.

Furthermore, there is a little notation on the site which reads:

        Additional contributions,
        questions or comments
        regarding this site are welcome.
        Click here to send e-mail

If you have the data you speak of in electronic form, you are
certainly welcome to let me know of its on-line availability
from which I will happily link to it, or email me the text and I
will happily create a page for it.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                              Re: Icelandic UFO

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 23:18:23 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 06:49:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Icelandic UFO


>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 14:25:25 -0400
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Icelandic UFO
>Cc: pippi@centrum.is

>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:24:23 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>Subject: Icelandic UFOs

>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 02:26:56 +0000
>>From: "Petur Gumundsson" <pippi@centrum.is>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>If you on the other hand have any new updates on "The Varginha
>incident" I would be thankful for that.

>>Respectfully yours,

>>Petur Gudmundsson

>>Iceland.

>I (personally) have heard nothing new about the Varginha
>incident, but would also like to hear more.


G'day Larry, Petur & List,

For those who may be unfamiliar with the Varginha case point your
searcher at _Varginha_ for some very interesting sites.

Regards,

Leanne






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                      UFO UpDates Off-Line Till Friday

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 23:57:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 23:57:53 -0400
Subject: UFO UpDates Off-Line Till Friday


A shooting job I'm involved in this week has increased the
time I need to devote to it.

Unfortunately, I won't be back to my computer until Friday
evening.

Sorry 'bout the delay in getting posts to you.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

              Anne Arundel Co., Maryland, USA Seminar Nov 7 '98

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 09:24:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:44:25 -0400
Subject: Anne Arundel Co., Maryland, USA Seminar Nov 7 '98

What are UFOs?  Are humans being abducted by alien life forms?
Is the popular TV show "The X-Files" completely fictional?  Is
there really evidence of a previous civilization on the surface
of Mars?

A special one-day, Halloween-time seminar will examine such
"unsolved mysteries" with some of the leading experts in the
field.  It will be held on November 7, 1998 at the Anne Arundel
Community College in the Humanities Building, Room 112, from
10:00am until 5:00pm.  The cost for this one day event is
$28.00, which includes a continental breakfast.  There will be a
break for lunch, which attendees will be responsible for.

Included among the speakers are Bruce Maccabee, Ph.D. (one of
the worlds foremost ufologists);  physicist, Robert Swiatek
(from the Fund for UFO Research); nationally-known space
scientist, Vince DiPetro; and an actual "alient abductee".  The
modersator/keynote speaker will be S. Peter Resta, Ph.D.,
adjunct professor of psychology, psychotherapist and
UFO/abduction researcher.

The seminar will also feature a question and answer panel
discussion with speakers and other experts.  Books and various
publications will be available for purchase and information
about joining UFO investigatory organizations will be presented.

For additional information, directions, and registration
information, please call (410) 541-2325.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                          UFO UpDates Back On Line

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:20:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:20:36 -0400
Subject: UFO UpDates Back On Line




There, another job jobbed. Sorry about having to close
the List down for three days.

I've spent the last three days using a Sony Mavica digital
still camera. Interesting technology - up to forty shots on
a 1.44mb floppy (they will hold more but name the files
sequentially with Sony set names, on _every_ disc identically.
So a simple file name change batch file allows the names to
be changed to whatever you/I want. They're .JPGs and not bad
resolution 'frame' or 'two-field' files. Takes too long to
save to disc for my liking. Not at all like a motorised drive
on a 35mm!

There is a fairly large backlog coming your way - so newcomers
beware <VBG> The next 24 hours or so are not typical of UpDates
traffic.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference

From: Jerry Anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 13:42:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:42:40 -0400
Subject: Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference

Saturday 3rd October 1998, saw the beginning of a two day
conference at Margate, Kent...UK.

Speakers included Jenny Randles (in video format), Robert La
Mont, Eric Morris, myself and other speakers who made up a list
of researchers from around the UK in every aspect of the UFO
subject. One of the most impressive presentations in my opinion,
came from my 'contraversial'colleague, Tim Mathews.

A lot has been said and written about Tim Mathews that I didn't
like the sound of, and I was quite expecting his talk to be in
the area of debunking and unverified reports of man made
UFOs...etc.....and how all UFOs weren't from 'elsewhere'..and so
on.

However, for those of you who listened, like I did, to all the
gossip and back stabbing of Tim, I would like to point out that
not only did this young man make no claim whatsoever that all
UFOs were secret government craft, he also gave a talk that was
one of the finest I have heard at ANY conference, and that ALL
his research had been checked and rechecked before any part was
released.

Although I believe in the ETH to a point, what Tim had to say
about the quite obvious man made saucers/triangles etc.,
especially during the 1950's & 60's, made an awful lot of sense.

I find that it is only those who are too blinkered to accept
that these man mades did and do exist, that try and cause
problems for those who dare to have a different view. Believe it
or not, a lot of these people claim to be 'open minded'. Ha!
What a laugh!!

So, I say this. For those of you who have decided _not_ to
include Tim Mathews in your conference programme due to rumour
etc.,  you are missing out on one hell of a speaker and it is
your loss. We in Kent are very pleased to have had Tim speak to
us on the subject of his extensive research.

Yes, he got off his backside and did something! Something that
some 'researchers' can't make a claim to. Put aside rumour and
do yourselves a favour, give him a chance. Jerry Anderson
UFOMEK 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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:24:22 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:37:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 15:00:06 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:04:20 -0400 (EDT)
>>Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:33:33 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Alien Autopsy' Film Junk

>Bob and list,

>I agree. Lets see if we can clear up some of the 'techno-speak'
>for the benifit of the readers and get on to the issues at hand.

These posts are getting far too long, so I am snipping a lot of
this one. I don't think most of the readers on this list care
about most of this techno-trivia anyway.

<snip>

>Okay, you win. I didn't use the word 'manufacture' I used the
>word 'produce'. My point is that, given a limited budget as the
>military might have in the 40's, the cameraman is not going to
>have a very exotic lens selection. I've got boxes of C mount
>wide angle lenses produced in the 40's and 50's for 16mm and the
>really dramatic wide angle lenses didn't come around until the
>mid 60's, as far as I can tell. (I could be wrong)

I cut my teeth using old crank wind B & H and Bolex 16 mm
cameras. Until he retired my Dad was a TV newsman, and they used
these for shooting TV news in the 50s, 60s and early 70s. They
didn't have the ultra wide lenses either, due to the very high
cost. Ultra wides were readily available in the early 70s when I
was shooting 16 mm professionally. I couldn't afford them,
either, so I rented them when I needed the look.

<snip>

>>>By the way, the normal lens for the 16mm format is always 25mm. So
>>>your statement that it was 20 - 25mm is ambiguous and incorrect, as
>>>any cinematographer would know.

>Your response was:

>>Wrong. The definition of a normal lens is one roughly equivalent
>>to the diagonal of the image area. It is usually expressed as a
>>range of focal lengths, since it is a rough measurement, not a
>>precise one.

>Well, what can I say? If I pick up the phone and call any number
>of rental houses to book a 16mm Arri SR3 and tell them to
>include a 'normal' prime lens, I'll get a 25mm _every_ time. I
>don't know how much more precise you can get than mutual
>consenses. Besides, did the Roswell cameraman answer the
>question about which lens he used by saying it was a 20 - 25mm
>lens? Or is this your opinion based on looking at the footage?
>Perhaps I'm just not getting this.

No argument. This is true TODAY. But things were much more in
flux in the 40s. 16 mm was just in the process of becoming a
professional medium, not just the "home movies" product it
started out as. Things were not as pinned down. The cameraman
says he used a "normal" lens, that's all he remembers. The man,
if real, is over 85 years old and switched to still photography
after he left the military, so he just does not recall stuff
like the exact focal lengths of the lens kit he had, their
apertures, etc.

>Moving on, you earlier wrote:

>>>>The lights would not have been overly bright in the room
>>>>because the filming was not the FIRST priority, but a secondary
>>>>consideration.

>With all due respect, Bob, this issue is one that I feel is
>important and should not be glossed over because it affects so
>many other points. Again, to suggest that the cameraman in the
>room would be the only person that would benefit from additional
>light makes no sense. Based on my own experience in the
>operating room shooting documentary footage long ago (on Kodak
>ECO, no less!) the doctors always wanted a very bright working
>area to increase visibility and the ability to focus close up
>while working on the patient. In fact, the lights were so bright
>that only minimal fill was necessary, even with the ECO ASA of
>only '8'!

Important to note that if this is a real film the cameraman was
barely tolerated in the room. Filming was not a high priority,
and the doctors let him know that. At one point he gets in the
way and is very sternly warned off. This was not a formal
documentation of an autopsy procedure, but a down and dirty
quick film to follow the sequence of the procedure, nothing
more. I don't think that bringing in extra lights, or anything
else, was an option to him. There was barely room for him to
squeeze into the room along with the medical staff.

>Along this logic I wrote:

>>>As I understand it, Super XX film was used. This film has an ASA
>>>rating of 250. What can I say? ASA 250 is pretty darned fast for
>>>close quarters in a small white room at a 60th of a second (for
>>>24fps) and wide open. Pushed, it would reach ASA 500. Certainly,
>>>with that much film speed, the cameraman could have stopped down
>>>to pick up the badly needed depth of field on the 25mm lens he
>>>so poorly chose. I mean, were they shooting in the DARK, for
>>>pete's sake? If so, why?

>Your response:

>>ASA 250???? Where did this come from????

>From the American Cinematographer's Handbook which lists Kodak
>Double X film as having an ASA of 250. To be totally honest,
>I've never shot the stuff nor have I held a roll in my hands,
>but the ASA of 250 is what's listed. If it's wrong, then what
>was/is the ASA of Super XX? Or are Super XX and Double X two
>totally different film stocks?

Yes, Super XX and Double X are totally different things. In 1956
Kodak made major changes in their motion picture films because
they were changing to a higher temperature process for faster
processing. All previous films, of which Super XX was one, were
discontinued since they could not be run through the new
process.

Additionally, the film speed ratings used in the mid-40s were
not ASA ratings, as that had not been established at that time.
As far as we have been able to determine with the help of film
historians the speed of Super XX in modern terms would be
somewhere between 50 and 100 with normal processing. How much it
could be pushed I do not know.

<snip>

>The following was good info:

>>>What were the focal lengths of the three lenses?

>>Not known. Many lenses were available. The cameraman says he
>>can't remember exactly what was on the camera, but recalls using
>>a normal lens for most of the filming, and a telephoto for a
>>portion of it. This squares with what we see in the film, with
>>most of it appearing proper for a lens of about 25 mm and some
>>few short segments appearing like they were shot with something
>>in the 50 to 60 mm range.

>>>What were the maximum aperatures?

>>Not known. Most likely f/2 or f/1.9 for the normal lens, f/4 or
>>f5.6 for the telephoto.

>>>What was the footcandle reading in the room?

>>Not known.

>>>What kind of lights were being used? How many?

>>Two large 'operating room' style fixtures with incandescent
>>bulbs. Easily determined by the reflections.

>>>Was this a borrowed camera from the base or one that he used all
>>>the time and was accustomed to? Did he keep it? (After all, he
>>>kept the film!)

>>He says he brought the camera with him from Washington. It was
>>military issue, and one of several that he used. He also shot
>>the outdoor footage with a different camera, or with this one
>>with an electric motor added. The outdoor footage is all shot
>>from a tripod and contains segments longer than could be shot
>>with the spring drive in the camera. The camera could accept an
>>accessory electric motor which was powered from a car battery.

>>>How many rolls _were_ pushed? How many stops?

>>Not known. Only one label indicates push processing.

>Ultimately you declared:

>>I never said that I can prove _anything_. All we have is video
>>made from purported 16 mm film, photocopies of film box labels,
>>the cameraman's statements, and a lot of information supplied to
>>me and others by Ray Santilli. We have no hard proof that there
>>IS any film or that there is a cameraman.

>Earlier, you said you went out to Arizona to check out the
>cameraman's story. I'm confused. Did you talk to him or was the
>info second hand?

I have never been allowed to speak directly with the cameraman.
My information that I used in my visit to New Mexico (not
Arizona) came in a three-way phone hookup. Ray Santilli had me
on one line and "Jack" on another and forwarded my questions to
"Jack" and his responses to me. He had a lot of specific
information about the area W and N of Socorro, information which
I am reasonably sure is totally unknown to Ray. So I think the
man really was on the other line feeding this info to Ray.

Unfortunately, a lot has changed out there since 1947. The
thriving town of Magdalena is now little more than a ghost town,
and the main highway has been rerouted not far from Socorro,
making it very hard to match up locations. In spite of a number
of attempts I never did find the dirt road the cameraman said
leads to the crash site. One of his landmarks was a wooden
bridge over a canyon, and I satisfied myself by talking to a lot
of locals and some forest rangers that this bridge is gone, and
no one seems to recall it. Also, there was a "rock gate" at the
beginning of the road, and again it seems to be long gone. The
road may still be there, but there are dozens of little dirt
tracks running off into the desert and it would take weeks and
some good four wheelers to check them all.

>So there's a lot we don't know; and that's reasonable. I asked
>if the camera man still had the camera since a test could be
>performed to see if the framelines of the Santilli film match
>those of the cameraman's camera. Perhaps you've already done
>this (assuming the film is available for inspection).

No, he does not have the camera, and it would not matter much
if he did since Santilli has never released any camera original
film. The short pieces I have are all from copy prints.

>More to the point, the lack of hard technical data makes any
>assumptions regarding what lens was used and how the film was
>handled somewhat sketchy. Basically, we're both guessing.
>However, I agree with you that it looks like it was shot with a
>'normal' lens and under low light. What we seem to dissagree on
>is why. While it might fit the description of how a film would
>have been produced following the army manual for documentation,
>that hardly means it was shot in the late 40's. After all, my
>wife has a cookbook dating back to 1928. Following a recipe
>from that book will not produce a cake that anyone would believe
>was over 70 years old. In general, I find Santilli's 'cake' just
>as suspicious.

Are you _sure_ about that cookbook? Reason I ask is that my wife
has one from her grandmother of similar vintage and a lot of the
recipes don't work because modern ingredients are not the same
as the ones available then. Flour in particular is very
different. We tried some of the cake and bread recipes, and they
don't work.

I've spent a lot of time with Ray Santilli. His company is one
of the most disorganized lots I have ever run across. I am
amazed that they stay in business and make any money at all. If
the film is a fake, and it may well be, I simply do not think
that Ray's "organization" is capable of creating it. If it is a
hoax, then Ray has been hoaxed along with the rest of us. The
problem I see with the hoax scenario is simple accounting. It
would have cost a LOT of money to hoax all of this. If the goal
was to make money off TV and similar rights, then why create one
entire "autopsy" which is too sexually graphic to show on TV in
any country??

That part makes no sense, and anyone who has followed this knows
that the amount of money Ray has made would never be enough to
offset the cost of making the film. I've grappled with this
since learning of the film and still can not make sense of it.

Plus we have whatever that is being dissected on the table. The
great majority of medical professionals who have seen the film
think that this is a real body, but not a human one. So what is
it and where did it come from? "Jack" answers that they never
did find out what they were or where they came from. He does not
believe in extraterrestrials.

Then we have the tagging and sorting of the debris. These
I-beams with their unusual symbols and the other material on the
table have very peculiar characteristics, evident when they are
handled. They don't look high-tech or sci-fi at all. So just
what the hell are
they? We simply do not know.

That's my thinking at this time.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                      Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 17:41:26 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:58:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 18:04:24 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>Dear Dennis:

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>>>Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 18:01:50 -0700
>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>>>Dear Sirs and Madames,

>>>As a true nuts-and-bolts sort of fellow, in the midst of all
>>>this smarmy stuff about how relevant contactees and spiritualism
>>>dovetail together, I wish to iterate the

>>>Fundamental Questions Of UFOs:

>>>1) Are they indeed anomalous?

>>>2) From where do they originate?

>>>3) Why are they here?

>>Larry,

>>If I were a professional philosopher, I'd no doubt have an easy
>>phrase with which to respond.  Since I'm not, let me put this
>>way: Questions 2 and 3 basically require a positive response to
>>question 1. Otherwise, they're seemingly meaningless, at least
>>in a nuts and bolts way.

>You are quite right of course,  Questions #2 and #3depend on #1.

>Like so many, I would love to find some proof of #1 alone, and
>then move on.

>By my poorly worded message, written by the light of the full
>moon, I intended to say that we have not yet settled quenstions
>1, 2, 3 ... and that questions 42, 85 and 114,  contactee
>studies etc., seem pretty shaky until we know more about the
>first few.

>>In other words, they only make 'sense' if the response to your
>>first question is something along the lines of "Mighty
>>anomalous, yes, therefore they must be ships from outer space,"
>>now let's ask where they're from and why.

>>Put another way, you've answered the first question to your own
>>satisfaction, then followed it with two 'questions,' any answer
>>to which can only confirm your 'answer' to the first one.

>>>Faced with questions like this, one tends to forget about
>>>personalities, who forgot to email whom and so on.

>>If I were Jerry Clark I would say don't you mean questions like
>>"these"? The who/whom issue I refuse to touch with a 10-ft. pole.

>><snip>

>>>I have three questions which demand answers.

>>>They are listed above.

>>>Everything else is tertiary (at best).

>>>Quarternary (sp) Intentions

>>>- Larry Hatch

>>It's not good form to ask unanswerable or loaded questions and
>>"demand" an answer to same.

>Sorry, I get impatient at times!

>I am just - LH

>>Because you might not get one.

>>But since you did ask, here are my answers:

>>1) Yes, UFOs are indeed anomalous and therefore they are
>>spaceships from another planet.

>>2) Where are they from? Why Zeta Reticuli, of course!

>>3) Why are they here? Haven't you read The Threat by David
>>Jacobs? To take over the planet (and your 401k), you ninny!

>>Any more questions?

>Yes, 4) 5) and 6), but I think the first 3 needsome
>verification first. <grin>

>Best wishes

>- Larry Hatch



Larry, Dennis & List,

I have but one thing to ask - who hijacked my thread?!?

My original post was seeking input on establishing a 'People List'
that we newbies could refer to in order to assess the value of the
inputs of the 'oldies' on the list. Unfortunately, it has already
descended towards yet another slanging match . . .

How about some proper feedback on my original issue?

Regards,
Leanne






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                              Sighting: Yakima

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 03:19:41 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:00:01 -0400
Subject: Sighting: Yakima


Source: alt.ufo.reports, October 6.

Stig

*******

SIGHTING: YAKIMA
Author: Forrest Baker
Email: fbaker@irwinint.com
Date: 1998/10/06
Forums: alt.ufo.reports

I am interested if anybody else saw strange lights in the Yakima
area on the night of 20 September (a Sunday night) at 2100. The
group I was in (4 adults, 3 kids) saw multiple lights varying in
brightness, colors, and directions. I was able to look at the
lights in extreme detail for I had my binocs with me and tracked
3 "V" formations of 7 rectangular lights each. Their color was a
dull red/orange. I viewed these formations for approx 15 seconds
before they disappeared into the light haze of Yakima towards
due East. Each one of the lights acted independently and would
swap places with other lights either in the same "V" formation
or in another nearby formation. Another witness saw similar
patterns, but the "V" was filled in with many more lights and
the color of the lights were blue/green. I first spotted 3 dim
lights (like bright satellites) directly overhead in the
constellation of the Swan (forget its proper name, also referred
to as the "Northern Cross"). A total of 30 seconds passed from
their overhead location to the point they disappeared into the
horizon. We heard no sound. I'm guessing their altitude was at
least 30,000 feet. Finally, despite my having the only pair of
binoculars, I did not get the best observation. My spouse did
not pick up on the lights, but a large, transparent, rectangular
shape object moving across the sky. She described it as having a
flat bottom, slight square like protrusions of the top, sides,
and the side facing us (I assume the rear). She remembers seeing
stars thru it! I feel that the multiple lights we observed were
nothing more than that, just lights on some sort of fancy light
board.

I have contacted a local MUFON rep and he called up the radar
stations of Spokane airport and Fairchild AFB. No contacts were
reported. I have not contacted Yakima's airport, or any other
authorities either. Even though this is my first sighting, I
know where that would get me. So please, if any in the area has
seen something similar, please post on "alt.ufo.reports" or
contact me at my e-mail address.

Thanks,

Forrest B






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:55:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 22:52:06 PDT

>>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:43:29 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Howdy, friend Ed,

>More treats provided from Jerome Clark's ufological wisdom
>maintaining the high ufological standards which have become
>known throughout ufology:

Thank you for praising my wisdom and high standards.

>>Ed Stewart is wrong, no surprise here. Even Jim Oberg, with whom
>>I corresponded on the subject at the time, did not dispute that
>>the judges were all UFO skeptics. I remember remarking at the
>>time that a pro-UFO paper had about as much chance of winning
>>this rigged contest as does a camel to pass through the eye of a
>>needle.

>Just because you say so? Just because you say you remember?

Nah. Look it up, guy.

>have shown on this list a total disrespect for factuality even
>going to the extent of writing Robert Todd's contributions out
>of your history book and encyclopedia.

Ah yes, the obsession with Todd's slight coverage in the
encyclopedia. I was trying to write a history of the UFO
controversy. Any historian has to make judgments about who is
important, who isn't, who did what and why, and so on. If Ed
Stewart believes Todd to be a major figure, he ought to write
his own encyclopedia. I would have covered Todd more if I'd
thought him to be somebody important, whether I liked him
personally or not. (I think Adamski was a bald-faced liar, which
didn't stop me from writing about him at length, for example.)
It's just that in my research I didn't come upon anything that
led me to believe Todd is significant in the way the truly large
figures (from Adamski to Zeidman) are. Not a single reviewer of
the book has remarked on Todd's relative absence, so I gather
that , aside from Todd himself and his apologist Stewart, this
hasn't been seen as the huge intellectual scandal T and S want
us believe it is.

I don't claim ultimate wisdom in these matters, so again, if Ed
disagrees, rather than rant about it he ought to write his own
history showing why he believes Todd to be a towering figure.
I'd look forward to seeing the evidence, and I mean that
sincerely.

At the same time let me say I am sincerely flattered that Ed
feels my work of such significance that Todd's relative absence
therefrom is a subject to come back to again and again. Thanks,
Ed, for caring.

As to the claim of "total disrespect for factuality": this
doesn't seem to be a view held by anybody but hysterica and
hyperbole

specialists Stewart and Todd, so I'll consider the source. The
rest of you, if you're interested, can read the reviews of my
encyclopedia in the current issues of Fortean Times, UFO
Magazine, and the Journal of Scientific Exploration. And thanks,
Ed, for giving me the chance to slip in yet another shameless
plug.

>That is as low as an
>individual can commit themselves.

Don't you mean "as low as an individual can commit _himself_?"
You mean as low as Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson, Charlie
Starkweather, Vlad the Impaler? History will record that Jerome
Clark, who went as low as an individual could commit himself,
was one of the vilest villains of the 20th Century, identified
as such by no less than that eminent demonologist Ed Stewart.

>>Stewart may have his virtues (not necessarily apparent in recent
>>postings), but a firm sense of UFO history is, alas, not one of
>>them.

>The history you have fabricate yourself? You are right. I rely
>on source material as much as possible, and not in your
>contrived reality, never in what you say or write. You have
>shown yourself to be unreliable.

Uh huh. I try to be, Ed, and thanks for crediting me with
success in that department. If I see a fact, I do my best to
twist it beyond recognition, as every reviewer of my books has
noted. I just hate them ol' facts. I see one coming down the
road, and I bop it on the head. And to think I thought I could
fool you!

>>Ron Westrum remains interested in the UFO phenomenon and over
>>the years has written a number of splendid papers on the
>>sociology of science as it relates to controversies surrounding
>>anomalous phenomena. These have appeared in refereed academic
>>books and journals. It is probably safe to assume that Ed
>>Stewart has read none of them, sad to say. It's probably safe to
>>say he's heard of none of them.

>Again we see a total lack of intellectual integrity here on
>Jerome Clark's part. Prior to the Roper Report, Ron Westrum had
>many papers in the UFO field and some in the refereed academic
>literature. But Jerome Clark knows as well as I do that since
>1992, there has been a dearth of UFO related papers from Ron
>Westrum both in and out of the UFO field. Of course he can shown
>me wrong by giving us an example of Ron Westrum's contributions
>in the social sciences refereed journals on UFO topics from 1993
>to 1998? The ones Jerome Clark claims I never read. Well, save
>thyself from your intellectual dishonesty and provide a source
>reference 1993-1998 for what you have dishonestly claimed I have
>never read? You can't do it, can you?

I don't recall saying that Ron Westrum has published much about
UFOs (aside from his contribution to the Roper report) in recent
years as his professional attentions have gone in other
directions. He remains privately very much interested, however,
and I believe he has contributed a paper to the forthcoming
University Press of Kansas volume. We should all welcome his
return to our subject.

As Ed makes clear above, he has not read or heard of any Westrum
papers aside from his contribution to the Roper report --
exactly the point I made in my last posting and exactly the
point he is trying to distract our attention from.

>Quess what? NO papers since 1992 by Ron Westrum. That makes
>Jerome Clark intellecually dishonest once again on this list.
>The point here is not what Ron Westrum has/has not done since
>the Roper Report related to UFOs. The point is that I stated he
>hasn't written about the UFO field since 1992 and Jerome Clark
>had decided to manipulate a response as if Westrum has remained
>active all this time.

Apparently Ed is so desperate for ammunition against me, since
little or none seems to exist in the real world, that he's
manufactured a statement I never made.


>Of
>course you can call Ron Westrum directly. Maybe he has written
>something that is not in any of those multidiscipinary indexes.
>His office hours are tuesdays and thursdays, 1:30 to 3:30 pm and
>fridays 2:00 to 4:00 pm. His office number is (734) 487-1073.
>Ask him, for what he has published 1993-1998?

Ron's a good guy and an old friend, as is his colleague Marcello
Truzzi. Both contributed generous quotes for the back of my UFO
Encyclopedia. I've known both since the 1970s. Aside from that,
I'm not sure what Ed is ranting about here.

>No, the Roper Report was simply a case of bad science. The real
>issue is whether or not Ron Westrum's paper "The Promise of
>Ufology" has withstood the test of time or not since it was
>offered in rebuttal to Oberg's paper.

The Roper report really has nothing to do with the Westrum
response to Oberg's paper. The latter can be fairly
characterized not as "bad science" -- since it doesn't rise even
to that level -- but simply as flawed polemic.

>So? You wish to defend ufology on the basis that it is not
>responsible for its own consequences, be my guest. That is
>exactly one of the positions Oberg's paper points out to as one
>of the reasons ufology can't seeem to get up. The point is not
>what has/has not happened TO ufology. The point is what
>responsibility has ufology taken on itsself for its own
>condition?

I believe I've already answered that. Those of you looking for a
balanced, rational discussion of ufology's problems re science
are, I'm afraid, not going to find them in our friend Ed
Stewart's frenzied and tedious polemics. For an excellent brief
discussion of the problems, see Mark Rodeghier's insightful
observations on pp. 6-7 of the Fall 1998 issue of IUR. Michael
Swords also has some illuminating observations in his
"Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Science" paper in my UFO
Encyclopedia (and thanks again, Ed, for letting me get in yet
another shameless plug).


>>Project 1947, serious, concerted international work on
>>UFO history,

>Major contributions here have been made by demon Robert Todd and
>his associate, Barry Greenwood, another of Jerome Clark's
>created demons.

It always amuses me that Ed Stewart is forever accusing _other
people_ of creating demons -- apparently he has never heard of
the psychological phenomenon of "projection" -- when Ed himself
may as well be a demonologist for all the hate-filled
accusations he hurls, without evidence or logic, against any
number of targets. Actually, I don't like Todd for the same
reason many people don't like him: he demonizes others and he is
rude to the point of incoherence and even unintentional comedy.
Gee, does that sound like anybody else we know? Somebody, say,
with the initials ES? Nah, couldn't be....

As for Barry Greenwood, I haven't a clue to what Ed is ranting
about here. I like Barry, and we get along fine, even if we do
disagree about some things. But with Barry, as is not the case
with Todd and Stewart, you can disagree pleasantly and not get
demonized. Barry and I assume that reasonable, honorable people
can have reasonable, honorable disagreements. What a shocking
concept, right, Ed?

>>psychological surveys of close-encounter claimants,
>>the appearance of an unprecedented number of scholarly books and
>>papers on our subject, the publication next year of a pro-UFO
>>collection by a university press, the publication of Brad
>>Sparks's seminal work on the RB-47 case, and more.

>Yup, more books the merrier, especially pro-UFO books. What a
>fine thing!

Well, at last we have something to agree about. The University
Press of Kansas book will be the first sympathetic treatment of
the subject from an academic press since Jacobs's The UFO
Controversy, published in 1975. Definitely a fine thing, and
evidence, one hopes, of continuing progress within ufology.

>>>2. The objections raised by James Oberg in his paper are still
>>>valid today. Even in the ufologists' condemnation of the Roper
>>>Report, co-authored by Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, Ph.D., and
>>>Ron Westrum, Ph.D., they still employ old arguments that are
>>>more appeals to the ufo gallery and readership than consist of
>>>any real logic as pointed out in James Oberg paper.

>>It's amusing to see Stewart, who just two or three postings ago
>>was endorsing Waterboy Todd's listing as Mark Rodeghier as one
>>of the great villains of ufology, citing as a responsible
>>scientific authority.

>Mark doesn't have the guts to clean his own house. That is what I said.
>He still employs you as editor of IUR after you have shown yourself to
>be intellectually dishonest and lacking in integrity by the way that you
>have attempted to re-write UFO history based, not on facts, but your own
>individual pettiness.

If Mark is such a villain, why, then, did you cite his work? As
always Ed wants to have it all ways. On one hand, Mark Rodeghier
is part of ufology's problem, and ufology never tries to clean
its house. Yet, on the other, when Mark writes a paper critical
of the Roper report -- in effect, an effort to correct what Mark
believes to be intellectual error (i.e., clean house) in ufology
-- Ed is quick to cite him, blithely oblivious to his own
glaring hypocrisy. Which is it, guy: Is Mark a vile character or
a respected authority? Does he or does he not attempt to clean
house?

(Incidentally: Ed never did answer my challenge to him to
provide evidence that Oberg and other debunkers have ever --
even once -- tried to clean their own house.)

And for that matter, a question you and Todd have never
answered: Am I charlatan or a true believer? I couldn't be both,
after all. You've got to get your ad hominems straight, my
friend. One big problem with the insults-uber-alles approach of
Stewart and Todd is its bewildering incoherence. It _is_ funny,
though.

>>Those who know more about UFO history than Stewart does will
>>recognize what Westrum is talking about here, though I fear he
>>was being unduly optimistic about the future. The 1970s, which
>>saw unprecedented involvement by scientists, gave cause for
>>future hope.

>The question still remains unanswered. What "major involvement by
>scientists" has ufology been blessed with? Just because you say so, and
>especially because you say so, or Ron Westrum alludes to it, doesn't
>make it so.

An excellent paper on the strong involvement of scientists in
the UFO controversy, especially in the 1970s, is Steven J.
Dick's "Edward U. Condon, UFOs, and the Many Cultures of
Science," read at the History of Science Meeting in Washington,
D.C., on

December 28, 1992. It is safe to say that Dick's diagnosis has
nothing in common with Ed Stewart's. Dick, a historian of
science, is author of academic books on the extraterrestrial
life debate over the centuries.

>>My impression is that Hendry has most often been cited when such
>>citation "selectively suits an argument" that ufology is a
>>pseudoscience -- i.e., in the debunking literature and polemic.
>>I knew Allan Hendry well. We were good and close friends when we
>>both lived in the Chicago area, and I can tell you bluntly that
>>Hendry detested debunkers and thought of "none other than Phil
>>Klass" as a joke. See, for example, my article "Phil Klass vs.
>>the UFO Debunkers," February 1981 Fate. (It's also posted on the
>>internet on the Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate website.)
>>Allan went out of his way not to include Klass's books (or
>>Menzel's) in the recommended reading section in The UFO
>>Handbook. He did not take Klass seriously in the way he took the
>>best ufologists seriously.

>Now that we have had some more imput of historical commentary
>and memory by Jerome Clark, it doesn't change, even if accurate,
>the original statement that Phil Klass respected Allen Hendry.
>As a matter of fact a couple of years ago I found myself at a
>table with Richard Heyden, Eddie Bullard, James Moseley and Phil
>Klass, a motley crew if there ever was one. I think we were
>somewhat later briefly joined by Bob Girard. No demons, just
>human beings showing mutual respect for each other.

"Mutual respect" seems to be difficult for you, I know. So does
the spelling of people's names. Last time it was Kent Jeffrey's
last name, and this time it's Richard Heiden's. (Rich is another
old pal of mine; he's working on an article for IUR right now,
coincidentally.) Eddie Bullard is one of the many good things
that have happened to ufology since Westrum's paper appeared,
and I appreciate Ed's bringing up his name.

Incidentally, Eddie (a fellow CUFOS board member whom I look
forward to seeing at our meeting late this month) contributes
several excellent papers to my encyclopedia: "Abduction
Phenomenon," "Anomalous Aerial Phenomena Before 1800," and
"Waves." I urge anybody who's looking for the best our subject
has to offer to go to your local library (don't buy the book
unless you're rich; it's damned expensive) and read Eddie's
extraordinary treatments of these subjects.

He is also a regular contributor to IUR (which, as some of you
know, I edit) and the Journal of UFO Studies, which CUFOS
publishes. Among his papers are some powerful debunkings of Ed's
intellectual mentor Klass and CSICOP, whose UFO Subcommittee
Klass directs. See, for example, his "Klass Takes on Abductions;
Abductions Win" (IUR, November/December 1987); "Missing Science"
(IUR, March/April 1994), and "Epistemological Totalitarianism:
The Skeptical Case Against Abductions" (IUR, September/ October
1994).

I personally find it distressing that so much Klass polemic
seeks to demonize those who disagree with him (Klass even, in
one particularly notorious instance, tried to get James McDonald
into legal trouble), but I can understand why Ed has no problem
whatever with this approach. It is hilarious, however, that
while Ed is accusing others of bad science, he is praising and
quoting Klass as a great authority. Klass's UFOs -- Explained
(1968), of course, is generally regarded as a pseudoscience
classic. See, for example, what the Condon report has to say
about it, not to mention James McDonald, who was an actual
scientist, unlike Klass or Ed Stewart (or, for that matter, me).
In his paper on the RB-47 case (also in my encyclopedia), Brad
Sparks shows why Klass's theories about that crucial incident
are scientifically and physically impossible.

For a treatment of the relationship of Hendry and Klass, see my
"Phil Klass vs. the `UFO Promoters'" (Fate, February 1981) and
The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp. 482-83 and 855. (Thanks for
giving me an excuse for another plug, Ed.)

>>>Here we are now two decades after the above was written. The key
>>>word above is "may". What has been revealed by ufology in terms
>>>of new natural phenomena? What leadership in this area has
>>>ufology taken?

>>There is, as Ed should know, a whole school of ufology arguing
>>that UFOs are new or little-understood natural phenomena. A
>>number of books argue as much in interesting fashion. I don't
>>agree with their conclusions, but I certainly feel they are a
>>worthwhile contribution to the ongoing discussion. I can just
>>see my friend Paul Devereux tearing his hair out at Stewart's
>>words.

I note that Ed chooses not to address his howler of an error
here, betraying his profound ignorance of what is going on
inside ufology. All he manages is yet another feeble insult, to
wit:

>I have called you intellectually dishonest and I DO so again by
>your above statement. It is so intellectually lazy and dishonest

. Now, take a couple of aspirins and lie down before you have a
coronary, my friend. And really _try_ for once to have a good
day. Maybe when one comes, you'll start talking like a rational
human being, and maybe you'll even have something to say that
goes beyond demonizing, slurring, and self-righteous posturing.
Even children eventually tire of throwing tantrums.
 Meantime, guy, you're boring the hell out of everybody. You
have nothing to say, and the more you carry on, the louder you
get. Your insults are so over the top -- so, dare I say it,
infantile -- that they amaze far more than they offend.

You've got a problem, Ed.  You may well be emotionally incapable
of participating in adult discourse, for all I know, but the
ranting and raving approach isn't getting you anywhere. It
certainly does not make you sound rational, and it obviously is
not making you happy. Maybe it's time to leave a field you hate
so much and go into something else -- though something tells me
that if you entered stamp-collecting, you'd behave pretty much
the
same way.

Sadly,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                                Re: Leo(nids)

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:52:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:10:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Leo(nids)


Dear list

Forgive me, but this is off topic:

........... there was "no part of the sky so large as twice
the Moon's diameter not filled each instant by meteors."

One of the descriptions of the recurring meteor storm which we
may be treated to this November, written by Prussian scientist
and explorer Alexander von Humboldt from his camp in Cuman=E3,
Venezuela in 1799. Check out the links on this subject at the
site given below. Included are the mathmatical probabilities of
how many satellites will be struck by this heavenly sandstorm.

Storm links:
http://fs1.ilk.de/sites/gap/leolinks.htm

Impact probabilities:
http://see.msfc.nasa.gov/see/mod/leonids.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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:01:49 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:07:46 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:58:36 +0100
>>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>>James Bond Johnson & List,

>>I wonder if the word "DISK" is spelled differently in
>>British and American (or Canadian/Australian) English;
>>i.e., should it be"DISC" - with a "C", or "DISK" - with a "K".

>>Specifically, what is the correct spelling in American? And,
>>how is this word likely to be spelled/written on the Ramey
>>message, i.e., as written by American military people?

>>Or, maybe both way of spelling is correct?

>>I guess this could be of some importancy for the correct
>>interpretation of the Ramey message.

>>Best Regards,

>>AWS

>I can't speak with authority about 1947 usage.  In the publishing
>business we use 'Webster's Dictionary of English Usage' as the
>authority in cases like this, but they do not even have an entry
>on these words.

>'Disk' seems to be the most common spelling used today by Americans,
>but I still see 'disc' used as well.

>Bob

Bob & List,

I always trip over it when writing on PC support issues often
finding when I reread what I've written that I have used both
spellings in the same paragraph. Having read so much U.S.
originated computer stuff over the years either way is a _don't
care_.

If you want to apply a _golden rule_ to it then ask yourself - do
the Olympians throw a discus or a diskus?

Regards,
Leanne.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:28:57 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:08:42 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40



>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:34:49 -0400
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40
>
>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:20:56 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 40
>
>UFO ROUNDUP
>Volume 3, Number 40
>October 5, 1998
>Editor: Joseph Trainor
>
>SAUCER PHOTOGRAPHED
>IN AUSTRALIA
>
>     On Friday, September 11, 1998, at 10:30 a.m.,
>Oswald Raeder, 58, a New Zealand tourist, was in
>Surfers Paradise, Queensland, Australia when he
>decided to take a photograph of the Dolphin Arcade
>Building.  Looking down Cavill Avenue, Rader snapped
>two color photos on his camera, aiming at the Dolphin
>Building framed by a clear blue sky.
>     But when the photographs were developed, they
>shouwed something else in the picture, as well.
>     The first image showed two puffs of smoke in
>the sky.  The second, snapped seconds later, showed
>a black saucer leaving the area.
>     "Mr. Raeder, 58, accidentally captured the images
>on a $10 (disposable) camera as he photographed the
>Dolphin Arcade Building from the Search Rescue Service
>Club in central Surfers Paradise."
>     "'My idea was just to take a picture of the building,
>as I do a lot wherever I go, because I love to look at
>architecture,' he said, 'It's fascinating, but I'm not a UFO
>fanatic.  In fact, I'm frightened that people will think I'm
>made because I cannot explain this."
>     "Roger Brown, operator of Surfers Paradise Photo
>Express, said, 'It's just a matter of an unassuming guy,
>not a professional photographer, who took his picture
>and then found the object.  It could not be faked,
>expecially with a disposable camera.  I'm certain they
>are legitimate.'"
>     "Wing Commander John Steinbeck (no relation to
>the USA author--J.T.), spokesman for RAAF (Royal
>Australian Air Force base) Amberley, confirmed that
>there were no military aircraft near the area at that
>time."
>     "A Civil Aviation Authority spokesman said there
>was no reported aircraft activity in the central Surfers
>Paradise area early on Sept. 11th."
>     Surfers Paradise is on the Queensland coast
>about 480 kilometers (300 miles) north of Sydney.
>(See the newspapers The Sunday Territorian and
>the Sunday Mail for September 27, 1998.  Many
>thanks to Diane Hamilton for forwarding the news
>stories.)


List,

By way of clarification Surfers Paradise is closer to 1000
kilometres north of Sydney - just south of the Queensland capital
of Brisbane. (The northern Brisbane suburb of Redcliff ahs been
the site of a few nocturnal UFO sightings in recent weeks.)

Regards,
Leanne






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

               Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:12:49 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:27:36 -0400
Subject: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City


For copyright reasons list only!

Source: CNN Custom News

http://customnews.cnn.com/cnews/pna.show_story?p_art_id=3D3008022&p_sectio
n_name=3DWorld

Stig

*******

Oct. 7, 1998 >> 5:04 am GMT

Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted into Irish City

Reuters
05-OCT-98

DUBLIN, Oct 5 (Reuters) - Mystery orange-and-white parachutes carrying
steel tubes with liquid inside fell on the southern Irish city of
Waterford on Monday, baffled police said.

"I'm not waiting for Martians or anything, but the fire brigade and the
army bomb disposal unit have examined them and so far no one knows what
they are," Sergeant Tim Price of the Waterford police said.

The bomb disposal unit had checked for explosives and determined that
the tubes presented no danger to the public, Price said.

The seven parachutes, carrying tubes about one metre (three feet) long,
fell at various points on the city centre, Price said.

The tubes concealed Pyrex glass holders sealed with wax and containing
an unidentified clear liquid.

"One of the tubular containers has a plastic box attached to it with a
fingerprint in red ink on it," Price said. He could not confirm media
reports that the tubes had Russian inscriptions on them.

"There must be some logical explanation for it," he said. "It's most
unusual."

Copyright 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

=A9 1998 Cable News Network, Inc. A Time Warner Company
All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this information is provided to
you.
Read our privacy guidelines.

Custom News is built on Oracle technology.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:36:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:31:08 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:58:36 +0100
>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>James Bond Johnson & List,

>I wonder if the word "DISK" is spelled differently in
>British and American (or Canadian/Australian) English;
>i.e., should it be"DISC" - with a "C", or "DISK" - with a "K".

>Specifically, what is the correct spelling in American? And,
>how is this word likely to be spelled/written on the Ramey
>message, i.e., as written by American military people?

>Or, maybe both way of spelling is correct?

>I guess this could be of some importancy for the correct
>interpretation of the Ramey message.


>Best Regards,

>AWS


Dear List,

Parallell to the ongoing research regarding the interpretation
of the Ramey message, I can provide you with the following
research report, which I recently just happened to come across,
and which is referring to an US Air Force research regarding the
Roswell incident, i.e.:

http://home.clara.net/ufo-net/air_force.html

This report seems to be written by Mr. Richard L. Weaver, Col,
USAF, Director, Security and Special Program Oversight.


Especially, check the following two texts, cut from this report:

"It was also noted that in the two photos of Ramey he had a
piece of paper in his hand. In one, it was folded over so
nothing could be seen. In the second, however, there appears to
be text printed on the paper. In an attempt to read this text to
determine if it could shed any further light on locating
documents relating to this matter, the photo was sent to a
national level organization for digitizing and subsequent photo
interpretation and analysis. This organization was also asked to
scrutinize the digitized photos for any indication of the
flowered tape (or "hieroglyphics, depending on the point of
view) that were reputed to be visible to some of the persons who
observed the wreckage prior to it getting to Fort Worth. This
organization reported on July 20, 1994, that even after
digitizing, the photos were of insufficient quality to visualize
either of the details sought for analysis."

and,

"Additionally, the description of the "flying disc" was
consistent with a document routinely used by most pro-UFO
writers to indicate a conspiracy in progress--the telegram from
the Dallas FBI office of July 8, 1947. This document quoted in
part states: ."..The disc is hexagonal in shape and was
suspended from a balloon by a cable, which balloon was
approximately twenty feet in diameter. ...the object found
resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar
reflector. ...disc and balloon being transported..."


I don't know whether any of you have read or heard about this
report and the author before, and I don't know anything about
the report's credibility and objectivity - just read it and make
your own conclusion about it.

Regarding the use of the words "disk" or "disc", it seems that
the newspaper journalists in those days (July 1947) were
familiar with, and were writing, the words "saucer", and "DISK"
- with a K; e.g., check:

http://bedlam.rutgers.edu/ufo/pictures/roswell.
1947/Roswell-1947.1.gif


Further, the military reporters seem to be using the word "DISC"
- with a C; e.g., check the (military) report referred to in the
URL above.

Now, the question is: Did the journalists in those days just
write the words "disc" (or "disk) or "saucer", just to continue
the story of the (alleged) first, modern sightings of UFOs and
"saucers", which were reported just a couple of weeks prior to
the Roswell incident - to create a more exciting story? I would
guess this is highly likely, but in addition, it appears - from
the referred to report - that the military themselves (e.g.,
Colonel Blanchard, Major Marcel, or General Hoyt Vandenberg)
were using the word "disc" (or "flying disc"), without knowing
this term's exact meaning.....

Referring to the military report (and it seems 'credible enough'
to me), could it be that the Ramey message was written by
General Vandenberg, by Major Marcel, or, maybe by Ramey himself?
(Maybe some preliminary draft for a letter or telegram?) Then
the word "disk", or "disc" - possibly appearing in the message -
isn't so unlikely.


Best Regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

               BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 03:36:57 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:46:06 -0400
Subject: BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers

Dear All,

I was recently contacted by a chap named Gareth Williams who is
working for BBC TV in Manchester. Gareth is looking for a UFO
researcher between the ages of 18 and 28 to take part in a
programme for BBC 2. The programme in question would film the
researcher at work etc.

If you know of anyone that is interested in this ide then they
can contact the BBC at:

Gareth Williams:
Tele: 0161 244 3636.
Fax: 0161 244 3640.
E-mail: gareth.williams@bbc.co.uk

I was thinking of people like Tim & Lynda Matthews, Dave Pointon or
Robert Bull, but I'm not exactly sure of their respective ages.

Please feel free to pass this onto any possible interested parties.

Yours Sincerely,


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 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                      Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:42:33 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:28:35 -0400
Subject: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania


Sources: alt.ufo.reports, October 6.

Stig

*******

UFO sighted Route 77 in PA Oct.4 1998=BF

Author:=BFgator
Email: gator@alleg.edu
Date:1998/10/06
Forums:alt.ufo.reports

I was traveling back to college this past weekend, Sunday Oct. 4, 1998,
with two friends. We were on Route 77 in PA, just outside of Corry. As
we were near the little town of Spartansburg at about 7:45pm, we saw on
the horizon an object with a few blinking red lights that did not look
like a plane. As it got closer, we grew more curious, and we pulled off
the road, only to watch it suddenly speed up and disappear over a
hilltop. We were curious, but had not gotten a close look. However, ten
minutes later down the road, we encountered something of the same
likeness. It was fast approaching along the passenger side where I was
sitting. We pulled off the road again to watch, and the object slowed
down and actually hovered above us. Looking out my window I could see
the actual underside of this thing. It had a definite triangular shape,
faint steady pale blue lights on the bottom, and red blinking lights on
the sides. The triangular shape was so distinct. My friend Randy
stepped out of the truck to look, and my friend Aubrey and I rolled
down the window and could hear a whirring sound as the object suddenly
picked up speed again and began moving through the air in the direction
from which we had been coming.  We saw another vehicle come from the
opposite direction and pull off the road about thirty feet behind us,
so we assume that we are not the only ones who witnessed this strange
thing. I have never been much of a believer in UFO stories, so I am
still trying to "come to terms" with this story myself. Did anyone see
this object when we did, or has anyone ever seen one that fits this
description?

*****

Re: UFO sighted Route 77 in PA Oct.4 1998=BF
Author:=BFJim
Email:  jcolonna@microserve.net
 Date: 1998/10/06
Forums: alt.ufo.reports

Ggator wrote:

> I was traveling back to college this past weekend, Sunday Oct. 4,

(snipped)

Great to know I am not the only PA person to see this UFO. I saw it a
little bit later around Blairsville, PA.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                CO2 Crystals Helps Study Of Martian Polar Ice

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:53:20 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:55:57 -0400
Subject: CO2 Crystals Helps Study Of Martian Polar Ice

Source: Agricultural Research Service

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/oct98/crys1098.htm

Stig

*******


FROM EARTH TO MARS--Carbon Dioxide Crystals Help Interplanetary Studies



"If life was once sustainable on Mars, it is important to know what
caused Mars to evolve into the cold and lifeless planet it is today.
With this knowledge, we can terraform Mars by reversing the
process."--Carl Sagan

Technology from the Agricultural Research Service often shows up on
farms, in food and industrial plants, and in the home. Soon, ARS
technology could find a new theater of operations: the Red Planet.

Mars, with its mountains, valleys, polar ice caps, dry river beds,
atmosphere, and relatively moderate climate, is more like Earth than
any other body in our solar system. Many scientists believe Mars holds
a key to answering questions about the geologic and climatic history of
the Earth.

Over the next decade, the National Aeronautic and Space Administration
(NASA) will investigate Mars with a number of spacecraft and landers.
Several missions are already under way. The Mars Pathfinder began
exploring the Martian surface in July of 1997. The Mars Global Surveyor
is being readied for its mission of sensing the Martian atmosphere. And
discoveries by ARS scientists may play a role in future Mars missions
that will look at the planet's polar ice caps.

It started a few years ago. Cytologist William P. Wergin and botanist
Eric F. Erbe, who are with the ARS Nematology Laboratory at the
Beltsville (Maryland) Agricultural Research Center (BARC), developed
the first technique for viewing and photographing snowflake crystals
with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Their technique relied on a
new procedure for collecting and preserving snow crystals. (See
"Anatomy of a Snowflake," Agricultural Research, April 1995, pp.
18-21.)

Wergin and Erbe were interested in the crystalline structure of
snowflakes as a source of new clues about the potential available water
in mountain snowpacks--information vital to irrigated lands in much of
the West.

"This was the first time the SEM was used to obtain highly magnified
images that clearly show the details of intact and well-focused snow
crystals," says Wergin. "And because the viewing stage allows a sample
to be viewed at different angles, we were able to record true,
three-dimensional images of the crystals."

Unlike conventional microscopes, the SEM does not use light passed
through a glass lens to form images of a specimen. Rather, the images
are formed by electrons that pass through a magnetic field that serves
as a lens. The images can be stored digitally and displayed on a
cathode ray tube similar to a TV screen.

The scientists' procedure uses liquid nitrogen to instantly chill snow
crystals to -320oF. This keeps them from melting while the SEM images
are obtained.

Now the scientists have adapted the technique to capture the structure
of dry ice--frozen crystals of carbon dioxide (CO2). Gaseous CO2 is a
minor constituent of our atmosphere, making up less than 1 percent.
There is no evidence that frozen CO2 exists in nature on our planet's
surface. On Mars, frozen CO2 makes up most of the planet's polar ice
caps.

"We used a special low-temperature SEM to visualize the structure of
CO2 crystals," says Erbe. "The microscope's stage, on which the
specimens are placed for viewing, can be cooled to -320oF."

The ARS scientists say that CO2 crystals are as small as 1/200,000 of
an inch. "They're considerably smaller than snowflakes--some only 1/100
the size of snow crystals," says Erbe.

When magnified up to 20,000 times, the CO2 crystals generally look like
eight-sided structures compared to six-sided ones for snowflakes.
"Carbon dioxide crystals often appear as two attached four-sided
pyramids, called octahedrons," says Erbe.

Carbon dioxide gas freezes to a solid at extremely cold temperatures,
around -240oF compared to 32oF for water. Earth and Mars are the only
two planets in our solar system with ice caps that expand and contract
in response to changing seasons. These two facts make the ARS
scientists' research of great interest to colleagues at NASA's Goddard
Space Flight Center in nearby Greenbelt, Maryland.

ARS and NASA scientists are collaborating to adapt the Beltsville
scientists' SEM technology to interplanetary studies of the Martian
surface. Collaborators include climatologist James L. Foster, physicist
Al T.C. Chang, and hydrologist Dorothy K. Hall at NASA's Laboratory of
Hydrospheric Processes, and geologist J. Barton of General Sciences
Corp. in Greenbelt.

Foster says that the "SEM technology, together with modeling studies
and experiments using microwave radiometers, may allow us to assess,
for the first time, the thickness of the seasonal Martian ice caps. On
Mars, as on Earth, ice plays a role in large-scale climate processes.
However, unlike Earth, Mars has polar ice caps made up of both frozen
water and frozen CO2," says Foster.

"Knowing the size and shape and scattering properties of both types of
frozen crystals will tell us how these crystals behave and scatter
energy in different parts of the microwave portion of the
electromagnetic spectrum," he says.

This information should lead to more accurate estimates of the
thickness and extent of frozen material covering the Martian surface.


What It's Like on Mars


More than 20 years ago, Viking I and II spacecraft recorded various
spectral data on this Martian CO2 mantle. Future missions will be
making measurements of Mars in the microwave region of the spectrum. In
order to model how CO2 crystals scatter and absorb microwave radiation,
NASA scientists needed to know the exact shape and size range of CO2
crystals.

Foster says, "The ARS studies have enabled us to look at the CO2
crystals in much more detail than ever before." The ARS scientists
think that other gases that freeze at ultralow temperatures--such as
ammonia and methane--could also be observed using this technique.

Back on Earth, seeing the crystalline structure of CO2 will give ARS
and other scientists clues that may help them learn more about how
frozen CO2 can cause rain to fall, as in cloud seeding.

"Dry ice crystals are among the most effective materials used for cloud
seeding," says Wergin.

He believes that CO2 crystals serve as nuclei around which water vapor
freezes, forming snowflakes. Eventually, the flakes melt to form
raindrops if the temperature at the ground is above freezing.

Studies of CO2 crystals may help scientists identify more efficient or
economical materials for cloud seeding. More importantly, the SEM
technology may help them learn how gaseous CO2 contributes to the
greenhouse effect.

"Carbon dioxide ranks first among the greenhouse gases--along with
nitrous oxide and methane--that contribute to global warming as they
increase in the Earth's atmosphere," says Gary R. Evans. Formerly chief
scientist to the Secretary of Agriculture on global change issues, he
is director of the ARS Natural Resources Institute at BARC.

"Knowing the crystalline structure of solid CO2 may give us clues as to
the capacity of the gas to absorb and re-radiate energy," says Evans.

"Carbon dioxide can be sequestered by the way we manage farming
practices," he says. "Plants take up CO2 through photosynthesis. After
harvest, their residue gets returned to the soil and becomes organic
carbon. So farmers have a chance to reduce CO2 by improving their
management of agricultural systems to increase soil organic carbon."

The spinoff benefits from increased soil organic carbon, Evans says,
are reduced soil erosion and better soil tilth--an indicator of soil
health.--By Hank Becker, Agricultural Research Service Information
Staff.


William P. Wergin and Eric F. Erbe are at the USDA-ARS Nematology
Laboratory, 10300 Baltimore Ave., Beltsville, MD, 20705-2350; phone
(301) 504-9027, fax (301) 504-8923.

James L. Foster is at the NASA Laboratory of Hydrospheric Processes,
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, 20771; phone (301)
286-7096, fax (301) 286-1758.

To view snow and CO2 crystals under ultrahigh magnification,visit

www.lpsi.barc.usda.gov/em usnow


"FROM EARTH TO MARS--Carbon Dioxide Crystals Help Interplanetary
Studies" was published in the October 1998 issue of Agricultural
Research magazine. Click *here to see this issue's table of contents.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                       Re: BBC: A Question Of Science

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:21:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:19 -0400
Subject: Re: BBC: A Question Of Science


>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 98 20:13:17 +0200
>From: Giuliano (Jimmy) Marinkovicc <9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: BBC: A QUESTION OF SCIENCE

>[Lightly edited --ebk]

>S>HORT REVIEW OF BBC SHOW. The length of the show was 45 minutes
>sense of my time) so I present this short review of the
>programme as I have promised.

================================================================

<snip>

Thanks for the review.   Very enlightening.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

               "Just Because You're Not Paranoid Doesn't Mean

From: Rebecca <RSchatte@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:41:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:20 -0400
Subject: "Just Because You're Not Paranoid Doesn't Mean

From: AOLNews@aol.com
Subject: "Just Because You're Not Paranoid Doesn't Mean They're...
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:16:01 EDT


"Just Because You're Not Paranoid Doesn't Mean They're Not
Plotting Against You." Conspiracy Theorist Robert Anton Wilson
to Publish with HarperCollins

NEW YORK--(ENTERTAINMENT WIRE)--October 7, 1998--What do the
Freemasons, the Kennedys, and Queen Elizabeth all have in
common? All are at the center of gigantic conspiracy theories
with incredibly complex and perpetually multiplying twists and
turns. At least this is the case presented by conspiracy
theorist/author Robert Anton Wilson, whose new HarperPerennial
book, Everything Is Under Control reads according to compact and
provocative entries (which include both cross-references to
other entries in the book and provide also the addresses to
related sites on the Web). This book is truly interactive--you
can dip, read through, or follow one of the URL's from an
interesting entry onto the Internet.

Everything Is Under Control: Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-Ups
covers the range of Robert Anton Wilson's (author of the classic
cult favorite The Illuminatus! Trilogy) kaleidoscopic knowledge.
Everyone and everything from John Adams to the Veronezh (former
Soviet Union) UFO sighting, the Campus Crusade for Cthulhu to
the Mothman prophecies (and the whole shebang in between) can be
found in this convenient and modern alphabetization of Wilson's
investigative work.

A few good conspiracies, cults, and cover-ups in Everything Is
Under  Control:

-- Abductees Anonymous is an organization which serves as a
support  group for persons who believe that extraterrestrials
have kidnapped  and sexually molested them--one of the largest
subgroups in the  recovered memory community, trailing behind
only the incest survivors  and the Satanic abuse survivors.

-- CIA LSD Research: In 1953, the Central Intelligence Agency
began a  series of experiments with LSD, the most potent
mind-altering drug  known at the time (or now). The LSD research
was part of a larger program called MK-ULTRA, which also
included CIA-financed studies of hypnosis, electroshock,
lobotomy, and sensory deprivation.

-- President Bill Clinton: please see: A-albionic,
Bilderbergers,  Council on Foreign Relations, Princess Di's
Death, Vince Foster

-- Heaven's Gate: In 1978, in Houston, the present author was
giving a lecture when a man and a woman in the audience got up
and walked out.  They were later identified as Bo and Peep,
leaders of a typical UFO  contact cult, and later we heard that
they had changed their names to  Him and Her. The female died of
natural causes, the male changed his  name again to Do, two
decades passed, and then he and 38 disciples  committed suicide
with vodka and goofballs.

-- Mosquito Conspiracy: In 1956-58, the U.S. Army conducted
field  experiments in Savannah, Georgia, and Avon Park, Florida,
in which mosquitoes were released into residential areas. Many
people were "swarmed" by the mosquitoes and later fell ill; some
even died. U.S. Army personnel posed as public health officials
to photograph and test victims. Although details of the
experiments on unwitting citizens remain classified, some
conspiracy buffs think that the mosquitoes were infected with
yellow fever.

The author, who sees himself as a Futurist, conspiracy theorist,
and stand-up comic, regularly gives seminars at Eslan and other
New Age centers. A former editor at Playboy magazine, Wilson's
ideas can be further experienced through his award-winning
website: www.rawilson.com

CONTACT:

Bruce Mason, 212/207-7292

email: bruce.mason@harpercollins.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

               'Roswell' Technology Featured In New TV-Series

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 02:40:31 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:21 -0400
Subject: 'Roswell' Technology Featured In New TV-Series


Sorry that I live in Denmark.

Stig

*******

From: Jenny Faraldo <jfaraldo@bncpr.com>
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: LIKE UFO's?
Date: 8 Oct 1998 00:00:50 GMT


There is a new time travel series that premieres this evening
(Wednesday, October 7th) on UPN at 8:00 PM called "Seven Days."
The premise is that a secret government agency uses alien
technology collected from the Roswell crash and uses it to create
a time travel sphere. This two-hour premiere is awesome!!

If you're interested in finding out more about this series you
can log on

www.sevendaze.com

or

www.paramount.com

and click on 'Seven Days' icon.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Scott Ribordy <sdr@ns.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:29:16 GMT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 98 22:52:06 PDT

<snip>

JC:
>>I am afraid I don't understand what point our friend is trying
>>to make here. In the years since then, a lot of good things have
>>happened to ufology, along with a lot of bad things. So?

ES:
>So? You wish to defend ufology on the basis that it is not
>responsible for its own consequences, be my guest. That is
>exactly one of the positions Oberg's paper points out to as one
>of the reasons ufology can't seeem to get up. The point is not
>what has/has not happened TO ufology. The point is what
>responsibility has ufology taken on itsself for its own
>condition?

<snip>

>Must be so! Jerome Clark has proclaimed it so. Ufology has now been
>recognized as a legitimate science and succedded to achieve equal
>stature with all the other legitimate fields of study and acceptance by
>the academia of the world. What a fine thing to happen! Ufologia has
>triumphed after all!

>Ooops! Wake-up call!

<snip>

>Mark [Rodeghier] doesn't have the guts to clean his own house.

<snip>

>I bring this up to
>affirm a strong point. Klass and other skeptics are not the
>problem with ufology, nor the deamons that are continuously
>presented on this list by UFO illuminaries looking for something
>to blame for their own problems. The problem is within ufology
>and the people that have keep it wallowing in its present
>condition by refusing to clean itself up. Ufologists can shoot
>as many messengers as they want, shrug responsibility for its
>woes and blame whoever they want for its paralysis, and in the
>end nothing will have changed.

<snip>

>Ed Stewart


Mr. Stewart,

With your obvious interest in the health and well-being of
ufology, I have to ask; What, in your opinion, should be done?

The impression I get from your articles (Please correct me if
I'm getting the wrong impression.) is that you feel that there
are certain individuals who should *not* be participating in
ufology. I am curious as to how you would endeavor to exclude
(excommunicate?) them.

Where can ufology be practiced so that it can be safe from these
foul despoilers of good scientific practices?

I would be interested in reading your (and the List's, of
course) thoughts on this.


Kind Regards,

Scott Ribordy
sdr@ns.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                             Re: Looks Deceiving

From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:28:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving


ebk, List, and Roger who wrote.....

>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 20:22:52 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Looks Deceiving

>Hello list,

>Fair warning; this is a rather 'train of thought' diatribe.

>Here goes...

>A funny thing happened recently that got me to thinkin'.

<snip>

>Well, there's been much debate about the 'science' and/or 'non
>science' of ufology. Skeptics want tangible proof; something
>they can hold in their hands or they don't even want to talk
>about it. Believers will usually settle for something less; if
>credible witnesses say they saw something, then it's open season
>for debate.

<snip>

>Roger Evans
>Houston, Texas


Roger:

I've taken the above ensnipped thought out of its well-spoken
context because it got me to thinking about what happens in
science when a problem is not stated very well, or, worse, is
misstated.

"What if Eleanor Roosevelt could (could not) fly?" (My
apologies to the "Firesign Theater", circa 1970.)

What observations would give rise to such a problem? What if I
solve the problem? Would my solution be of any use to anyone?
How about if I end up with a consensus among all observers which
is in basic agreement as to the observation?......Does that mean
I've got an answer to the problem or that I've got myself a
science?

Now, an observer of old Eleanor is really hot to have others see
(not see) the same thing s/he sees (doesn't see) - old eleanor
flying (not flying) - but what if old Eleanor flies only once in
a blue moon? I guess you would need a helluva lot of observers
with some way of recording their observations in order to check
each other's sightings so as to have some scientific basis for
consensus on solving the problem of "what if Eleanor Roosevelt
could fly?" and not be trumped by a contrary consensus among
those who didn't see old eleanor flying.

Barring a series of numerous, independent, observations of old
eleanor flying, recorded with an objectively verifiable
measurement device, I ain't got much on which to reach a
scientific consensus, much less solve, the flying problem, when
all I've got is a bunch of folks saying they saw old eleanor
flying. What I've got is a consensus among observers based on
personal mental impressions and memories that Eleanor Roosevelt
could fly. And that kind of science ain't much use to me when
I'm not one of the chosen few to have such an observation.....
by default I'm stuck with mental impressions and memories of old
eleanor not flying.

It strikes me as obvious that it doesn't make too much
difference what the hell the mental impressions and memories
might be..... flying or not flying..... neither are particularly
useful in figuring out a solution to the problem of "What if
eleanor roosevelt could (could not) fly?" It strikes me as
equally obvious that either is little more than unquestionable
authority..... and that ain't science. (Paraphrasing the Duke, I
think.)

Anyhow, Roger, thanks for the thoughts.

John White







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

              Spanish Air Force's Declassification Of UFO Files

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:21:58 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:06:55 -0400
Subject: Spanish Air Force's Declassification Of UFO Files


Source: alt.ufo.reports, October 8.

Stig

*******

THE SPANISH AIR FORCE UFO FILES DECLASSIFICATION FINISHES

Author: Pedro P. Canto
Email: ppcanto@ctv.es
Date:1998/10/08
Forums: alt.ufo.reports

THE SPANISH AIR FORCE UFO FILES DECLASSIFICATION FINISHES

Lasts weeks was deposited in the of the Air General Headquarter
Library (Madrid), to arrangement of the public party, the last
file of the Spanish Air Force on anomalous observations related
to unidentified flying objets (UFOs). According to Vicente-Juan
Ballester Olmos, director of research in the FUNDACI=D3N ANOMAL=CDA
(P.O.Box 5.041, 39080 Santander), "with this we must consider
ended the process of declassification of secret character UFO
information from Defense, that begun in September 1992 after the
fact that the Junta de Jefes del Estado Mayor (JUJEM) took a
brave decision in this regard.

Already in December 1996 was freed the last case of what has
been given in calling the historical file of the Air Force,
formed by 62 files transmitted at the beginning of 1992 for the
Air General Headquarter - where during a thirtieth of years were
guarded under the classified matter stamp - to the Air Operative
Command (MOA), organization commisioned of management of the UFO
information, located in the air base of Torrej=F3n (Madrid)."

In the last year and a half have left to the public light 21 new
recaptured episodes of the forgetfulness in various military
facilities in Spain, as consequence of an intensive
documentation research by MOA. In total, 83 UFO files finally
facilitated public occupy almost 2.000 pages on anomalous
appearance events (exactly 122), occurred between 1962 and 1995.

The process of declassification of the UFO information was not
developed under the general consent of all the  researchers.
Instead of this, from its beginning it received unjust critical
from the sensationalist sector of the national ufology, that it
has not saved affronts and misrepresentations, in short, a real
poisoning campaign, to tarnish the outstanding success of this
military opening process. And is that with the declassification
is ended one of the untruthful myths seated between the UFO
believers: the conspiracy and the official cover-up. "Today we
know -declared by Ballester Olmos, author of five books on this
subject - that the Air Force only investigated very slightly the
UFO phenomenon between 1968 and 1980.

The reason of the secret has not been, as compared to what some
talkative maintain, that the Government knows the "surprising
truth" that is hidden after the UFOs and that agrees to conceal
to the citizens, but to the simple fact of "to maintain
reservation toward that whose nature is ignored". The Valencian
researcher has claimed also that "The Air Force Air has finally
been realized that the characteristics of the UFO topic are more
sociological than aeronautical and that they do not suppose any
risk for the National Security".

V.J. Ballester Olmos is recognized as the civil driver of this
historical declassification, with no preceding in Europe, and
coordinates a multidiscipline researchers team with the
objective of analyzing the emerging information. This expert has
been forceful in his conclusions: "We can assert with absolute
guarantee that all the information on UFOs known by the Air
Force has been put at the disposal of the civil society without
any cover-up. Now the ball is in our roof: to evaluate the data
to see if there is or not unsolved cases".

By Ricardo Campo

More UFO News in http://www.ctv.es/USERS/ppcanto/newsof.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                      The Distance Learning UFO Course

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:21:07 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:16:24 -0400
Subject: The Distance Learning UFO Course


G'day List,

I thought that this would be of interest to some of you . . .

Regards,
Leanne


From: craig roberts <croberts@totton.ac.uk>
Subject: The Distance Learning UFO course
===========================================
Dear student,

Please find an attachment which explains some more of the UFO
course that we offer here at Totton,

Happy readings,
Craig Roberts

================================================================


ATTACHMENT READS:

A note for Distance Learners wanting to complete the UFO
course(s)

Here is some extra information concerning how the course runs.
These are applicable to all units that we offer:

* You will be sent regular handouts and recommended readings
covering the areas of study highlighted by each unit.

* You work at your own pace as work will be marked when it is
sent in. You may wish to negotiate deadlines but the idea is for
the course to be flexible.

* You will have contact with myself via e-mail, telephone or
written letter on a frequent basis (the college expects students
and tutors to have some form of contact every 4 weeks).

* You can submit the coursework via e-mail and soon I will be
sending those with e-mail addresses an application form that can
be printed and completed and sent back to me via postal mail.

* Each unit can be studied as an individual course or as part of
the whole six unit programme. The recommended progression of
units is:

(1) Historical Perspectives
(2) Theoretical Perspectives
(3) Research Methods
(4) Alien Abduction
(5) The Media and Ufology
(6) Primary Research in Ufology

* Anyone who participates in any of the units becomes an
automatic member of TRUTH (Totton Researchers of Ufology Theory
and History) and can help with the running of projects and
activities that we are currently involved with. We seek people
who are objective in their analysis of the UFO phenomena.

I hope that this answers any questions that you may have about
the course and I look forward to hearing from you soon,

Cheers,
Craig Roberts,
OCN Ufology Course Director,
Co-ordinator of Educational, Theoretical and Abduction Studies for
TRUTH.

(For Non-UK residents I have been told by the college that you
can pay via an international money cheque/bank draft but you
must pay the charges for doing this. Sorry for the
inconvenience).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                             UFOs And Hurricanes

From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:10:14 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:03:13 -0400
Subject: UFOs And Hurricanes

Some UFO events were reported during Hurricane Andrew in South
Florida. Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo, Dr. Willy Smith and,
possibly, Mary Margaret Zimmer, Miami Director for MUFON, have
that information.

During Hurricane Georges some reports for UFO events were phoned
and what seems the potential confirmation is currently under
investigation.

Jorge Martin, in Puerto Rico, island affected by the storm,
reported that many credible witnesses called him and,
inclusively, offered videos taken during the events.

As soon as more information is available (confirming or not) a
report will be sent. It will be greatly appreciated that any
information from the UFO events during Hurricane Andrew and
others, are compared, in order to filter the events from natural
phenomena typically occurring during
hurricanes.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                   UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
Date: 8 Oct 98 18:36:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:52:37 -0400
Subject: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

There is a twist in the story with UFO KGB files.

I received outrageous legal threat from the production company in
respond to the numerous inquires for an additional information
and last notion of the new discovery made regarding dubious
credibility of some presented documents.

http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

Alex Hefman

P.S. Any advise?


More information from Russia is expected 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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: UFOs in Hurricanes

From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:00:36 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:38:19 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs in Hurricanes


From: National UFO Reporting Center <director@UFOCENTER.COM>
Via: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

Greetings to the List:

The National UFO Reporting Center has received several credible sounding
reports from witnesses who have claimed they were witness to similar
sounding phenomena.  One woman in New Mexico asserted that she had been
witness to a disc shaped object streaking out of a dark thunderhead,
reversing its course instantly, and streaking equally rapidly back into
the cloud.

We received another such report from a gentleman, who I believe was
located in Arkansas.

I have played over national radio brief audio cuts of both these reports.

On another subject briefly, our Center received extremely heavy volume of
UFO reports during the last two weeks of September.  As I have reported
over several radio programs, many of the reports were of bizarre green or
blue "fireballs," but those reports have been interspersed with reports of
discs, triangles, "cigars," spheres, and other objects as well.

Some of the reports received via our web site are currently posted on our
web site.

Cordially,
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter B. Davenport, Director
director@ufocenter.com
www.ufocenter.com
National UFO Reporting Center
P.O. Box 45623
University Station
Seattle, WA 98145






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                 DISPATCH # 105 -- the weekly newsletter of

From: ParaScope@AOL.COM
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:33:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:54:46 -0400
Subject: DISPATCH # 105 -- the weekly newsletter of

S O M E T H I N G   S T R A N G E   I S   H A P P E N I N G

10/8/98

Quotes of the Week

"All great truths begin as blasphemies."

--George Bernard Shaw

-----------------------

Rant of the Week: �No I Did Not Wet Myself�

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, �Wendy� discusses her ability to
see ghosts and hold her bladder shut. Enjoy.

"For years I have thought about writing to someone, anyone. My reason being
that I am always amazed has to how one sighting of a ghost, mostly shadows can
be so fasinating that it can warrant a segement on one tv show or another
dealing with the unusual.

"You see, seeing ghost for me is so normal for me, and I don't mean shadows,
even though I have seen those too. I mean I have seen ghosts as  whole as I
would look at someone standing next to me. I have spoken to them, and in some
cases didn't even know that the person I was speaking with had died years
before I came to that area, only by telling someone of my conversation, that
after their initial shock, they say to me, the person you said you were
speaking with was dead.

"I have lived in Jamaica, London, Chicago, California and now Connecticut, and
have seen ghost in all those places. My last encounter was here in CT at my
mothers house, I had a long conversation with this woman, she say she was the
one who lived there. She told me a lot. I have not investigate to find out if
who I saw was who actually lived there. I have seen her other times too. Now
she just wave and smile at me.

"For a matter of fact I have had encounters with ghost even before I can
remember, my mother tells of a story of what I call my first known encounter
at age two. So amazing was this encounter that the person I saw actually threw
water on me.  My mother beleived that the woman had thrown water on me,
becasue she say, she will never forget standing there in the room, and looking
at water dripping from my head to foot, and being afraid as she wrung out my
soaking clothes.

"No I did not wet mysellf. The mattress and sheets she say were bone dry. Also
as I ran around telling everyone of this incident, she learned from a woman in
the tenanment that the person I described was actually her daughter that had
died some 35 years earlier. Apparantely her daughter was not right in the
head, and loved to full a bucket of water and throw it on people. Even my
description of the bucket was correct.

"That encounter was some 36 years ago. I have since had too many encounters to
mention hear. But most you wouldn't beleive. I have also seen ghost where
others saw it at the same time.

"I also have the abilty to look at some people and tell everything about them.
People always ask me if I am aware that I can read mind. Some have even said I
was a witch. I have a six sense of things. Four times in my life I have seen a
light in someones face, and tell others that that person would be dead (only
one was actually sick) and within days they died. I have also seen death in my
dreams.

"I have two encounters where total strangers have walked up to me and say to
me, "You will never be a whole person until you accept your gifts and ability"
But all my life I have being afraid of people knowing my abilities, but
without failure they always find out.

"All my life I have wondered should I do something with this ability. Why me.
When I see something in someone's future am I suppose to tell them. When a
dead person tell me something am I suppose to follow up on it.

"That's enough for now. I don't even know why I am writing this. Anyway, just
so you'll know. I was born with a viel over my face, and in the hospital one
of the nurses told my mother that I would have all these abilities, that I
grew up having.

"My daughter also shows signs of these abilities.  If anything hear interst
anyone that care to read this please feel free to contact me."

------

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:


"War of the Black Heavens":
The Radio Weapons of the Cold War

During decades of U.S.-Soviet conflict, the CIA and other government agencies
fought secret propaganda wars with the enemy. International radio was a key
weapon in this contest of ideas, and now that the Cold War is over, the story
of Western broadcasting to undermine the Soviets can finally be told. This
week Dossier reviews "War of the Black Heavens," a recently published book by
Michael Nelson that lifts the veil on decades of covert radio operations. Find
out how long-range transmitters did the job that neither stern diplomacy nor
military threats could do.

----------------

Ufology in the UK: Update

A new edition of Georgina Bruni's UK UFO News. Fortean Times brings Ufologists
together with online UFO "unconvention"; British UFOlogists featured in
prominent UK periodicals; Jenny Randles takes "Northern UFO News" online; more
news.

----------------

Conspiracy Newsline

Amnesty International Campaign to focus on human rights violations in the
U.S.; defendants in racist murder case in Jasper, Texas will face death
penalty; Assassination Records Review Board decries JFK secrecy; lots more
news.

----------------

UFO Roundup

Get the latest UFO news and sighting reports, courtesy of Joseph Trainor's UFO
Roundup. Spain declassifies 83 military UFO files; French UFOlogists spar over
Voreppe case; Mars Global Surveyor tightens its orbit; secret societies and
strange phenomenon at Orenberg; lots more.

...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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                         Current Status Of John Ford

From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:17:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:22:26 -0400
Subject: Current Status Of John Ford


Attention Friends Of John Ford

Oct. 8, 1998


This message, and the recent letters from UFO activist John Ford
below, are going to all in my address book who've expressed an
interest in John's case in past. My own  inolvement dates from
the time of John's arrest some two years ago when I was
instrumental in forming the John Ford Defense Committee.

As you may recall, John was arrested on charges of threatening
to harm someone on Long Island. John may have said threatening
words, but if so it was an idle boast as men do when they get
together. My fundamental belief about the arrest of John Ford
has not changed: John Ford never harmed anyone, he would not
harm anyone, and he should not be in jail. Unfortunately, he
still is in jail.

The John Ford Defense Committee web site is still up, I believe,
and anyone wanting to read my original article in defense of
John can do so at www.iwaynet.net/~pic

The following 2 letters were received from John in Sept. & Oct.
l998. The letters are heartfelt and describe John's current
circumstances.

Feel free to write to John at:

John Ford (8-29-48),
Riverhead County Jail,
100 Centre Drive,
Riverhead,
NY 11981

Dear Friends:

I am very sorry about not writing to all of you for the past 6
months. I was very depressed and felt like not writing to anyone
while I was in the hospital. The atmosphere was depressing and I
didn't have the desire to write.

Last Thursday I was transferred back to the County Jail at
Riverhead (NY) after it was determined by the hospital I was
competent to stand trial. The end result is I am sitting in a
cell awaiting a trial date in Riverhead. I've been to court
today and I go back Thursday to receive a trial date. It would
be a week or 30 days from now.

I have to admit I am a little scared to go to trial since I
don't know how things will come out and there appears to be a
lot of damaging evidence on their side of the question--a lot of
which appears to be made up and is just short of perjury.

This has cost me my home (sold at auction Jan. 20), my credit
rating, my public reputation, and the organization--the Long
Island UFO Network--I slaved 10 years to create. Now my very
freedom is at stake as it nears the deadline for a trial date.

I ask this of all you all--to keep the faith and say a little
prayer to the man upstairs and wish me luck when I go back to
court.

My stay at the Mid-Hudson hospital was a break from the
atmosphere of the jail here at Riverhead, though both are
depressing places. I managed to lose 47 lbs at the hospital
because they put me on a reduction diet. I had ballooned up to
267 lbs during the year I was in jail before going to the
hospital. So far I have slimmed down and intend to lose more
weight.

My attorney John Rouse is working hard for me and he is trying
to get the charges dismissed. I hope he succeeds. We'll see what
happens.

Thank you all for sticking beside me. Thank you for all the help
you have extended on my behalf, and the money you have sent. I
am deeply indebted to you all. Sincerely, John Ford

P.S. Any of you who wish may contact Preston Nichols here on
Long Island at 516-581-1574. He can give you a running dialogue
of what is happening.

-----

Oct. 1998

Dear Friends:

Some of you have written, and I thank you for the sentiments
expressed. As some of you said, I deserved none of this. It's
true, but it has happened anyway,.

The blame for it rests squarely on the shoulders of the UFO
coverup. From everything I have endured and experienced I have
developed the belief that the coverup is administered here on
Long Island and partly expressed through the Suffolk County
Police Department.

We've known the police department here on the Island has a
special briefing manual distributed to inspectors, deputy
inspectors and precinct commanders detailing what to do in a UFO
situation, how to control and cover up the situation, and what
federal agencies to contact to get them to intervene and cover
up the incident. They also have harrassed us in the the past and
have threatened us in the past both verbally and in writing.

The police have also cooperated with the Feds in staging
situations where they can discredit the reputation of
individuals who are UFO witnesses. Their usual method is to run
the witness (victim) into Stonybrook psychological department on
either a suicide attempt charge or stating the person is acting
strangely. From there either the person is usually confined or
has been threatened by the police and psychiatrists into
silence. They do this and I know for a fact they they do it
because they did it to several key witnesses from the Southaven
Park UFO crash case. Now they are doing it to me.

The third day I was imprisoned I was told I had an attorney
visit. I went there expecting to see John Rouse, but I was led
into a cubicle where they was an attorney sitting waiting for
me. It wasn't John Rouse. As I sat down he introduced himself as
a Mr. Kevin Kerraus, and he informed me he was here to represent
me free of charge. He further stated he was from friends on the
outside who were deeply concerned about me. He went on to say he
had been in conference with Catterson (the District Attorney)
and that all I had to do was wait and Catterson would drop the
charges. When he would do so would be at his own discretion.

This was said along with the stipulation that if I didn't want
to wait I could take a plea and that would mean upstate jail
time. So I was left with the alternative to wait for the
dismissal. That is what I am doing right now. I'm still waiting
for the dismissal.

Take care of yourselves, and God bless.

Sincerely,
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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                      Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants

From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:32:43 -0700 (MST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:33:46 -0400
Subject: Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants

Source: Ufolist of Riskers Organization bdouglas@riskers.org


This is another side of the Implant  Story...


All sides must be considered !


From: Virgil Priscu

I think I have to react to the above mentioned posting because I
feel that people with interest in the UFO field can be mislead
by the information presented.


I am a physician, specialist in anesthesiology, head of a
Department in a teaching hospital in Israel. I have also a long
time interest in UFO phenomena.

I had the opportunity to meet Mr. Derrel Sims personally during
a recent visit he made in Israel. At that occasion he presented
in front of a small audience some of the results of his
research.


Let me point out some details:

Dr. R. Lear, Mr. Sims' collaborator is not a physician (MD), and
much less a "surgeon", but a podiatrist (licenced to make small
surgical interventions on the foot only.)  Mr Simms could be a
"qualified Hypnotherapist" - I do not know.


What I know for sure is that Mr Sims stories have medical
inaccuracies regarding details of the operations performed for
the removals of what he and his organisation (FIRST) claims to
be "implants" (with all the implications of this term -in the
way it is used -namely implying to describe an object
manufactured by extraterrestrial beings with the purpose of
monitoring/controling humans, etc.)


Absolutely no evidence of such was presented by Mr. Sims at the
presentation which I personally witnessed. I could add that he
became visibly disturbed when I asked him specific questions
regarding the alleged "implants" and he gave inadequate answers
regarding such specific topics as the dose of local anesthetic
used for the extraction of the so called "implants".


I specifically asked him to provide me with color slides of the
actual pathological specimens that he extracted from the
subjects studied. He declined under various motives.


No other evidence or specimen was available to my specific
request. I asked him for such because I have the possibility to
made them examined by some of my friends either in the pathology
Dpt of my Medical Center, The Forensic Medical Institute at Abu
Kabir or at The Weizmann Institute in Rehovot - Israel.


No specimen, pathological slide or other material was available
from Mr. Sims for examination by an independent specialist or
laboratory - as I have asked. I am afraid that all claims made
by Mr Sims or his associates have not been confirmed or
underwent a pair review process, therefore I personally have
serious doubts as to the veracity of those claims.


I would like to emphasize that I am a physician with about 20
years of experience in the operating room, in the field of
anesthesiology and emergency medicine.  I know a thing or two
about what we call "Foreign Bodies" (FB) found quite often,
especially in the feet of some unsuspecting patients by an
incidental X Ray made for another purpose.


They get there by a variety of methods : waking or playing bare
foot on the beach, grass etc, and not noticing when the FB is
getting in. (during a fall, running, getting hurt by some other
bigger object from which a small splinter can get into one's
foot and remain there for many, many years under the skin -
until sometimes they are discovered by chance while some other
physician or medical practitioner - like a podiatrist - is
examining the patient for another, unrelated complain - and
sometimes X Ray their feet!) If it is a substance that degrade
slowly, then after years only a small notch of"reaction" tissue
remains in the place of the former FB. It is composed of human
tissue components - etc.. No mystery, no "implants".


This is my two cents of caution about the above mentioned
subject. I firmly belive that "UFO phenomena" exist.


I also firmly belive that meticulous research by competent
persons is
the way to the truth.


Sincerely yours:
Virgil Priscu MD
priscuv@shani.net

~~~~~Get BREAKING news plus UFO/ET news - NOW - click on "What's Up
Doc?" www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/5518






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                        Blather: No Threat Whatsoever

From: Blather -  Daev Walsh <daev@blather.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 15:45:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:30:58 -0400
Subject: Blather: No Threat Whatsoever

______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
October 9th 1998, Dublin, Ireland   Vol 2. No. 22
_______________________________________________________


NO THREAT WHATSOEVER Blather's favourite Irish ufologist -
Eamonn Ansbro - is back in the news once again, this time in the
'Sunday Tribune' of October 4th, under the headline 'Alert:
Aliens pose no real danger'.

Longtime Blather readers may recall 'War of the Wetlands', an
issue from December 1997, which recounted how this writer, like
an eejit, spent an entire Sunday evening monitoring the
endeavours of the ICUFOS (Irish Centre for UFO Studies) on Bull
Island, Co. Dublin. The date was December 14th, the night that
Ansbro had predicted would be fraught with UFOs, using Roy
Dutton's rather dubious 'Astronautical Theory'. He claimed that
Dublin, Boyle (Co. Roscommon) and Bantry (Co. Cork) were to be
the best places to see the UFOs. Back then, Blather commented on
the curious correlation between the ICUFOS predictions, and the
Geminid meteor showers, which started on December 13th.


Ansbro's prediction for the ultimate in UFO viewing this year
is, funnily enough, for December 14th 'again'. This year Omagh,
Ballinasloe, Boyle, Shannon and Dublin are the targets (poor
Bantry must be unfashionable).

As 'Sky Online's Meteor Page' tells us:

"Geminids (Dec. 12-14). This is the only major meteor shower
known to be associated with an asteroid (3200 Phaethon). It
should peak on the night of December 13-14, 1998, and the nights
of December 13-14 and 14-15, 1999. An observer may see 80
meteors in an hour under moonless, rural skies from late evening
through dawn. A suburban observer may see only 30 meteors or
fewer per hour. The prime observing hours are essentially
Moon-free in both 1998 and 1999."

Is it to too much to ask for Ireland's extraterrestrial
proponents to inject a little originality into their
predictions? At this rate, they'll bore their detractors into
submission.


'The Tribune' tells us that Ansbro, 'the foremost expert in
unexplained foreign objects [surely useful when dealing with
Irish customs officers], and international co-ordinator of the
PEIR (Programme for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Research)
Project,' is constructing a unique telescopic camera to prove
the existence of extraterrestrials. A photograph of Ansbro and
his telescopic apparatus accompanies the article. There is no
attempt to explain just 'how' it is to be used to gather such
proof.

The article, written by Richard Oaklay, states that Ansbro
reckons Ireland to be prime alien tourism country, due to our
lack of xenophobia and our neutrality. The space-brothers 'pose
no real risk', as '"Extra terrestrials are our friendly
neighbours, all we have to do is treat them well,"'.

I don't know what planet Ansbro has been living on recently, but
a foray into the 'Irish Times' archives should illustrate the
problems that Ireland is currently facing, due to its recent
economic boom, and subsequent arrival of racial minorities. With
regard to neutrality, I pondered upon what difference it should
make to a visiting alien envoy... ('oh, no...we don't want them
running off to invade somewhere 'while we're visiting'...'), and
so I considered last week's Blather, which discussed the 1951
movie 'The Day The Earth Stood Still'. Klaatu, the visiting
alien, heaps scorn upon humanity for our barbaric bloodlust, our
habitual warmongering, etc. Perhaps Klaatu should have landed in
the Republic of Ireland, where he would have either been sold a
passport for an exorbitant fee, or deported back to his own
world.





'War of the Wetlands'
(http://www.blather.net/archives/issue1no32.html)
'Astronautical Theory'
(http://www.globalserve.net/~mallet/roycharts.shtml)
'The Irish Times'
(http://www.irish-times.com)
'Klaatu Barada Nikto'
(http://www.blather.net/archives/issue2no21.html)

'SKY Online's Meteor Page'
(http://www.skypub.com/meteors/meteors.shtml)
'Geminid meteor images'
(http://www.demon.co.uk/astronomer/geminids.html)
'Geminid Star chart'
(http://www.ticetboo.demon.co.uk/geminids.htm)
'Watch out for the Geminid Meteor Shower '
(http://www.campus.bt.com/CampusWorld/pub/ScienceNet/astron/comet/gem
inid.html)
_______________________________________________________


THEY CAME FROM THE SKY Mighty fun was had in Waterford since
October 5th, when, according to various and varying news
reports, nine orange and white parachutes landed in and around
Waterford City, each carrying aluminium tubular frames - about a
metre square with four legs and Pyrex-made wax-sealed vials of
soil and water, and a 'blue inky substance'. Each one was heavy
enough to require two men to lift it. Each unit had a white box,
with 'two little metal pieces inside them, shaped like
half-moons'. On the back of each box was what appeared to be a
red thumb print. The parachutes carried marking which 'suggested
that they might have originated in Russia' (sounds like a bit of
a lazy assumption).

The first was found at 0700 hours at the Bull Post,
Ballybricken. The second find was a little later Earls Court,
Dunmore Road, 2 miles south of Ballybricken. Number three came
to rest in the grounds of the Mercy Convent at Military Road, at
0900 hours. The next four were found from 1000 and 1200 hours at
Rice Bridge, Jurys Hotel, the Peoples Park and Trinity Square.
Blather has no details as where the other two were located.


The objects were carted off to Waterford Garda Station, in
Ballybricken, where an Army bomb disposal unit took a gander...

Garda Sergeant Dave Sheehan was quoted as saying that the test
tubes may be part of a scientific experiment. Meteorological
Offices denied responsibility...

According to Tuesday's 'Irish Times', the Gardai 'said the
objects were "far too elaborate" to be part of a hoax'. By
Wednesday the IT said that 'the gardai are not amused and point
out that they have more important matters to deal with. They
feel the mystery objects could be an elaborate hoax'.


Curiously, it seemed 'assumed' that the things had actually
'landed'. Fair enough, if you find a parachute open on the
ground, you would probably 'assume' that it had arrived from
above, but no one seems to have seen the things in flight. And,
considering that each one had landed in such... opportune
locations, without injury or damage to property, it surprising
that doubt was not more immediate... (The 'Irish Times' had
pointed this about by October 7th, but failed to elaborate).


By October 8th, the mystery had been 'solved'. At 1730 hours RTE
(national broadcaster) announced that the riddle had been
solved. Paul Gregg, a U.S. artist living in Ireland, had come
forward to claim responsibility. They said that their aim was
'not' to 'make a fool of anyone', but to prompt 'enjoyable
speculation'. The parachutes had been unloaded from a van in the
early hours of the morning... The Gardai are suitably
unimpressed.

So much for my Zimmer-frame low-budget-cosmonaut
Mystery-time-travel- airship
Virgin-Atlantic-Shannon-Aeroflot-Stopover theory.



Sources:

Irish Times, Tuesday October 6th 1998
http://www.irish-times.com/irish-times/paper/1998/1006/fro4.html

Irish Independent, Tuesday October 6th 1998
http://www.independent.ie/1998/278/d08g.shtml
Picture:
http://www.independent.ie/1998/278/images/D08G.jpg

Irish Times, Wednesday October 7th 1998
http://www.irish-times.com/irish-times/paper/1998/1007/news8.html

Infobeat News 10/07/98 (via Reuters)
http://www.infobeat.com/

Aertel Teletext, Monday, October 5th 1998
http://www.rte.ie/aertel/

RTE Update, Wednesday 7th October 1998 - 5.30pm
http://www.rte.ie/email.html
_______________________________________________________



MORE KLAATU

In last week's issue of Blather, 'Klaatu Barada Nikto', a few errors
and omissions were made. Don Ecker, of UFO Magazine, was in touch, as
he had correctly noted that in the cast of 'The Day The Earth Stood
Still', Bobby was played by Billy Gray, and not Frances Bavier -
Bavier played Mrs. Barley (and also 'Aunt Bee' on the Andy Griffith
Show). Professor Barnhardt was not played by Billy Gray, but by Sam
Jaffe.

Blather also mentioned that 'in 'The Empire Strikes Back', Darth
briefs his bounty hunters - Boba Fett is flanked by two others...
Klaatu and Nikto (Klaatu, Boba, Nikto?)'. In fact, it was in 'Return
of the Jedi' that three of Jabba's entourage were Klaatu, Barada and
Nikto. (Thanks to StUberGeek)

There also seems to be some contention over whether or not Klaatu
actually says that he is from 'Venus and Mars'. Personally, I don't
recall this line. (Thanks to Kevin Killion)


'Klaatu Barada Nikto'
(http://www.blather.net/archives/issue2no21.html)
_______________________________________________________



MAGONIA UPDATE

The latest additions to the Magonia site:
(http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/newmag.htm)

ETH Bulletin #7
So how did Travis Walton do it?

An Anorak's Paradise or A Passage To Narnia?
What steamy excitements lurk in The Box Hill Tunnel?
_______________________________________________________

LOCH NESS MINISUB EXPEDITION

Last but not least, Loren Coleman (an occasional Blather contributor)
is joining Dan Scott Taylor in a mini-submarine expedition to Loch
Ness in June 1999. The submarine, named 'Nessa', after the Gaelic
Goddess of Water, will be attempt to return with film, sonar and
tissue sample proof of the creatures' existence. Blather wishes the
team the best of luck (and that they have more success than the
diabolical GUST debacle).
(http://wwww.blather.net/archives2/issue2no22minisub.html)
_______________________________________________________

SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE

The Blather list was moved during the week - this should have no
discernable impact on subscribers (apart from those who filter their
mail). The new details can be found at the bottom of this message.
_______________________________________________________

Dave (daev) Walsh
9th October 1998
daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.blather.net/archives/index.html

_______________________________________________________


SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<list@blather.net>
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
<list@blather.net>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email admin@blather.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                       TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 15:49:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:19:13 -0400
Subject: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'


>Mail-For: <steve@konsulting.com>

For what it's worth, this comes as no great surprise (at least to me):

>Date:  9 Oct 98 14:58:38 EDT
>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>To: el51@dial.pipex.com
>Subject: it is the hoax..


>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                              Re: Anfalov Anton

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 01:07:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:51:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Anfalov Anton

Dear colleagues,

Ukrainian UFO researcher Anton Anfalov has volunteered to assist
with research into the so-called 'Secret KGB UFO Films' which
were recently screened in the USA by TNT on television. Anton
can be reached via e-mail at: tan@cris.crimea.ua

Part of his recent message to me is featured below. I will be
sending Anton a copy of the TNT show along with other data on
this subject as and when I receive it.

All the very best,


Philip Mantle.




tan@cris.crimea.ua wrote:

Dear Philip and dear colleagues, please, answer me in detail!

I desperately need your help about the details on secret KGB
video of UFO crash in Russia. Please, send me all the
corresponding information and details about that. Who is V.
Vereschagin? What your colleagues in Internet know about UFO
crash near Sverdlovsk in 1968? Is that reliable information?
What is about the newspaper "Vecherniy Sverdlovsk" - it informed
about that?!? Etc., etc.

Please, ask your colleagues to send me the information, and I�m
ready to answer all of the questions about that video. My
parents and relatives used to live in Sverdlovsk in that time,
in fact! and they know that place well. Also, the shocking
revelation was recently released by "Chudesa i Priklucheniya"
magazine in Moscow referring to Yuri Elhov, the witness of UFO
crash in Russian Far East near Svobodnyi and Seryshevo. There
was the silver disk and the body of EBE ( the date is unknown).
So, I earnestly ask you to send the inquiries by e-mail to all
addresses especcialy in ex-USSR- if they have that article (that
magazine) and can share that data with you and me (because I
have only the brief information).

I need your help VERY MUCH!!!

What is the origin of that video and is it really KGBian?

Is anybody know  anything intelligible about that??? Even few...
Please, inform your colleagues by e-mail about me, that I can
answer a plenty of questions about that, actually, I was born in
Sverdlovsk and I was there! Waiting and sincerely hope.

Anton A.Anfalov, the first reseacher of UFO crashes in Russia.
Just print the data from WEB-site for me, OK?( I have no access
to WEB site).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:19:39 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:41:46 -0400
Subject: Re: BBC TV Looking For 18 - 28 Year-old Researchers

>Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 03:36:57 +0000
>From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: BBC TV

>Dear All,

>I was recently contacted by a chap named Gareth Williams who is
>working for BBC TV in Manchester. Gareth is looking for a UFO
>researcher between the ages of 18 and 28 to take part in a
>programme for BBC 2. The programme in question would film the
>researcher at work etc.

>If you know of anyone that is interested in this ide then they
>can contact the BBC at:

>Gareth Williams:
>Tele: 0161 244 3636.
>Fax: 0161 244 3640.
>E-mail: gareth.williams@bbc.co.uk

>I was thinking of people like Tim & Lynda Matthews, Dave Pointon or
>Robert Bull, but I'm not exactly sure of their respective ages.

>Please feel free to pass this onto any possible interested parties.

>Yours Sincerely,
>Philip Mantle.


List,

Surely this becomes immediately suspect!

The BBC is probably going for photogenics over insight,
experience, extensive knowledge base etc, etc.

Is there a foul aroma wafting over from Denmark?

Regards,
Leanne







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:32:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:03:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

>Incidentally, Eddie (a fellow CUFOS board member whom I look
>forward to seeing at our meeting late this month) contributes
>several excellent papers to my encyclopedia: "Abduction
>Phenomenon," "Anomalous Aerial Phenomena Before 1800," and
>"Waves." I urge anybody who's looking for the best our subject
>has to offer to go to your local library (don't buy the book
>unless you're rich; it's damned expensive) and read Eddie's
>extraordinary treatments of these subjects.

Jerry -

No, no, don't send them to the library. Have them buy a copy of
your 'The UFO Book' and they get Swords' paper and the excellent
and balanced analysis of abductions by Bullard.

Only $20, so not prohibitively expensive, and much more worth
the price than most of the other tomes to hit the bookshelves
lately.

Yes, I just bought a copy, and am already halfway through it.

ISBN 1-57859-029-9

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:28:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:24:56 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


Thanks to Asgeir's sharp eye, we now know that the Air Force as
part of its exhaustive 1994 investigation sent the Roswell crash
photos to a "national level" organization for digitizing and
subsequent photo interpretation and analysis...  In an attempt
to read this text (on the paper in General Ramey's hand) to
determine if it could shed any further light on locating
documents relating to this (Roswell Incident) matter." And also
to look for evidence of the "purple flowers" (on black and white
photos)!

My question is this: did the Air Force get ripped off by a very
inept "national level" photo interpretation service or is there
something else going on here? During the past five months of the
RPIT (Roswell Photo Interpretation Team) revisit to the Ramey
office photos, this group of efficient volunteers, using
everything from Abobe Photo Shop computer software to a Navy
spyglass to a child's microscope to a hand held magnifying glass
have been able to read highly significant words on the Ramey
Message that have turned the half-century old Roswell Mystery on
its ear!

Early on the RPIT members took flak from the likes of Stan
Friedman and Kevin Randle that the government had done such a
thorough investigative job on the Ramey office photos there
could be nothing else left to discover. Now just look at what
has been uncovered by the RPIT that the Air Force somehow
"overlooked": a series of finely machined bas relief symbols
emblazoned on the metal-looking beams (just as described by
several of the original Roswell crash witnesses), "balsa wood"
struts  that are hollow and have none of the characteristics of
wood (again as described by original Roswell witnesses) and
several other anomalous objects which cannot be found in the Air
Force's latest "explanation" -- A Mogul balloon train. And now
phrases like "four victims" and "SW of Magdalena, N. Mex." and
"Site Two" and "Fort Worth, Tex." being rather easily read in
the Ramey Message with its official looking heading and logo.
But NONE of these findings were reported in the Air Force
official reports in 1994 or 1995. Sure seems strange to me that
the Air Force just never seems to be able to get it right!


James Bond 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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

From: Jerry Anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:06:23 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:22:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City


>From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:12:49 +0200
>Subject: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

>[List Only]

<snip>


The riddle of the nine orange parachutes found in Waterford city
has been solved.

An arts group from the Burren in County Clare contacted
Waterford Gardai today admitting responsibility for the prank.

The parachutes were found within a one-mile radius of each
other. Gardai initially thought they were part of a scientific
experiment.

The arts group says their intention was not to make a fool of
anyone but to prompt enjoyable speculation. However, the Gardai
say it has been a waste of valuable Garda time.

Jerry Anderson   UFOMEK (thanks to Dave 'Daev' Walsh for the info)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                                 BBC & UFOs

From: Giuliano [Jimmy] Marinkovicc <9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 98 08:20:12 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:19:29 -0400
Subject: BBC & UFOs


Hello UFO Gang...

Now this is really interesting and impressive...

The BBC World Service is just talking with Edgar Mitchell (ex
Apollo 14 astronaut) who is saying that UFOs are real and that
they were a TOP SECRET subject in the US for decades (this is
nothing new because he was involved in pressuring for
Congressional UFO hearings. What is interesting is that the BBC
is again devoting air time to the UFO controversy).

So, now I am getting very interested in BBC policy...

This is maybe not an accidental case and it seems that BBC is
getting hooked on UFOs...

I will now be tuned to the BBC World Service short wave
frequency all the time. I can also pick it up via the ASTRA
satelite.

My impression (I haven't listened to the suplement from the
beginning) that it was a section inside a news programme so I
guess this stuff with Mitchell will probably be broadcast
again during the day.

Keep listening 12,095 MHZ AM (or the frequency for your continent)...
I have just recorded the material and will listen to it again later...

Now is 05:30 GMT / 10.10.1998

NOTE: One of the AGETI SSI (Section for searching and
intercepting) projects is the monitoring of world wide and local
media....

Sent by:

================================================================
AGETI - WORLD WIDE HAMRADIO GROUP
ANALYTICAL GROUP FOR EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL INFORMATIONS

----------------------------------------------------------------
MAIN SYSOP:                          |  POST ADDRESS:
9A4AG - GIULIANO MARINKOVICC - JIMMY |  ANTE STARCHEVICCA 25/C
                                     |  23000 ZADAR
                                     |  CROATIA, EUROPE
----------------------------------------------------------------
TELEPHONE:                           |  PACKET RADIO ADDRESS:
for international calls:             |  9A4AG@9A0YSI.SBK.HRV.EU
+385-23-430-970                      |
for calls inside Croatia:            |  E-MAIL ADDRESS:
023/430-970                          |  9a4ag@s55tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org
                                     |  or
                                     |  9a4ag@clarc.org

----------------------------------------------------------------
INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE MODE  |  AGETI WEB SITE ADDRESS (Created by 9a1cto):
                             |  http://public.srce.hr/~ivangloc/
AMPRn WW UFO channel 1947    |  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/3099/
                             |  9A4AG's HOME PAGE:
                             |  http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag
----------------------------------------------------------------
AGETI IS A GROUP OF RADIO-AMATEURS WHO ARE EXCHANGING WORLD WIDE
INFORMATIONS, VIEWS AND NEWS ABOUT THE EXTRA-TERRESTIRAL SUBJECT!!!
================================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re-Scheduling of 'IF' November Conference

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:10:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:08:01 -0400
Subject: Re-Scheduling of 'IF' November Conference


Hi All,

The conference that was originally scheduled for November 14,
1998 in NY by the Intruders Foundation (featuring Budd, Dave
Jacobs, Jerry Clark (no 'e') and moderator Greg Sandow) has been
pushed back to early spring (March) of 1999!

We had booking problems with the auditorium and because of the
coinciding holiday season (then winter!) we thought it best to
simply reschedule the conference for spring.

Better in NY in the springtime anyway! As a very dear friend has
already commented, "Who wants to be in New York in the winter!"
I'll see you guys here next spring! Watch for further
information/details.

Thank you,

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

              Re: Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference

From: David Baker <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:03:01 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:28:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Open Minds? - The Margate, Kent UK Conference


>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 13:42:21 -0700
>From: Jerry Anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Open Minds?

>A lot has been said and written about Tim Mathews

>(snip)

>However, for those of you who listened, like I did, to all the
>gossip and back stabbing of Tim, I would like to point out that
>not only did this young man make no claim whatsoever that all
>UFOs were secret government craft, he also gave a talk that was
>one of the finest I have heard at ANY conference, and that ALL
>his research had been checked and rechecked before any part was
>released.

>Although I believe in the ETH to a point, what Tim had to say
>about the quite obvious man made saucers/triangles etc.,
>especially during the 1950's & 60's, made an awful lot of sense.

><snip>

>So, I say this. For those of you who have decided _not_ to
>include Tim Mathews in your conference programme due to rumour
>etc.,  you are missing out on one hell of a speaker and it is
>your loss.

<snip>

>Yes, he got off his backside and did something! Something that
>some 'researchers' can't make a claim to. Put aside rumour and
>do yourselves a favour, give him a chance. Jerry Anderson
>UFOMEK UK

I totally agree. I have seen Tim's lectures on four seperate
occasions and each one was completely different, with primarily
original material, something that many 'top name, top price'
ufologists on the scene cannot claim. So often we see the same
tired old (mis)information rehashed again and again, year after
year by the Big Guns on the lecture circuit - no names, but I
bet we've all got a few contenders. Tim comes a breath of fresh
air, whether you agree with him or not.

On a more personal note, I would like to add that as well as
being a dedicated and exhaustive researcher, Tim does a great
deal to help the smaller, 'grass roots' UFO groups dotting the
country, even if he is speaking before only a handfull of
people. Tim has provided excellent lectures twice for our group
now, and he charges expenses only: generally enough to get him
from A to B. No fancy resturaunts,  hotel rooms or ridiculous
paycheques for Tim.

I can think of only a couple of other researchers, ufologists
- call 'em what you will - who actually make themselves
affordable and accessable to local groups in this way, and he
should be commended for it.

Dave Baker- Yorkshire UFO Society





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

              UFOs And EBEs: More Insider Evidence (Linda Howe)

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 06:27:30 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:05:18 -0400
Subject: UFOs And EBEs: More Insider Evidence (Linda Howe)


Source: Nexus Magazine.

http://www.icom.net/~nexus/ufosebes.html

Transcript from "Coast To Coast With Art Bell" June 1. Go to

http://ww2.broadcast.com/artbell/archive98.html#jun98

and click on

6/01/98 Monday/Tuesday

to listen in RealAudio.

Stig

*******


UFOs & EBEs

More Insider Evidence


This testimony from a former US Army Signal Corps and CIA officer is
the latest to confirm that the US government and military are
withholding the facts about extraterrestrial craft and biological
entities.

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 5, #5 (August-September '98).
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. nexus@peg.apc.org
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at: http://www.peg.apc.org/~nexus/


by Linda Moulton Howe =A9 1998
LMH Productions
PO Box 300, Jamison, PA 18929-0300, USA
Telephone: (215) 491 9840
Fax: +1 (215) 491 9842


Since my new book, Glimpses of Other Realities Volume II: High
Strangeness, was released to nationwide US bookstores on April 1, 1998,
I have heard from several ex-military and ex-intelligence people from
around the country. They say the documents and military voices in my
new book have true information about United States Government knowledge
and cover-up of non-humans interacting with Earth.

And a month ago, in May, I was put in phone contact with a man I will
simply call "Kewper" to protect his identity at his request. Kewper
served as a First Lieutenant with the US Army Signal Corps and was a
CIA administrator at an Army base in the southeastern USA from 1957 to
1960. He provided his DD-214 and Certificate of Discharge along with a
1956 newspaper article about his being drafted. That civilian name and
Army Signal Corps base of operations were consistent with the Army
discharge papers.

I would name the Army base, but as you read further you will see that
Kewper was asked by a government watchdog to withhold that information
in order to protect current CIA-sensitive and classified operations out
of the same base in 1998.

Back in the 1957 to 1960 period, Kewper taught radio operations and
cryptography to Army Signal Corps officers under a false identification
assigned to him by the CIA. The head of that Signal Corps school had
worked for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II.
The OSS became the Central Intelligence Agency in 1947. In addition to
teaching, Kewper's CIA boss at the Army base asked Kewper to help
analyse Top Secret cases gathered for the Air Force's Project Blue Book
investigation of unidentified flying objects.

When I first talked with Kewper a month ago, he said his security oaths
expired 30 to 35 years after he got out of the Army and CIA in 1960. So
that period ended around 1995. Therefore, he said, he now feels he's
not doing anything wrong by discussing with me his extraordinary
first-hand knowledge and experiences concerning "extraterrestrials"as
he said they were referred to in the Top Secret classified files he'd
read and analysed. However, a month ago he was not certain he wanted to
go on the public record.

On Saturday, May 30, I called him again to ask if he might now be
willing to do a radio interview as long as his real civilian name was
withheld. Since 1993 I have been reporting science and environmental
news for the nationally syndicated Chancellor Radio Broadcasting
Network. Kewper surprised me when he immediately said, "I'm afraid your
phone is tapped." He'd had a call on Monday, May 25 from a man who did
not explain who he was or for whom he worked, and did not address
Kewper by name but simply started talking. And this is what Kewper told
me on the record, under the condition that I edit out subjects that the
unidentified caller said were still sensitive. Those edits are
indicated by parenthesis notes in the following interview first
broadcast on the North American syndicated radio programs Dreamland, on
May 31, 1998, and Coast to Coast AM Hosted by Art Bell on all-night
radio, June 1-2, 1998:

Howe:  You answered the phone and they said...?

Kewper: Yeah, they didn't repeat my name. They just said: "We
understand that you had a conversation with somebody in Pennsylvania in
regards to classified materials that had been classified, and we would
appreciate it if you didn't bring up the fact in an interview or
television interviews in regards to [Army base name deleted] that you
had mentioned on the telephone, and also about anything going on in the
[CIA aerial logistics deleted] or anything in regard to that. We would
really appreciate it because reporters and just interested people, if
it gets aired, may try to get into the classified area thereand, of
course, to their own physical harm."

Howe: They did not say that you could not talk about the six-fingered
humanoid film?

Kewper: No; nothing like that.

Howe: Well, then, could we do an interview today? Not for name
attribution but to put you on the radio as a person who servedand you
can tell me how you want it describedand who saw this film, and you
could try to give me the year. Can we do that?

Kewper: Yeah, I guess so, as long as I don't bring up anything about...

Howe: So you were getting the reports that Project Blue Book was
collecting; that they were allowing to the public only those they were
explaining. You were actually handling the files that were unexplained?

Kewper: Yes. Probably not all of them, but at least we were one of the
groups investigating the unexplained. I know when they closed down
Project Blue Book they said they had found absolutely nothing as far as
what they did in Project Blue Book that wasn't explained. And that was
actually true because anything they didn't explain would be sent to
Fort Belvoir in Virginia and then farmed out from there to other
military. The FBI was involved with some of the things, too, I know,
because FBI would show up on some of these peoples' doorsteps.

Howe: What were the years that you were personally working in the CIA
and handling these highly classified reports related to the UFO
phenomenon?

Kewper: 1957 to 1960. I was in the service starting in 1956, but I
didn't get involved with this in the first year, you know.

Howe: And your rank was what and in which military branch?

Kewper: I was in the Army and a First Lieutenant. I was still actually
in the Army Signal Corps, but I also worked for the CIA, too, because I
was getting two paychecks. I was getting one from the CIA and one from
military service.

Howe: Now, in the course of this work from 1957 to 1960, did you see
any 16-mm films related to this phenomenon?

Kewper: In regard to UFOs in Roswell, you mean?

Howe: Right.

Kewper: The only film I saw is the one that has been released in the
last couple of years showing an alien autopsy. I saw that very same
film in 1957.

Howe: And what were the circumstances in which you saw this?

Kewper: It was in regard to studying UFOs, in working up and going
through and trying to cover or investigate some of these folders we had
in regard to the different sightings. Apparently someone at Fort
Belvoir, Virginia, sent that film to my boss. The team viewed the thing
one Saturday morning and he had to send it right back to Fort Belvoir
again. But we did see that one. And we also saw several other at that
time highly classified UFO sightings on film. We had one film showing a
UFO actually developing or materialising over a power plant out in one
of the western states like Oregon or Washington or Utahsomewhere out in
that area.

Howe: You mean someone just happened to be filming?

Kewper: Yes. Someone was trying a brand new camera and they were
filming this power plant. First, the mountainous areas around, and then
they were over to this power plant. The power plant had a smokestack
and had some smoke going on up. And a little ways away from where the
smoke was going up, we started seeing little white, round...like a
little piece of a cloud. It got more and more dense, and more and more
round. And pretty soon you could see little tiny windows around the
bottom section. I'm just using "windows" as a term loosely. It
developed more and more, and pretty soon it looked real silver, and
soon it started flying off by itself, slowly.

Howe: So you had on film, in Central Intelligence Agency work, we'll
call it an actual materialisation of what appeared to be a hard, silver
disc that literally just emerged from what looked like a vaporous cloud?

Kewper: Yes; just a little ways from a cloud emitted by the smokestack.
So we thought at that time that these aliens must have some way of
materialising or travelling from one area to another and materialising,
by using the current that was down in the power plant somehow to change
the electric currents...into something electromagnetic or something
solid, like solid material.

Howe: Now, how was the autopsy/dissection of the six-fingered humanoid
film presented to you? What was the explanation of how this had
occurred?

Kewper: They just said that this was done at Roswell, the same day or
day afterthe same, I thinkthe craft was picked up at night; that some
time during the next day this autopsy was performed there at the
military base, and also an autopsy was performed in town in the little
clinic or hospital they have there.

Howe: Now that would contradict the statement released with the
autopsy/dissection film by the alleged cameraman who said he was there
and filmed the wreckage and the beams that had the symbols, and that
about two weeks later, I believe, he was asked to go to some place to
film the autopsy dissection. Do you know how to reconcile these two
pieces of information?

Kewper: No, I don't, because we were toldit mentioned right in the
filmthat it was done in New Mexico, that most of the film was done
right there at the military base outside of Roswell and that some
little parts of the film were done at the local hospital or clinic.

Howe: And what was the briefing to you about these six-fingered
humanoids? How were they described? Was there any information?

Kewper: There was little info in regards to that. The film was about 10
years old at that time, and they just said this was the only film that
we have of the aliens and the body. There are pictures that have been
taken by different private people showing these aliens walking around
outside their craft, something like that, but this is the only film
that we have that shows a close picture of the aliens and exactly what
they look like. So, if you run across any more of these sightings that
people have sent in that describe this particular being, then you can
match them up according to this.

Howe: Was the film you saw in black and white or colour?

Kewper: It was black and white.

Howe: And did you ever see any colour film or photographs of these
beings?

Kewper: No, not of the beings. The only coloured film I remembered
seeing was of that spaceship materialising.

Howe: Now, you were working for the CIA and this was tangential to
Project Blue Book. How were you shown this film? What were the
screening conditions? Were you in Washington? Were you in the South?

Kewper: Yeah, they sent this down to [location deleted at Kewper's
request after anonymous phone call referenced in introduction to this
interview] and we looked at the film. Then my boss had to send it right
back the next day by a special courier they had running between Fort
Belvoir and CIA headquarters.

Howe: How many of you were there?

Kewper: About 20 of us. There were 26 people involved altogether in our
group, and I would say that about 20 of us saw it. Some were overseas
at the time. A lot of the UFO pictures that we got were not from the
United States; they were European, Central American, Mexican, and South
American sightings of UFOs. One was an Italian film. So I believe we
got it down there at the CIA because the CIA had facilities in all
these foreign countries to be able to try to verify some of these
things; because we had men in all the different parts of the world.

Howe: So this was your first visual sort of experience with something
non-human. Do you remember what you thought at the time?

Kewper: Yeah, I was kind of perplexed. I thought: How can this be? How
can these beings come here? How can they be completely different from
man?

Howe: But sort of resembled us in a humanoid-shape way.

Kewper: Yes, they did; they did resemble us. That particular alien, the
six-fingered alienyou might say it didn't resemble us completely, but
it looked like a miniature man with a smaller head, but it wasn't the
great big narrow face with the big eyes. It didn't have ears like we
have; it had a little circle around a hole inside of its skull. The
ears didn't look like [ours]. The nose looked basically like [ours] and
the mouth was much smaller.

Howe: Do you remember if this film was shown to you in 1957, 10 years
after 1947? Was there any knowledge then among the intelligence
agencies from any communication with these beings about what their
origin was?

Kewper: Nothing really. While I was there, the whole three years, we
never saw any information about where they came from and what they were
doing here. Nothing was ever brought out in regards to that. My boss
and I were both wondering about that: Why were they here? Why would
they come here? And where were they from? During that period of time,
as far as I know, the government had no idea where they were from or
what they were trying to do here.

Howe: From a military and CIA point of view, were they considered a
threat?

Kewper: Not really a threat, but there was a questionable threat; and
they were working under that assumption to try to increase the
different radar around the country more so that they could detect if
they were coming in from outer space and be able to get some type of
scrambling from the Air Force's nearest base to check it out or shoot
them down or whatever.

Howe: Were you ever given a briefing or exposed to any other
information between 1957 and 1960 beyond that screening of the
autopsy/dissection film?

Kewper: I would say no, not during that time. We just had the various
foreign, a few domestic, but mostly foreign sightings that we had gone
over. We had people overseas who would go and interview these people
who had photographs of aliens outside of a saucer, but nothing at that
time. Basically I saw just the film of the autopsy on that particular
being; but, like I mentioned, when I went to Area 51 in 1958 I did see
another type of a being where it was the peaked face, the great big
eyes and the little chin that has always been termed a "grey", I
believe.

Howe: Okay, can you describe that experience?

Kewper: We were out there for a meeting of all the CIA people around
this country and over towards the Far East and so on, and we had the
meeting there at Area 51. We were involved with this Project Blue Book
thing and they wanted the meeting there, so some of us involved
directly with itthere were only five of us that went from [name of Army
base deleted] and we were the only five that had the meeting out there.
They had meetings right in the main buildings of the Air Force, a
little base they had there.

Howe: At Nellis AFB in Nevada.

Kewper: Yes. But we went out to Groom Lake area and the two areas they
had out there. They showed it to us, but only to us and not to the CIA
people from the Far East or from Central America. They didn't go out
there; it was only the five of us. We landed at Area 51 at the main
landing strip. Then we got into a van-type of small minibus. After
that, we didn't stop to get into any other buildings there.

They took us down about 10 miles away, something of that nature, and
stopped at the first special area. And they took us into the area
there, and they had U-2s and also the SR-71 BlackbirdsI believe they
were flying them at that time. We were there a short period of time,
and then we got back on the bus and went about another eight miles to
the third and final area where they had highly classified material. We
stopped there and went into an office area first, and then a colonel
there met us and took us on a tour. He took us first of all down a
walkway into a hangar area that had been carved out. It might have been
a natural cave to start out with, but at least it was carved out of the
mountainside area. It was not extremely large.

Howe: Was this the Papoose mountain range?

Kewper: I wouldn't really know. I don't think I ever questioned what
the mountains were.

Howe: Okay, but so I am clear, this is a colonel who is joining you and
your CIA boss and three other CIA men in your program?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: Were there only six of you?

Kewper: Yes. As we passed through different areas, naturally there were
other workers and scientists working on different things, and office
personnel.

Howe: And did you understand what the reason was that your boss was
having you go to have this tour by this colonel?

Kewper: Yes. They wanted us to see the craft so when we looked at
pictures, trying to identify fake pictures from the real thing, this
would be a help to us. That was the main reason why we were toured
through the area to see the different types of craft, so we could pick
out the [hoaxed] "garbage can covers" from the real craft.

Howe: So the six of you, with the colonel, your CIA boss, yourself and
these three other CIA men involved in this project, you're going,
literally moving, walking into a carved-out area of a mountain?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: Can you describe exactly what you saw?

Kewper: As soon as we got in, the first thing we did see were two small
craft.

Howe: What colour were they?

Kewper: They were silver, kind of a silver finish to them; not real
shiny and bright, but basically silver.

Howe: What was the diameter?

Kewper: About 18 or 20 feet. They were quite small.

Howe: Were you allowed to go over and touch them?

Kewper: No. We were on a walkway area and couldn't get down over to
where the craft were actually sitting.

Howe: And how many others could you see?

Kewper: At least about seven, I think. There were some larger ones that
were in the rear towards the end that we could see down there because
they were probably 50 to 60 feet in diameter.

Howe: Could you see any characteristics on these? Were any different
from another?

Kewper: They were all disc-shaped, but some had larger bottom areas
that extended down the same as the top, the top extending up. And they
were in different colours. The larger ones in the rear were a real
deep, real dark grey colour, and some of the other ones were lighter in
colour, but maybe like a light- or medium-brown type of thing. The
larger ones in the rear had real large top units and large bottom units
to them and were sitting on metal saw-horses to hold them up off the
ground.

Howe: And did the colonel try to explain, or did he have knowledge or
any understanding of the propulsion system of the extraterrestrial
craft?

Kewper: That question was asked, and he mentioned it was
electromagnetic/antigravitational-type engines. But some of the craft
had other propulsion systems also, but he didn't go into great detail
on other propulsions. Apparently it was like antimatter propulsion on
one of the units, something of that nature.

And I saw they'd tried to reverse-engineer one craft, so part of it was
taken apart. They were trying to figure out how it works, and he was
explaining to us that there really was no physical motor in that thing.
The entire disc was like an electronic circuit, and the aliens had to
be inside of this disc to complete the electronic circuit to make it
fly. The Area 51 people knew that, because they had tried to make that
one fly. It was just like a battery electrical unit; it worked with
antigravitational/electromagnetic drive, but the whole saucer itself
was like the drive of the ship. It was all coated with nickel inside
and it was like a giant circuit, an electronic circuit. And it took the
aliens to complete the circuit because they were tied right in with it:
they had headbands they wore that had detectors on, and they had
finger-type board control where they could fly the craft.

Howe: Those are the hand-imprinted, six-fingered control panels that
were with that autopsy film?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: And did you see the panels themselves actually there with the
craft?

Kewper: Yes. They were there with the craft. They were trying to figure
out the electronic circuitry because there was no wiring of any kind
that they could see. But later on when they had it at Groom Lake, they
had a couple of scientists there who used microscopes to check over the
fingertip-control harnessing and found little fibres going out from it.
They found out then that it was a fibre optic type of electrical
transmission throughout the craft.

Howe: All done with light.

Kewper: Yes, it was light. The report I read originally said that when
they looked inside the craft it was glowing with a real thin light
inside from all the circuitry fibre optics. Reverse-engineering of that
is apparently where we got fibre optics from.

Howe: What was the colonel saying to you about these discs in
relationship to where you were going next?

Kewper: He just stated that these are some of the craft we have picked
up and captured in different parts of the world. Apparently some of
them were even brought in from overseas from some point or other, but I
gathered that most were captured within the US. He then mentioned that
we were going back out to the general office area and another smaller
hangar area to see the being, this extraterrestrial being, that they
had there at that time.

Howe: Try to walk us through what happened next.

Kewper: Okay. We went from the hangar area where the saucers were, out
to a covered walkway area and into an office complex, I would call it,
because it was a bunch of small rooms and offices. They had a special
room for viewing that had one-way windows in itone-way mirrors, rather.
We could look through the window into this small office, and the being
that was in there was not able to see us through the mirror because
there was a mirror on his side.

Howe: And what happened?

Kewper: They said we could go in and talk to this being, and at that
time I chose not to go in. Years later, I wished I had, but I chose not
to go in because they did tell us that the being spoke telepathically.
The colonel had more terms added to it other than telepathically, but
the being wouldn't speak in any manner that we could hear through our
ears. So I chose to stay out, and the other four people did go in.

Howe: Your boss, the three other CIA guys and the Colonel Jim?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: Now, can you describe the being exactly, from your watching this
and listening?

Kewper: What the colonel called him was a "grey". He had the large head
and bigger eyes, kind of slanted bigger eyes. He looked like he was
wearing sunglasses because the lenses were real dark. He had kind of a
slim face down to a peaked chin with just a little nose area, a tiny
slit of a mouth and just holes in the side of his head for ear openings.

Howe: About how tall?

Kewper: About five feet, something like that.

Howe: What was the surface of the skin like in colour and texture?

Kewper: Yeah, it was greyish looking, but it looked fairly coarse, not
like the smoothness of our skin.

Howe: Now what happened between your boss, the three CIA guys and
Colonel Jim in that room communicating with the being?

Kewper: My boss did ask him, "What are you doing here? And why do you
come here?" The only answer he got was, "We are not here to conquer the
Earth. We are not here to destroy anything. We are here to add
knowledge to humans so they can gain more knowledge in different areas."

He [the CIA boss] said it was probably like a 16- or 20-letter name
where he was from, but he couldn't remember what the being said. After
he came out and we left, I asked him and he said, "I don't remember
what it was, but it was a real long name that he had given us as far as
where he was from." He'd asked if it was a part of the galaxy or if
that was his planet. He said the being answered back to him that it was
part of a galaxy he was from. Not our galaxy, but a different galaxy.

Howe: A different galaxy?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: When the being had "telepathed" to your boss that it wasn't here
to hurt anything but to impart knowledge, how would they impart
knowledge to us if they weren't making themselves public to the Earth
in a straightforward way?

Kewper: I remember my boss mentioning that when he said that, he
denoted the creature was stretching the truth or lying just by the tone
of the answer, this type of thing; that he wasn't telling the truth
altogether, you know.

Howe: Did your boss and the other men explain to you how the telepathic
process went? What did they experience?

Kewper: They said they definitely weren't hearing a thing through their
ears and that the voice they heard more or less was right in the mind
itself. They could put their fingers in their ears and they would still
hear the being. One tried that; he plugged both ears to see if he could
still hear the being, and he could.

Howe: Oh, you could see through the glass that one of the men actually
put his fingers in his ears?

Kewper: Yes, to see if he was actually hearing the being, and he
wasn't, but he just heard what the being said right in his mind.

Howe: What was the sound of the being in his mind?

Kewper: He said the voice almost sounded like an electronically
reproduced voice. And now, of course, we have computers that can talk
to us and answer the phone with a computer voice. Back in those days,
that type of thing was just beginning with computers. He said it didn't
sound like a human voice: it sounded like an electronic voice.

Howe: Neither male nor female?

Kewper: Neither one, sort of in between.

Howe: Why would the concept of a telepathic-communication being bother
you?

Kewper: Well, naturally, it's something I'd never run across before;
that would be a certain amount of bother, you know.

Howe: Did you ever learn in your work for the CIA what the relationship
was between the six-fingered beings and the grey being?

Kewper: Nope, never did.

Howe: Did someone explain why this being was even being kept there?

Kewper: No. They wouldn't tell us why he was kept there, how long he
had been there or anything like that. I think one of the answers was,
"We can't talk about that." I believe that was the main answer.

Howe: And who at Area 51 seemed to be in control of this being? Which
agency?

Kewper: It was the Air Force, actually. The Air Force colonel is the
one we talked to.

Howe: Did this colonel or anybody explain to you what their perception
was of this grey being from the standpoint of whether there was any
kind of a threat?

Kewper: No, they didn't really consider it like a big threat, but there
was always this: "We don't know for sure, but we don't think they are
going to be harmful to us, but we don't really know for sure. We can't
say for sure that they are not trying to invade, or checking us all out
and checking out our military." Because even at that time, the saucer
sightings were always around classified areas and any military bases,
that type of thing. So it looked almost like they were scouting, you
know.

Howe: By the time you left the Army Signal Corps and CIA in 1960, did
you have any further briefings about the beings, and were they referred
to as "extraterrestrials"?

Kewper: Yes, they were referred to as "extraterrestrials". Most of the
time they referred to the one out there as a "grey".

Howe: The one at Area 51?

Kewper: Yes. They just referred to it as a "grey".

Howe: Did they have any live six-fingered humanoids anywhere?

Kewper: No, not that I know of. That was one of the questions I asked
the military man on the way in thereif this was the same kind of being.
He'd mentioned they had a being that we were going to look at, and I
asked if it was the same being as Roswell. He said no. And I asked if
they had any beings like at Roswell, and he said no.

Howe: And Roswellfrom your point of view in 1957 when you were shown
the six-fingered humanoid film, did it identify in the introduction
where exactly the six-fingered humanoids had been retrieved from?

Kewper: They just said "near Roswell".

Howe: But they didn't specify?

Kewper: No, no. They didn't specify if that was the craft they had
captured near Roswell; they didn't specify that. They just said "near
Roswell", and I understand they had two or three craft they had picked
up there that same summer of 1947.

Howe: Did anyone talk about the weather balloon story as being
deliberately floated to obscure...?

Kewper: Yes, they did, and they said it was a cover story. The weather
balloon was a cover story.

Howe: To cover up the fact that extraterrestrials and craft were
retrieved.

Kewper: Yes. And I asked them why they covered this up. This was 10
years later...

Howe: In 1957?

Kewper: Right, in 1958 [while visiting Area 51]. I asked him [Colonel
Jim], "Why do you continue to cover this up?" Well, he said it was
covered originally because the Cold War was just starting and somebody
up in the governmentI'm sure it was probably President Trumanhad
requested a tight cover on this because with the Cold War starting and
now having aliens flying around, he thought it would be too much for
the American public all at once. But it was perpetuated, and even to
this day they are still covering it with balloon stories.

Howe: Now it is 1998. This is 40 years after you first saw the 16-mm
black and white film of the six-fingered humanoid dissection, and there
still appears to be a policy of silence and denial about this
extraterrestrial interaction. Why do you think the government has not
told the United States and the world what they know?

Kewper: You would think they would have by now. But I know that at the
same time through the Cold War era back in the 1950sI was involved with
itthe CIA in a lot of cases in regards to these unidentified flying
objects did contact and work with even the Russians during that time of
the Cold War to see what they had, because the Russians had contacted
us in regards to UFOs as they had UFO sightings also. They contacted us
because they thought it might be some kind of advanced flying craft
that we had, and they were calling us to warn us to keep them out of
their area because they thought they were our craft. We told them they
were not ours.

Howe: If Russia and the United States were secretly trying to talk with
each other about an extraterrestrial presence, did you ever have any
further information over the last 40 years about what our government's
understanding of the agenda or intent of these beings is by now?

Kewper: I know that we have worked together with Russia on this,
especially since the Gorbachev thing and we became more friendly; and
that Russia is involved with particle beam weapons, too, from satellite
and from ground. We had actually given them the particle beam weapon to
be able to shoot down any of the saucer craft.

Howe: But why would we try to shoot down craft if we perceived these
beings to be benevolent?

Kewper: Well, it could be something that happened since that time. I
believe it would have happened over the [former] Soviet Union because I
know they had a big craft go over that was almost like a mother ship,
and they tried to shoot it down but the thing just shot all the
aircraft that they had pursuing it, right out of the air in just a few
seconds, with whatever lasers or whatever they [alien craft] haddeath
rays, something like that.

Howe: What is the source of your information on this?

Kewper: This is through my friend, through my boss's son. When he
talked to me in 1993 he mentioned that they'd had an ugly incident
there where the aliens had actually attacked some type of a military
base from where they had sent the planes up to attack [the mother ship].

Howe: Did you ever learn what type of being was in that craft?

Kewper: No, I didn't. Nobody did. It was a flyover-type thing and
nothing landed, so no one would know what was actually in there. But I
know the big craft contained many small saucer craft; it was almost
like an aircraft carrier, like we would have with airplanes on it.

Howe: So, in summary, you went from 1957 to 1960 seeing these highly
classified reports about extraterrestrial beings, technology and craft.
You actually saw 16-mm black and white autopsy/dissection film of the
six-fingered humanoid when you were in the CIA. You actually went to
Nevada, to Nellis AFB and Area 51, where you personally saw at least
seven different craft and the live being that was described as a "grey"
with large black eyes and was different from the six-fingered humanoid.
And yet, when you left the Army Signal Corps and CIA work in 1960,
there was still no understanding about the relationship between those
beings or why they were there.

Kewper: Yes, that's right; one- hundred-per-cent right. At that time
there was a question mark, a big question mark as to why they were
here. In some casesapparently some of the US sightingsthey were
tremendously friendly.

Howe: Were friendly?

Kewper: Yes, were friendly. And, of course, there were all the
abduction things that came out later. There weren't any in that
original Blue Book file that I had seen at that time in Blue Book. I
know there were quite a few later that said they were abducted.

Howe: And did you ever see any references to animal mutilations or
unusual deaths?

Kewper: Yes. At that time we had it out in Colorado, I think. I saw
some of those. Different parts of the animal were taken like samplesthe
stomachs in some, sex organs in othersand [the animals were] apparently
mutilated with a laser weapon of some kind that left very precise
cutting edges.

Howe: Did you read about any such cases in that 1957 to 1960 time
period?

Kewper: Yes, especially from Colorado.

Howe: Even back then?

Kewper: Yes.

Howe: And was there speculation on the part of the Central Intelligence
Agency or the military about the relationship between these unusual
animal deaths and the extraterrestrials?

Kewper: Yes. The only thought at that time, if I remember correctly, is
that they [extraterrestrials] were taking samples of these various
animals on the Earth just to see more or less what their different
functions were...

Howe: Do you think that this story should be told in its entirety today?

Kewper: Yes, I think it should. I think it would be helpful in
explaining it, first of all. We still have a lot of sightings to this
day and age.

Howe: And this is why you're talking to me?

Kewper: Yes.


EPILOGUE:

After this audiotaped interview was broadcast on the North American
syndicated radio programs Dreamland and Coast To Coast AM Hosted by Art
Bell, I learned from Kewper that he'd contacted a phone company
executive in his city to inquire about the source of the anonymous call
to him on May 25. He was told that the source was the Wackenhut
Corporationa security operation that works for the National
Reconnaissance Office and other sensitive military and intelligence
agencies in the United States.

More than 50 years after the 1947 Roswell incident, a major question
is: What do the United States, England, Australia other American ally
government insidersand, according to Kewper, even Russiaknow which
sustains the Orwellian policy of silence and denial in which lies are
ordered to become official truth?...as written so strongly in SOM1-01,
the Majestic–12 Group Special Operations Manual of April 1954:

Any encounter with entities known to be of extraterrestrial origin is
to be considered to be a matter of national security and therefore
classified TOP SECRET. Under no circumstance is the general public or
the public press to learn of the existence of these entities. The
official government policy is that such creatures do not exist, and
that no agency of the federal government is now engaged in any study of
extraterrestrials or their artifacts. Any deviation from this stated
policy is absolutely forbidden.

What will it take to change this policy instigated by US President
Harry S. Truman's Executive Order in 1947? What
military-industrial-complex interests are so vested in perpetuating the
suppression, and why? It seems a right of the entire global human
family to know that we are not alone in this universe, and that
extraterrestrial biological entities and other-dimensional entities
have been interacting with this planet for aeons, affecting our
biological, social and religious evolutions. But why?

Note: If any readers have more information, please fax Linda Moulton
Howe in the USA on (215) 491 9842, or write to her as per details on
the first page of this article.


About the Author:

Linda Moulton Howe is a graduate of Stanford University, USA, and has a
Masters Degree in Communication. She is a science and environmental
reporter for radio and television. Her film documentaries, A Strange
Harvest and Strange Harvests 1993, explored the worldwide animal
mutilations phenomenon. Her books include An Alien Harvest, Glimpses of
Other Realities–Volume I: Facts & Eyewitnesses, and, most
recently, Glimpses of Other Realities–Volume II: High
Strangeness (Paper Chase Press, USA, phone (702) 826 5947; see review
this issue).

Ms Howe's investigations have taken in such diverse subjects as crop
circles, the chupacabras mystery, humanity's hidden history, and the
evidence for UFOs and ETs, including research into the alleged Roswell
UFO crash fragments and government knowledge and cover-up of non-human
intelligences interacting with our planet.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                      Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 02:31:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:20:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 17:41:26 PDT

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>

>>Dear Dennis:

>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>

>>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>

>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>>>>Dear Sirs and Madames,

>>>>As a true nuts-and-bolts sort of fellow [ big snip ]

>Larry, Dennis & List,

>I have but one thing to ask - who hijacked my thread?!?

>My original post was seeking input on establishing a 'People List'
>that we newbies could refer to in order to assess the value of the
>inputs of the 'oldies' on the list. Unfortunately, it has already
>descended towards yet another slanging match . . .

>How about some proper feedback on my original issue?

>Regards,
>Leanne

>From LH: Sorry Leanne, if things sort of drifted away!

I think we could all use a nice concise list of the participants
in these debates, their activities and contributions to UFO
studies, and especially their positions / opinions on various
issues.

Such issues should include (but by no means be limited to)

The likelihood that UFOs are extra-terrestrial, and/or
time-travelers, and/or extra-dimensional and/or . . .

Opinions on the various abduction scenarios; government
involvement and/or secrecy .. ditto the military etc.

Opinions on the better known smoldering matters like Roswell,
the Santilli UFO dissection film, the TNT / Russian remake,
Billy Meier .. and numerous others.

As useful as this would be, who is going to compile such a list?
I'm not about to. If I published my honest opinions about some
people, or mis-stated their positions on this or that issue, I'd
never hear the end of it.

Look what you're asking.

If you read between the lines of the people who post to this and
other lists for a few weeks, you can pretty well figure out
where each Jack and Jill is coming from.

I'll bet you have 3, 4 or 5 personalities pretty well scoped
out by now already.

I wish I could offer better suggestions, but I can't just now.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #275

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:42:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:30:18 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #275

Apology to MW #275 (For October 10, 1998)

I went outside and couldn't see them so, then, went inside
again, occluded by my thoughts on hidden stars. I reflected on
the absence of these things so large or vast -- exceeding any
measure of a section or a class, and the disappointment's
plaintive like I'm underneath your hand; the atmosphere is
cloistered, and I cannot breath or stand. Cut off from their
indifference to the standards of my life (!), I am withered,
drawn, emulsified, or swallowed up like rice.

They leap and dance behind the clouds, each one a different
color, but its color in a spectrograph, so then wider, Brighter
-- FULLER!!  And they boil ultra violet -- then they simmer
infrared! They churn in colors you shan't see -- and _livid_
with them, Fred! But, I shall not _see_ the difference under
soggy, humid clouds, with a harshness to the atmosphere that
foams corrosive doubt. I shall not _have_ that promise made in
subtle youth now seems betrayed by honored feelings I have
hidden -- make a wish it's _all_ forbidden! I shall not spread
my common arms, and cleave the heavens unalarmed while *fathers*
of convenient place destroy my planet for their faith!!!

Things _aren't_ the way you thought they were while hidden in
the clouds, deterred. Every _thing_ is out of focus, has no
meaning -- has no locus. It _makes_ one look with longing at an
easy answer, friend! It _makes_ you want to go along, give in,
and just pretend . . . that we are but _alone_ in space -- we
are IT! It's us -- our race, and we, of course (creation's
jewel), are not just gangs of grinning ghouls! That we have
substance, we have smarts -- that we have sense . . . that we
have hearts! That we shall _have_ a good clean spirit, or lay
our claim to _something_ near it! That justice is, most times,
at hand (!) -- that freedom is awash our land! That Reagan's
voodoo _was_ our tonic, not a sickness, lasting -- chronic!

Clinton is a cheater that betrayed his only wife (produced a kid
with head on straight), but no additions to our strife. I
preferred him, even _knowing_ he's the left arm of the beast, he
didn't take my mother's money, or my good friends life at
least!!! He didn't cut school lunches while he lauded family
concepts! And he didn't cut the forests down for landslides
final conquest. Now Reagan's lies _killed_ Carter, and the Bush
lies _swept_ the stage for massive trickle "ups" of bucks that
should fill us _all_ with rage. (It's the people that were
cheated will be breaking down our doors -- we'll be dragged to
bloody streets become a vicious killing floor. . .) But THEY are
*elder statesman*, and they OOZE benign respect. While Clinton
is a MONSTER 'cause he likes his pee-pee wet?

And this a *churn* while stars explode as flying saucers change
abode and travel in their way mysterious -- pulsing through the
sky delirious. Reality a fever dream, as space folk make their
hybrids scream for reasons we shall _not_ determine. We won't
grok the story, Herman! Every day *good* people pray for unborn
babies, save the day, but once they're born (?) forgot, forlorn
unless they hear a Christian horn. Reviled and shut out from
life, a victim double's standard strife, took a licking _kept_
on ticking, filled your jails you've built inflicting!!

But, blow away the clouds dear fate (!), this morning saw
Orion's gait! He strode across the early sky like walking
diamonds flying high. And there beside huge Betelgeuse a
*flicker* blinked alive and moved so grandly in the predawn air
-- a UFO should blandly stare! Just a point of light that moved,
a glass dispels a plane with crew -- a circle of unblinking
light that moves against a star field, Mike! And I saw it, it
was there (!), moving weirdly here to *where*.  Flashing lights
in non attendance!! Breaking major laws -- some business!!!

No "flash" to a position? Well, it's "flash" avoids collision! A
flashing light's a _must_ for planes in flight. And it's weird
when you don't see them, you can bet Kal won't impeach 'em  --
turning _down_ a notch his knob he'd use for spite. But, at
_least_, no longer hidden by the tyranny of clouds! At least it
can be seen as plain as ragged, rancid doubt!! Anomaly
_unmasked_ is what we sign the contract for (!) -- breaking
black paned windows, and exploding unjust doors! Digging up the
blood soaked ground is what we'll end up doing -- do it 'fore it
needs it, friend!
It's where we need imbuing!!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

When you look, you find!

Restore John Ford!


--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: UFOs in Hurricanes

From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:56:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:37:04 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs in Hurricanes


>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:00:36 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
>Subject: UFOs In Hurricanes And Other Natural Phenomena
>To updates@globalserve.net

>From: National UFO Reporting Center <director@UFOCENTER.COM>
>Via: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>Greetings to the List:

>The National UFO Reporting Center has received several credible
>sounding reports from witnesses who have claimed they were
>witness to similar sounding phenomena. One woman in New Mexico
>asserted that she had been witness to a disc shaped object
>streaking out of a dark thunderhead, reversing its course
>instantly, and streaking equally rapidly back into the cloud.

<snip>

>Peter B. Davenport, Director



I have lived in Miami for 30 years and was here during Hurricane
Andrew. I also witnessed what I can best describe as "green
lightning" during the hurricane. The flashes were quite
brilliant, and at time lit up the entire sky. I think that they
were more of an atmospheric phenomenon than of extraterrestrial
origin, but can't say for sure. It was quite beautiful actually,
and is one of my strongest memories from Andrew.



--
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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@ccsi.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:42:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:20:59 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:36:26 +0100
>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


Howdy ya'll,

Interesting to hear this guys disinfo resurrected (Col Weaver).
see below.

Incidentally, a friend of mine who is a Vietnam vet (gunner) and
ex-NSA photo analyst said to me when he heard about this report,
"when I was with the NSA we were told that if we were ever
captured and interrogated to only say 'We were involved in upper
atmospheric EM propagation experiments'."

PS - dont the Illuminati have paper shredders?

SMiles

article parts below:

>Dear List,

>Parallell to the ongoing research regarding the interpretation
>of the Ramey message, I can provide you with the following
>research report, which I recently just happened to come across,
>and which is referring to an US Air Force research regarding the
>Roswell incident, i.e.:

>http://home.clara.net/ufo-net/air_force.html

>This report seems to be written by Mr. Richard L. Weaver, Col,
>USAF, Director, Security and Special Program Oversight.


ROSWELL REDUX: THIS TIME IT'S OFFICIAL
Dean Genesee

partial article from issue four of THE EXCLUDED MIDDLE magazine

"While the GAO took it's sweet time, it seems that Colonel
Richard Weaver whipped his office into attention to interview
witnesses and scour Air Force records for their own version of
events. It is not generally known that Col. Weaver has been
employed by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations
(AFOSI) in the past to concoct stories for eager UFO
researchers. While stationed at Bolling AFB in Virginia in 1978,
he was assistant to Col. Barry Hennessy to plan and implement a
project that has become known publicly as the "Bennewitz
Affair."

Paul Bennewitz is generally believed to have been "driven crazy"
by elements of the AFOSI, assisted by various researchers and
informants in the UFO community. Although he was basically
feeding off his own delusions to begin with, Hennessy, Weaver,
et al saw in his plight a chance to obfuscate the issues
surrounding secret developments which ultimately had nothing
whatsoever to do with UFOs. When the intelligence community
decides to move in a given direction, it does so when its
actions will kill many birds with one stone (rhetorical pun
intended). By discrediting  Bennewitz and filling him with
ever-increasing paranoia, they hoped to keep prying eyes away
from Sandia/Manzano (New Mexico) research and development
complex.  . . . . .

Now in 1994, Col. Weaver takes authorship responsibilities for
the explanation that the Roswell debris was the result of a
project to detect nuclear testing from the upper atmosphere.  .
. . . . .

Just as there is much to prove in the case for the story that an
alien craft crashed in the desert in July, 1947, there is an
equal onus on anyone who cares to refute the claims of many
researchers. Throughout the report, reference is made to
"attachments" (there are about 300 pages of them) that were not
released. It may be assumed that there is a prosaic explanation
for the Roswell event, but Col Weaver's report is as quilty in
its vagueness on salient points as the UFO writers in many of
their unqualified statements and quotes taken out of context. It
is also strange that Weaver, as "Director Of Security And
Special Program Oversight" suddenly decides to release a report
which would normally be handled by the Air Force's public
relations office.
Once again we must choose our reality, friends.

Subscription Info Advert for The EXCLUDED MIDDLE magazine
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/images/tEMad.jpg
and its editor Greg Bishop
mailto:exclmid@primenet.com
--

        Stephen MILES Lewis

Writer, Designer, Producer, Editor
        & INFORMATIONALIST

E.L.F. INFESTED SPACES -
Journal of Possible Paradigms

mailto:elfis@ccsi.com

        ELFIS OnLine :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:45:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:46:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Scott Ribordy <sdr@ns.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:29:16 GMT

>>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>I bring this up to
>>affirm a strong point. Klass and other skeptics are not the
>>problem with ufology, nor the deamons that are continuously
>>presented on this list by UFO illuminaries looking for something
>>to blame for their own problems. The problem is within ufology
>>and the people that have keep it wallowing in its present
>>condition by refusing to clean itself up. Ufologists can shoot
>>as many messengers as they want, shrug responsibility for its
>>woes and blame whoever they want for its paralysis, and in the
>>end nothing will have changed.

>With your obvious interest in the health and well-being of
>ufology, I have to ask; What, in your opinion, should be done?

A good starting point would be trying to emulate Allan Hendry in
his methodology placing emphasis on critical thinking,
discernment and evidence that can be independently verified and
provides linkage. It is very frustating to maintain such rigid
standards of evidence if one has acquired belief systems along
the way as to what ufology is all about, but necessary for
progress to be made. Allan Hendry became so frustated with the
lack of such standards in ufology that he left the field in
total disgust never to turn back to it. Deep inside he realized
that ufology was a 'failure' as practiced and simply didn't want
to be part of it anymore. A short time after he left ufology,
Marge Christensen (who has also left ufology) spotted him at a
wedding which he was videographing, the business he was then in.
She tried to engage him in conversation as to why he left and he
refused to even discuss any aspect of his time in ufology or
even to look back at it, his disgust was so overwhelming.

>The impression I get from your articles (Please correct me if
>I'm getting the wrong impression.) is that you feel that there
>are certain individuals who should *not* be participating in
>ufology. I am curious as to how you would endeavor to exclude
>(excommunicate?) them.

You got the wrong impression. The only people that I have met
that have endeavored to suggest for people to leave the field
are individuals that have taken offense with more rigid and
strict viewpoints contrary to their own positions. People like
Jerome Clark and Robert Swiatek of FUFOR, for example, suggested
that I should leave the Project 1947 mailing list because of
statements I made suggesting the Sturrock Panel announcement was
a managed news event. It didn't make any difference to them that
the statement was not derogatory and that I spoke from the
personal viewpoint of being in the same room with Sturrock, as
well as Haines, Vallee, Gross, and nine others two months before
the announcement was made and Sturrock brought the subject up
and the upcoming news 'event' was discussed. We see examples of
managed news all the time when public support is needed.
Examples are the martian meteorite and cold fusion. Both have
fizzled, but it sure brought a lot of attention to the initial
claims. The Martian meteorite even helped to save the Ames
Research Center.

The idea is not to target individuals and exclude them out, but
not to let them get away unchallenged when their beliefs are
presented as facts. The idea is to raise the level of critical
thinking and discernment and require and maintain higher levels
of evidence including independent verification, provenance and
linkage shown between two allegedly supporting facts. This is
all common sense. In present day ufology, belief systems are so
strong that the above are interpreted as 'tools of debunkers'
when they conflict with rigid beliefs.

>Where can ufology be practiced so that it can be safe from
these >foul despoilers of good scientific practices?

Anywhere outside a temple.

>I would be interested in reading your (and the List's, of
>course) thoughts on this.

On a separate posting, I will post a commentary by Barry
Greenwood found in a past issue of JUST CAUSE that is relevant
to the present state of ufology.

Ed Stewart
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                             Re: Looks Deceiving

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:31:06 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:43:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving


>From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:28:13 -0700
>Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:24 -0400
>Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving

John and list,

In a previous response John wrote:

>"What if Eleanor Roosevelt could (could not) fly?" (My
>apologies to the "Firesign Theater", circa 1970.)

>What observations would give rise to such a problem? What if I
>solve the problem? Would my solution be of any use to anyone?
>How about if I end up with a consensus among all observers which
>is in basic agreement as to the observation?......Does that mean
>I've got an answer to the problem or that I've got myself a
>science?

First, I'm glad to see that someone other than an old fart like
me remembers Firesign Theater. Good writing, that. Funny stuff.

But, I digress...

Agreed. So WHAT if Eleanor Roosevelt could fly! Having an answer
to a silly question certainly doesn't elevate the subject to the
realm of 'science' automatically. In fact, the only person that
it might really make a difference to is...Eleanor Roosevelt!

Or is this really true?

My feeling is that most truly profound subjects seem totally
silly to others that don't understand it (yet?). The point you
make is a very good one, though. Mistating the problem is a big
factor in not solving the very same problem. But, as I pointed
out before, we really don't what the hell we're looking for.

Since we are approaching the subject of UFOs
"science/non-science" with a lighter touch, let me pose this
question to you:

_If_ Eleanor Roosevelt _could_ fly, wouldn't you like to know
her secret?

I'm sure Lockheed would.

Hmmmm.

Reverse-engineering Eleanor Roosevelt; now _that's_ a sobering
thought!

Later, all.

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 13:28:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:26:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Scott Ribordy <sdr@ns.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:29:16 GMT

>>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>With your obvious interest in the health and well-being of
>ufology, I have to ask; What, in your opinion, should be done?

>I would be interested in reading your (and the List's, of
>course) thoughts on this.

The following short essay was written as an editorial in JUST
CAUSE, #32, June 1992 by its editor, Barry Greenwood.

"Recently several persons have expressed their dissatisfaction
to us about UFO research. 'It seems like everyone has their own
ideas about what UFOs are and it is all very confusing,' said
one. 'There is so much controversy that it is difficult for an
outsider to tell fact from fiction,' said another. 'The politics
of UFO research seems to be incredibly bizarre,' added a third.

The fact is that there are new people taking an interest in UFOs
who are not familiar with the rather convoluted history many of
us have lived with for decades. And it is a chore for one to
comprehend not only the phenomenon but the people in it. The
best sources of information tend not to be easily available
anymore and costs have risen to a point where some UFO books
make one decide whether having it is worth a week of meatloaf
for supper or a weekend of the Three Stooges on TV instead of
going to a ball game.

It is beyond the scope of this commentary to launch into a
primer on the UFO field. However a few suggestions can be made
without involving a reference work or quoting a prominent person
with a history of UFO interest.

1) There is no such thing as a 'UFO EXPERT.' If one says he/she
is, doubt it. If someone says he/she is, doubt it. How can one
be a UFO expert if they do not know what UFOs are, who's in
them, where they come from, or why they are here? If they do
claim to know any one or all of these things, they are either
careless for not being able to offer proof of their
extraordinary statements, preaching from a religious viewpoint
instead of a scientific one in choosing to 'believe' rather than
considering information on its merits, or just plain lying for
personal gain, self-gratification; etc. Judge UFO information by
how logical and sensible it is, not by who says it. Don't be so
overwhelmed by emphasis on one's credentials or affiliations
that you accept their statements at face value, without
question. Often a close examination of information from a
supposed authority reveals that it is no more credible than your
Aunt Hortense's speculations on Relativity Theory (unless your
Aunt Hortense has done a lot of reading!). Flawed information
from self-appointed authorities become ingrained in many
individual minds from sheer force of personality, personality
that shields their failings behind a fascade of intellectual
superiority.

2) Carve your own niche. If you decide to pursue an interest in
UFO research, make sure you learn much about the world around
you first. Handled properly, a UFO interest can motivate
self-education in astronomy, meteorology, psychology and a host
of other areas. Unlike what some pundits have said in the past,
being into UFOs doesn't always send people off onto wrong
pathways. In fact it probably generates as many people who
become channelled into serious, hard-knowledge fields as it does
ding-a-lings. Ideally, a society that is increasingly inclined
to one-dimensional thinking and stereotyping will recognize that
being interested in space mysteries does not always equate with
eccentricity and instability. It is up to you how others will
eventually perceive it.

3) You are not a 'little person.' You come into the UFO subject
with a great deal of enthusiasm. You desire to contribute to the
resolution of a long-standing mystery. Confronting you are
prolific authors, 'Whirling-Dervish' investigators,
high-intensity personalities and groupie-like hangers-on, all
from the high and low end of the likeability scale. Trying to
fathom all of this seems impossible and you question whether you
can after all contribute anything in such a marketplace of
obscure and fantastic information.

Remember that they all started the same way, from a complete
lack of knowledge of the UFO phenomenon. You have to build your
background slowly, patiently. You must regard yourself as being
as good as anyone else in pursuing UFOs. As previously stated,
there are no experts so don't idol-worship Ufologists. Respect
them if they are honest and truth-seeking and follow such an
ideal yourself. Hold untruthy, chicanery, exageration,
pretentiousness, pomposity and greed in great disregard and
express such in a way that will discourage others from wanting
to pursue those negative attributes. Then you know you will be
an important contributer to improving our knowledge.

Welcome to the UFO field!"

Barry Greenwood


Barry Greenwood is the co-author with Larry Fawcett of "Clear
Intent", which has been re-issued and available as "The UFO
Cover-Up" at your local bookstores. Some of the basis for the
evidence discussed in the book was uncovered by the research
efforts of many people including Robert Todd, an independent
researcher who has been an associate of Barry Greenwood for many
years.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:45:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

>>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Ah yes, the obsession with Todd's slight coverage in the
>encyclopedia. I was trying to write a history of the UFO
>controversy. Any historian has to make judgments about who is
>important, who isn't, who did what and why, and so on. If Ed
>Stewart believes Todd to be a major figure, he ought to write
>his own encyclopedia. I would have covered Todd more if I'd
>thought him to be somebody important, whether I liked him
>personally or not. (I think Adamski was a bald-faced liar, which
>didn't stop me from writing about him at length, for example.)
>It's just that in my research I didn't come upon anything that
>led me to believe Todd is significant in the way the truly large
>figures (from Adamski to Zeidman) are. Not a single reviewer of
>the book has remarked on Todd's relative absence, so I gather
>that , aside from Todd himself and his apologist Stewart, this
>hasn't been seen as the huge intellectual scandal T and S want
>us believe it is.

First things first. Inspite of Jerome Clark's continued
demonization of Robert Todd, Todd is on record on this mailing
list disavowing himself from my commentaries. He has stated
previously that he has never ever cared if his name has appeared
in any of his books at any time. But, it apparantly tickles
Jerome Clark's ego to continue attributing my rhetoric to Robert
Todd and vice-a-versa. It is must be sad for Jerome Clark
afficionados to witness such a continuous fiasco and inability
to attribute what was said to Todd to Todd and what was said by
me to me. I am afraid all it does is it provides continuous
evidence of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty and contrived
pettyness. Maybe, Jerome Clark does not know and understand that
every single message/thread on this mailing list is archived and
quickly available for anyone interested on the internet through
the efforts of Glenn Campbell and UFOMIND. A complete record
exists of every message posted on UFO updates since the end of
1996, almost a two year archive.

>I don't claim ultimate wisdom in these matters, so again, if Ed
>disagrees, rather than rant about it he ought to write his own
>history showing why he believes Todd to be a towering figure.

I don't consider Robert Todd to be a 'towering figure'. What he
has demonstrated time and time again is overwhelming integrity
in his research methodology in the evidence he has discovered
through his own personal research and efforts, evidence that is
backed-up by a trail of paperwork that can be independently
verified by anyone who so desires, evidence that he has shared
with the UFO community over two decades. Unfortunately, for
those that place their beliefs ahead of the evidence, the
documentation uncovered by Robert Todd has proved to be highly
embarassing for the promulgation of their beliefs regarding
alleged government involvement and some of their pet beliefs
such as MJ-12 and later Roswell. Some of the areas that Robert
Todd has uncovered relevant information has been:

        . Research contributions that can be read in "Clear Intent"
         regarding northern tier 'overflights' over strategic
         installations.

        . Releases of Air Force Intelligence Files (over 2000
         documents) Any discussion of Air Force involvement during
         the 40s, 50s, 60s probably involves documents first
         uncovered by Robert Todd.

        . 52 Washington DC overflights. Transcripts uncovered by
         Robert Todd included National Airport/Andrews AFB
         transmissions.

        . Projects MOONDUST, BLUEFLY.

        . 1950-56 Special Study Group Of AF Intelligence documents.

        . 2nd release of another 262 pages of Air Force Intelligence
         documents.

        . NORAD files and Databases.

        . Belgium UFO wave DIA documents.

        . Bentwaters, England, The Halt Memo.

        . FOO-fighter and Ghost Rocket documents.

        . What is now known as the 'Bolender' memo.

        . Insights into Project Blue Book, Project Sign, Project
         Grudge.

        . and of course documents and evidence related to much of
         the MJ-12 and Roswell myths.

His main contribution has been the de-mystification of the UFO
problem. His intentions, by my understanding, were never to
debunk the subject, but to tackle a subject he originally found
to be intriguing. Unfortunately, the evidence was not there to
support the many government conspiracy models the ET crowd needs
to help pump-up their continuing belief system. And there lies
the real reason why his contributions have been ignored. He is
in good company. Hendry is ignored. Jeffries has been ostracized
for his position. Todd has been written out of the UFO
Encyclopedia because Jerome Clark claims he can't think of any
significant contribution. (GRIN)

>>That is as low as an
>>individual can commit themselves.

>Don't you mean "as low as an individual can commit _himself_?"
>You mean as low as Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson, Charlie
>Starkweather, Vlad the Impaler? History will record that Jerome
>Clark, who went as low as an individual could commit himself,
>was one of the vilest villains of the 20th Century, identified
>as such by no less than that eminent demonologist Ed Stewart.

And Jerome Clark continues his intellectual dishonesty creating
allegations that originated in his own head and attributing them
to me. Nowhere, at any time have I ever associated him with any
of the characters above. Yet, he keeps repeating the same jargon
every time he posts. The archive of this mailing list shows
that. Maybe Clark was not aware that his intellectual dishonesty
has been a continuing part of the archival record available to
anyone on the internet.

>Apparently Ed is so desperate for ammunition against me, since
>little or none seems to exist in the real world, that he's
>manufactured a statement I never made.

Anybody interested in what is fabricated and by who, has the
archival record to guide them. One of the reasons I always use
quotes when attributing a statement to some else, is so that
there is no question of my integrity. I have not manufactured
any of Jerome Clark's quotes, yet he has failed to quote me when
accusing me of his fabricated improprieties. Ufological wisdom
at its best. Red herrings and strawmen arguments are logical
fallacies that can never support a legitimate argument. Why
Jerome Clark continues using is beyond my comprehension.

>>So? You wish to defend ufology on the basis that it is not
>>responsible for its own consequences, be my guest. That is
>>exactly one of the positions Oberg's paper points out to as one
>>of the reasons ufology can't seeem to get up. The point is not
>>what has/has not happened TO ufology. The point is what
>>responsibility has ufology taken on itself for its own
>>condition?

>I believe I've already answered that. Those of you looking for a
>balanced, rational discussion of ufology's problems re science
>are, I'm afraid, not going to find them in our friend Ed
>Stewart's frenzied and tedious polemics.

No, It hasn't been answered. If ufology had ever taken any
responsibility for its own sorry state, I wouldn't be here
bringing it up.

>It always amuses me that Ed Stewart is forever accusing _other
>people_ of creating demons -- apparently he has never heard of
>the psychological phenomenon of "projection" -- when Ed himself
>may as well be a demonologist for all the hate-filled
>accusations he hurls, without evidence or logic, against any
>number of targets. Actually, I don't like Todd for the same
>reason many people don't like him: he demonizes others and he is
>rude to the point of incoherence and even unintentional comedy.
>Gee, does that sound like anybody else we know? Somebody, say,
>with the initials ES? Nah, couldn't be....

What I don't understand is how a mentally normal person can be
simultaneously intellectually dishonest and believe their own
rhetoric? We know from the archival record of this thread that
your rhetoric is intellectually dishonest. That leaves two
choices. Either you do not believe your own rhetoric, or you are
not normal? I think you believe your own rhetoric as dishonest
as the archival record shows it to be.

>(Incidentally: Ed never did answer my challenge to him to
>provide evidence that Oberg and other debunkers have ever --
>even once -- tried to clean their own house.)

Who really gives a hoot what skeptics or debunkers do in their
own house? That is not an issue or concern to the state of
ufology. It reverts back to whether ufology has ever taken
responsibility for its own state of being? It is obvious that
Jerome Clark is not willing to take that responsibility and
continues to point a finger as if that relieves or enhances
ufology in the eyes of the world. That is in direct relevance to
what Oberg pointed out two decades ago. Ufology is not willing
to take responsibility for its own state of affairs. Maybe all
it will ever be is an 'hysterical pregnancy'.

>And for that matter, a question you and Todd have never
>answered: Am I charlatan or a true believer? I couldn't be both,
>after all. You've got to get your ad hominems straight, my
>friend. One big problem with the insults-uber-alles approach of
>Stewart and Todd is its bewildering incoherence. It _is_ funny,
>though.

What is hilarious is that I have never called you a charlatan.
But your intellectual dishonesty compels you to attribute that
statement to me. I suspect that you consider it fashionable to
come across as a 'true-believer' on this mailing list, but I
have seen you shuffle many times in the past over the decades so
I strongly suspect that whether you are a true-believer or not
is temporal in nature. What has been established here is your
continuous intellectual dishonesty.

>An excellent paper on the strong involvement of scientists in
>the UFO controversy, especially in the 1970s, is Steven J.
>Dick's "Edward U. Condon, UFOs, and the Many Cultures of
>Science," read at the History of Science Meeting in Washington,
>D.C., on December 28, 1992.

I haven't read this paper, so I can't address it. I will track
it down and read it. I am familiar with Dick and his role as a
SETI historian.

>He [Bullard] is also a regular contributor to IUR (which, as some of you
>know, I edit) and the Journal of UFO Studies, which CUFOS
>publishes. Among his papers are some powerful debunkings of Ed's
>intellectual mentor Klass and CSICOP,

A continuous weakness of ufological wisdom is the introduction
of illogical fallacies into their arguments. It is not enough
for Jerome Clark to state a truism (i.e. Bullard's papers
include debunkings of CSICOP and Klass), but apparently he has
found it necessary to create a dishonest construction that they
are my intellectual mentors. Allegedly, this makes the statement
somewhat stronger. I would have thought that the mention of the
truism by itself would be the stronger statement to make. As
anybody ever noticed how often Klass and CSICOP are attacked in
Jerome Clark's commentary? Are they that powerful that their
image needs to be tarnished continuously? Actually, they are not
even relevant to this or any discussion involving the state of
ufology because they are not responsible for ufology's woes. The
introduction of them into a negative statement is simply a
logical fallacy technique, an appeal to the gallery, employed to
make it appear that the argument is stronger than actually is.
It is a sign that the user has low esteem for the position they
are trying to defend and actually weakens ones own argument by
employing it. But, it raises cheers in the gallery. The gallery
just can't understand why the home team has been in the whole
for the last fifty years! If they understood logical fallacies,
they would know.

>I personally find it distressing that so much Klass polemic
>seeks to demonize those who disagree with him (Klass even, in
>one particularly notorious instance, tried to get James McDonald
>into legal trouble), but I can understand why Ed has no problem
>whatever with this approach.

Another example above of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty
and addiction to illogical fallacies. The above is tantamount to
asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife?
Recognize these illogical fallacies in arguments. It helps a
reader in recognizing how feeble the argument being posed
actually is.

>It is hilarious, however, that
>while Ed is accusing others of bad science, he is praising and
>quoting Klass as a great authority.

Further example of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty. How
he gets the above from my statement that we sat together for
five hours with Eddie Bullard, Richard Heiden, James Moseley and
Robert Girard and enjoyed each others company is simply
unbelieveable? Yet, Jerome Clark apparently feels compelled to
make these absurd interpolations even though the archival record
is showing them to be false. I keep bringing up these examples
of his intellectual dishonesty up because Jerome Clark is
allegedly a recognized UFO historian. Somebody who you would
alledgedly trust to write books that would capture truth,
resource books for future generations. If Jerome Clark can't
keep his arguments close to the truth in an ongoing mailing list
discussion, what chance is there that his encyclopedia books
reflect true history?

>For a treatment of the relationship of Hendry and Klass, see my
>"Phil Klass vs. the `UFO Promoters'" (Fate, February 1981) and
>The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp. 482-83 and 855. (Thanks for
>giving me an excuse for another plug, Ed.)

Why don't you explain to the readers why Hendry left the field
of ufology in such total disgust? Never to come back!

>. Now, take a couple of aspirins and lie down before you have a
>coronary, my friend.

Your sentiments are tacky at best. Everyone that knows me
personally is aware that I suffered a major stroke last
February. My capacity to even type at the computer has been
drastically curtailed since then. Your continuous references to
my alleged state of health only show to display how consuming
your pettyness is. You are a real scumbag. That is the only way
I know to describe you and it has nothing to do with your
intellectual dishonesty. That character flaw is separate.

>You've got a problem, Ed. You may well be emotionally incapable
>of participating in adult discourse, for all I know, but the
>ranting and raving approach isn't getting you anywhere. It
>certainly does not make you sound rational, and it obviously is
>not making you happy. Maybe it's time to leave a field you hate
>so much and go into something else -- though something tells me
>that if you entered stamp-collecting, you'd behave pretty much
>the same way.

Actually, I bought a house from profits I made dealing in postal
history. I specialized in the 1850s. Great historically active
postal era!

Much to your chagrin, I don't hate this field and have no plans
in leaving. This is a relaxing hobby for me. I strongly suspect
that time will show who has the problem here and who is
incapable of adult participation. Your character and your
intellectual dishonesty is already a part of the archival
record. Unfortunately, that is not the issue here. The issue is
whether or not ufology has lived up to its promises? So far you
haven't produced any good arguments for your position.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                            The Lunar Conspiracy

From: Jsmortell@aol.com
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:31:06 -0400
Subject: The Lunar Conspiracy


I would like very much to open a thread on a subject that, since
I have been here, which is not very long albeit, I have not seen
addressed. The subject is our moon.

There are a number of issues which I have read lately,
attempting to give ground to theories on the condition of this,
our nearest neighbor in space.

Among these are the following:

- The moon is an artificial satellite

- The moon is hollow

- We have ceased exploration on the "orders" or "agreement" of
 Aliens who would have us stay away from their labors there

These various rationales appear to be conspiratorial in nature
and connote additional damning evidence of governmental
repression. In truth, my interest is not only curiosity, but
stems from research which has been forced upon me by a client.
This research should have nothing at all to do with the
aforementioned theories.

However, I have run into some dichotomous information, the
explanation of which may be related to these theories.

Anyone out there have FACTS which they are willing to share?

Any and all information would be appreciated.

Jim






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

               Space Coast UFO Conference: NASA And Newsmedia

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 03:05:58 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:30:44 -0400
Subject: Space Coast UFO Conference: NASA And Newsmedia


Source: Florida Today

http://www.flatoday.com:80/space/today/101098i.htm

Stig

*******

FLORIDA TODAY Space Online
"Planet Earth's best source for online space news"

For Oct. 10, 1998

NASA, news media rapped at UFO conference

By Billy Cox
FLORIDA TODAY

COCOA BEACH, Fla. - Although NASA made an easy target during Friday
afternoon's opening session of the Space Coast UFO Conference at the
Hilton, the most rousing applause erupted after a swipe at the news
media.

Several hundred listeners gathered for an event billed as the NASA
Forum, which - for the first time, according to conference sponsors -
featured a space agency representative, Thomas Howard Smith.

But UFO researcher/author Stanton Friedman scored a crowd pleaser when
he charged, during the question-and-answer session, "If any newspaper
spent one-fifth of what they've spent (investigating) Monica Lewinsky,
we'd have the answers to flying saucers."

Twenty years ago, Friedman, a nuclear physicist whose contracts
included classified projects, was the first to investigate the 1947
accounts of a controversial crash in the New Mexico desert. Now
popularized as the Roswell Incident, that event has become what
Friedman contends was the beginning of a "Cosmic Watergate" engineered
by the military and civilian intelligence machinery.

But with a NASA rep sitting at his elbow, Friedman couldn't resist
venting some frustration at the space agency - "we don't have a
project, we don't have goals" - and he wondered what happened to the
UFO data supposedly collected by NASA's predecessor, the National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.

Smith, a space station and human exploration specialist, preferred to
talk about NASA's more conventional history and a discussion of
upcoming projects. He described himself as a "sympathetic nonbeliever"
who wasn't here "to deliver any kind of revelation. It would be fine.
It would also be career limiting," he added, provoking laughter.

Forum panelist Vincent DiPietro also had a major bone to pick with
NASA. A senior systems engineer employed as a contractor at Goddard
Space Flight Center for 23 years, DiPietro was the first to study
enigmatic Martian surface features photographed during the 1976 Viking
mission.

Citing a September Space News report on the growing number of planetary
scientists disgruntled over the slow release of photo data from the
ongoing Mars Global Surveyor project, DiPietro suggested compelling new
images were being consciously withheld.

DiPietro criticized MGS camera operator Michael Malin, whose contract
gives him a six-month proprietary embargo on the images. He said other
scientists reported Malin had taken numerous pictures of the so-called
Face on Mars, other than the single one released to NASA in April that
appeared to reflect natural terrain rather than artificial features.

"This leads me to believe we are not getting all the facts from Malin
Enterprises," DiPietro said.

But not all the barbs came from the panelists; the audience took their
shots, too.

One man asked Smith a question he said he couldn't get NASA
Administrator Dan Goldin to answer several years ago during a public
forum: "When (are you) going to tell the public about the UFO
presence?" The perplexed Smith replied, "The next time I play golf with
him, I'll ask him."

Another exasperated audience member wondered where the space agency's
curiosity was when it came to UFOs, given the level of public interest.
"I've never heard a NASA official say, 'Y'know, this is interesting." '

Friedman said the problem was with "ancient academics and fossilized
physicists" and "a failure of leadership."

"It takes guts to say, 'I don't know' or, 'that's interesting,' as you
suggest."

The Space Coast UFO Conference, sponsored by Project Awareness of Gulf
Breeze, continues its lineup of speakers and workshops today and
Sunday.



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 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                               Re: BBC & UFOs

From: Kerry Ferrand <kferrand@rocketmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:29:53 -0400
Subject: Re: BBC & UFOs


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 98 08:20:12 +0200
>From: Giuliano [Jimmy] Marinkovicc <9a4ag@9a0tcp.ampr.org>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: BBC & UFOs

For those Interested in the BBC World Service, you can
listen to them via Real Audio:

http://http://www.audionet.com/bbc/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                              Filer's Files #40

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:32:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:30:13 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #40


Filer's Files #40-1998  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  MUFON Eastern Director,
October 8, 1998,   Majorstar@aol.com  609 654-0020

Lord Hill-Norton the former Head of the Ministry of Defense in the UK, and the
only living five-star admiral in the world, met with Dr. Steven Greer.  Lord
Hill Norton told Dr. Greer.  'I know now that these UFOs are real, that there
are extraterrestrial life forms, but I never knew it as a member of the
British Government or as a member of the admiralty.'  I looked at him and
said: 'This is strange.' He said: 'I assure you that this subject never ever
crossed my radar screen.'  Thanks to Dr. Greer and Monte Leach from Share
International Magazine Nov. 97.

NEW YORK

SMITHTOWN: Larry Clark received a report from Nick L. who observed a low
flying helicopter heading north above the Long Island Expressway near exit 70
on October 6, 1998.  Looking further to the north he sighted a UFO at 5:15 PM.
It was a strange circular object located near the Brookhaven National
Laboratories.  The object seemed suspended and appeared to just hover without
any motion.  The report forwarded to Sal for investigation.  Thanks to Larry
Clark at lclark@ibm.net.

NEW JERSEY:

WANAQUE RESERVOIR: Mike reports that Monday evening October 5, 1998, was a fun
night for UFOs.  Ryan and Mike saw a strange light that moved west to east at
11:15 PM.  It repeatedly faded in and out of sight when cars passed by on the
road near the reservoir.  At 11:20 PM we saw a light sit just over a hill for
three minutes.  Later we saw five or more lights at one time in the sky.  We
only stayed for thirty minutes, but saw plenty of unexplained lights.  Thanks
to:  Mike MATHrk101

PENNSYLVANIA

CORRY:  'I was traveling back to college this past weekend, Sunday, October 4,
1998, with two friends.'  We were on Route 77 near the town of Spartansburg at
about 7:45 PM, when we saw on the horizon an object with a few blinking red
lights that did not look like a plane.  As it got closer, we grew more
curious, and we pulled off the road, only to watch it suddenly speed up and
disappear over a hilltop.  Ten minutes later further down the road, we
encountered the same craft.  It was approaching fast so we pulled off the road
again to watch.  The object slowed down and actually hovered above us.  I
could see the actual underside of this thing.  It had a definite triangular
shape, faint steady pale blue lights on the bottom, and red blinking lights on
the sides.  The triangular shape was very distinct.  My friend Randy stepped
out of the truck to look, while my friend Aubrey and I rolled down the window.
We could hear a whirring sound as the object suddenly picked up speed again
and began moving in the direction from which we had been coming.  Other cars
stopped to watch.  I have never been much of a believer in UFO stories, so I
am still trying to "come to terms" with this story myself.  The witness can be
reached at gator@alleg.edu.  Wonder why our military would possess a huge slow
moving triangular craft, fly it over our populated areas and then deny it
exists.  But then again, maybe it's not ours.  Thanks Stig Agermose and Peter
A. Gersten  CAUS Director

WEST VIRGINIA

FAIRMONT: Alexander Colburn Janes saw a circular shaped UFO with red, blue.
green, and yellow lights on September 12, 1998.  Its appearance and movements
did not seem to match standard aircraft.  The observer was at the Fairmont
Field Club, Fairmont, WV at 9:00 AM at the time of the sighting.

GEORGIA, ALABAMA, NORTH CAROLINA

STEPHENSON: Tom Sheets the Georgia State MUFON Director reports he has been
looking into a continuing series of events in Chatsworth, Georgia.  I also
received information to possible UFO activity in Alabama.  UFOs were observed
hovering and flying over the TVA plant on September 29 and 30.  There is
supposed to be at least one pair of witnesses in the area, but they have not
decided to come forward, and told the source of the event in confidence.  The
source will talk to them and describe our confidentiality policy and let me
know if they will talk.  The UFO was oval shaped, with two 'humps' and close
to the ground.  One of the Chatsworth events was witnessed by myself and the
Assistant State Director during a stakeout we conducted there a few weeks ago.
These reports are in the process of being submitted in the next week.  I
received additional info from Terry Kimbrell that he was aware of cases
continuing into the North Carolina Mountain area just above the Georgia line.
All of this country is sparsely populated highland terrain.  We are
speculating on a 'Blue Ridge Corridor' as suggested by Terry.  Thanks to Tom
Sheets-State Director-MUFONGA
Editors Note: We frequently learn of sightings second or third hand by asking
questions.  It often takes weeks to determine if the sighting actually
occurred and the witnesses are reliable.  I often wonder if we should be
called detectives rather than investigators.

FLORIDA

LAKEWOOD:  MUFON investigator, Mary Margaret Zimmer reports a female security
guard who recently photographed UFOs saw a strange alien like entity on July
12, 1998.  The entity was standing on the corner of Dixie Highway and Lucern
Road.  He had pasty white skin, reddish blond short hair and black button
eyes.  His nose was small, his lips were very thin.  His eyes were black in
color with almost no white area.  He had neither eye lashes nor other facial
nor body hair.  His head was unusually large, while his ears were very small.
He moved very slowly with short little steps.  He did not seem entirely human
in appearance, although he wore genes and a T-shirt.

The following evening at 9:30 PM the entity appeared outside the witnesses'
work place twelve miles from the first sighting.  It seemed more than a
coincidence that the entity found the witness at her work place in the
gatehouse of an exclusive development.  He walked up and down the street
nearby.  The security guard asked a resident to check him out as she drove out
of the development.  The Security officer pointed towards him and the lady
drove toward the entity who was now 150 feet away.  As she drove nearer the
entity suddenly disappeared.  The next night at 11:30 PM, the entity again
appeared at the gatehouse and asked in a soft whispering voice, "Can I come
and a talk to you?"  She told him, "No, absolutely not!"  She then called the
police.  Within a few minutes the police with a German Shepard dog arrived in
three patrol cars.  They searched the area, but the entity had mysteriously
disappeared again without a trace.  Editors Note: The description of the
entity is similar in appearance to the hybrids often described by abductees.
Thanks to Mary Margaret Zimmer, MUFON State Section Director for Miami.

ORLANDO:  There have been a series of black flying triangle reports over
Florida.  It should be noted that B-2 aircraft are on temporary duty at Mac
Dill Air Force Base in Tampa.  This aircraft can easily be mistaken for UFOs.

During Hurricane Georges some UFO reports were apparently phoned in to
investigators.  These tentative reports are currently under investigation.
Jorge Martin in Puerto Rico reported that many credible witnesses called him
and offered videos taken during the storm. There were similar reports during
Hurricane Andrew and from John Thompson in Georgia of UFOs associated with
strong thunderstorms.  Editors Note:  These reports may relate to a plasma
like phenomena that could be manufactured by the storm itself.  Conversely
strong hurricane winds do not present a particular serious threat to an
aircraft moving within the hurricane.

MISSOURI

ROLLA: On Friday, September 2, 1998, at 7:45 p.m., while at a church youth
group meeting 85 miles southwest of St. Louis.  William B. and his friends
took a break and went out into the parking lot to listen to some music.
"Then I looked up and saw an elliptical unidentified object," Bill reported.
"It was very bright and shiny."  Calling his companions' attention to the UFO,
he "told my friends to look  at it, and it split into two equal parts.  Many
times in the time we watched it appear to move away, only to come right back
in a minute or so.  It must have been going very fast because it was still
going fast even at a distance.  Jets don't move like that."  Thanks to
Missouri MUFON.

WASHINGTON

DEMING:  On September 21, 1998, "A perfect sphere hovered over Mosquito Lake
for five minutes and twenty seconds exactly.  It then shot out over the woods
and disappeared at 2:30 PM.  Phone #360-952-2537, 1789 Mosquito Lake Road,
Deming, Washington.  Thanks to Amanda H. nobody@web3.america.net. and
John@aol.com.  Editors Note; We're unable to verify this report.

CHILE:

Luis Sanchez Chilean Director Skywatch International reports that on September
28,. 1998, a ring shape UFO was seen throughout Chile.  The UFO flew from
Punta Arenas to La Serena a distance of over 2000 Kilometers.  On Tuesday, the
29th the newspaper "La Tercera" published the following story:  'Strange
Object flew over great part of the country.'  A UFO flew over our skies last
night between 9:00 and 10:00 PM, causing much expectation in the people who
saw this object.  It was described as a RING of SMOKE.  La Direccion de
Aeronautica Civil (equivalent the FAA) said that they did not receive any
reports and that airport radars did not register any strange object in the
sky.  The CEFAA is investigating this case.      End of the story.  On the
other hand Chilean Ufologist like Mr. Patricio Diaz from La Serena, has
received dozens of phone calls reporting this sighting.  People all over La
Serena saw this big blue, gas/cloud like, ring shaped object in the sky.  It
was the size of a full moon moving North at slow speed.  People from nearby
Islon and Tierras Blancas also saw it.  They said it was a white cloud like
ring.  It started going down and disappeared behind a hill.  It looked as the
object had landed, because all kind of bright colors came from behind the
nearby hill.  The witnesses wanted to go see what it was but were too
frightened.  Mr. Patricio Diaz is on an expedition at this moment towards the
possible landing place.  He also provided to CEFAA the TV recordings from
numerous witnesses.  The CEFAA is the "Comite de Estudio de Fenomenos Aereos
Anomalos" created last year by order of the Chilean Air Force to study the
strange objects or phenomena (UFO's).  Thanks to Luis Sanchez Chilean Director
Skywatch International.

ENGLAND:

CAMBRIDGE:  Andrea Southgate-Spark reports seeing a swirling cloud (almost
like a flat twister),  containing within 12-16 white solid circles of light on
September 18, 1998.  There was no projection of light coming from the flat
solid circles of dense whiteness.  This saucer like object followed us in the
car for three miles on A425 at 10.50 PM.  Even when we changed direction it
changed course to follow us.  The object darted from the left to right side of
us for another mile and was only 500 yards above our vehicle.  It was
completely noiseless, and when reporting the incident to Cambridge police,
they said there was no or laser shows within the area.  I do not believe in
UFO's.  I am a mature business women, but this beats logical explanation.
Please can you shed light on this incident?  Phone: 01954-718324 at: 13,
Taskers Field  Caxton, Cambs CB3 8PA

MALAYSIA.

BELURAN DISTRICT:  Jonis Juanin  writes that, I work nights as a staff nurse
in a government hospital in the state of Sabah, Malaysia.  On October 2, 1998,
three of us saw a round bright orange color light flashing with many small
black dotted things at 2:15 AM.  The UFO seemed to landing.  The distance was
about two kilometers from our place of work and we witnessed it for about 5
minutes until all its lights turned off.  The sky that early morning was dark
with no moon and stars visible.  This is the first time in my life I have been
a witness to this kind of thing.  Before this I never heard of things called
"UFOs" before.  Thanks to Jonis Juanin at Phone #: 089511480,  Mail Bag No 02,
90109 Beluran, SABAH. joju@tm.net.my

DISC PLANES - "THE SECRET OF THE REAL UFOs"

Bill Rose and David Windle have combined to write an article for the October
Focus Magazine.  The article starts out discussing a friend of mine Jack
Pickett.  The article states: World War II combat veteran jack Pickett has no
time for aliens, but he does believe in flying saucers.  He says he kicked the
tires of one at a US air base in Florida in the late 1960s and that he saw
saucers flown at night at the US Navy's China Lake Complex in California.
He's a reliable source and a unique one: he has reluctantly allowed us to name
him.  There are many eye witness accounts like his, but they all refuse to be
named for fear of reprisal.  What makes their accounts so hard to believe is
the recurrence of the phrase 'flying saucer.'  There's no single explanation
for all UFO sightings, but there is evidence to suggest that man-made craft
are behind the most famous cases."

The article gives a short history of flying saucers as follows:  In 1930,
Alexander Lippisch built the Delta Flying wing. In 1933, Germany's Horton
brothers fly the H1 flying wing glider.  In 1940, Rudolf Schriever joins
Heinkle to design a disc.  In 1941, the small Schriever designed flying disc
is tested and Lippisch designs the AS-6 circular craft.  In 1942, Charles
Zimmerman designs the V-173 /Flying Pancake for the US Navy.  In 1943, the
Schriever flying disc tested in Germany.  In 1945, the flight of the
Heinkel/BMWV7 flying saucer takes place.  Production begins of the Horton
Gotha Go 229 flying wing jet fighter.  As the war ends, Dr. Miethe escapes to
the West and Klaus Habermohl is captured by the Russians.  Top German
scientists go to work for the US to continue work on space and secret aviation
projects.  The US Navy's advanced XF5U-1 Flying Pancake is under construction.
In 1946, The Northrop XB-35 Flying Wing is completed and programs are under
way to build advanced jet powered Navy Pancakes and high tech saucers based on
German designs.  In 1947 Kenneth Arnold sights a formation of unknown flying
wings and the Roswell crash occurs.  The Armstrong Whitworth AW52 a British
jet powered flying wing takes to the air at RAF Boscombe Down and photographs
of discs are taken over at McMinnville, Oregon.

Editor's Note:  I have spent many years trying to find evidence for Jack
Pickett's claims.  I personally believe Jack, but despite hundreds of phone
calls and letters, I have not been able to prove any part of his story.  Jack
himself has also been tireless in attempting to get proof for US discs.  He
has spent a fortune himself attempting to track down these craft and was
instrumental in obtaining the release of formerly classified information
concerning Silver Bug, a $55 million dollar project to build a disc.  Silver
Bug was designed to have Mach 3.5 speed and a ceiling above 80,000 feet.  Bill
Rose has written a book that details these experimental aircraft.  We are
looking for additional information about disc aircraft built for the Air Force
or Navy.  The main problem is do a few man-made experimental craft explain
thousands of UFO sightings?  Thanks to Bill Rose and Focus Magazine October
1998.

WRIGHT PATTERSON ENGINEER RESPONDS TO DR. MACCABEE

I just wanted to pass along a brief response to MUFON's Maryland State
Director Bruce Maccabee�s comments in Filer's Files #39 REGARDING ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
Response:  From my 13 years experience in electronic countermeasures systems
analysis as a Wright Patterson engineer I am well aware of the programs Dr.
Maccabee mentions.  As he knows and for the benefit of the general public,
there are at least two types of US Department of Defense security
classifications that are used.  One is the usual "white" world vanilla
classified security levels of CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, and TOP SECRET.  Usually
there are many compartments of TOP SECRET that so-called "black" TOP SECRET
Special Access Required (SAR) programs exist and are a fact and characterized
by little accountability to not only Congress, the President, many levels of
DOD, supervisors, and even the person sitting next to the DOD employee who are
"read" into a black program.  Billions of dollars are spent yearly in the
"black" world with such minimal accountability.  Just because Dr. Maccabee may
not be aware (or cannot confirm or deny involvement) of research & development
in the black world does not mean that advanced development programs involving
exotic technology do not exist.  As far as holography, I personally
collaborated with engineers in the WPAFP USAF Avionics Laboratory in which
white world studies were conducted to determine the feasibility of using
holographic false targets to defeat advanced imaging missiles in the infrared
(IR) spectrum.  Results indicated that with a larger than wingtip to wingtip
angular separation (e.g., cooperative multiplatform coordination), IR.
holographic false targets were shown to feasible and demonstrable.  One can
only imagine what may go on in black world with other broadband wavelengths
for target concealment.

RED ALERT ON METEOR SHOWERS

National Space and Meteor Hotline reports that meteor showers are expected
over the next several weeks.  The RED ALERT relates to a Leonid Meteor Storm
Alert and the strange and relatively unknown radio emissions from meteors,
called Electromagnet effects.  These effects are expected to maximize on
November 17, 1998, and could cause damage to digital chip within the Leonid
target zone.  Leonid meteor showers are expected to be heavy this year
according to NASA.  It is well known that atomic bombs exploded above 16,000
feet cause an EMP or Electro-magnetic Pulse that renders electronic equipment
within the target range useless.  It is possible that electronic and computer
chip circuit could be damaged by these effects.  More info  at
http://www.eisa.net.au/~ippoz/17nov1998.html  concerning the World Wide Meteor
Watch Program.  Thanks to Ross Dowe at the National Space Center
ippoz@eisa.net.au and Skywatch International Inc.

ST. LOUIS MUFON CONFERENCE OCTOBER 17, 1998

Bruce Widaman, MUFON State Director of Missouri is hosting a regional
U.F.O./I.A.C Conference on the known government connections with Ufology.
Scheduled speakers include: Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist and UFO
researcher; Robert Swiatek, FUFOR; Chris O'Brien, author; Lt. Col. Gerald
Rowles MUFON State Director for Washington and Major George Filer, MUFON
Eastern Regional Director.  The conference will be held at the Comfort Inn,
located at Page Avenue and Highway 270.  The conference will be hosted by Ted
Phillips, Marvin Czarnik and Bruce Widaman.  This will be one of best
conferences of the year.

FREE REAL ESTATE RELOCATION SERVICES:  HELP UFO RESEARCH
As a special aid to our readers, we can help you obtain the best real estate
experts in your area at no cost to you.  We provide free relocation
information and consulting services from the largest and most respected firms.
If your planning to sell or buy a home and would like a top flight real estate
agent give me a call at 609 654-0020 or e-mail me at Majorstar@aol.com.

Filer's Files Copyright 1998 by MUFON EASTERN DIRECTOR all rights reserved.
Readers may post items from the Files 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 appeared.

Send your letters to George A. Filer at Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to
keep your name confidential please so state in your E-mails.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Alex Hefman Says KBG UFO Story Is A Hoax

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:31:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:35:04 -0400
Subject: Alex Hefman Says KBG UFO Story Is A Hoax


Hi Folks!

Please, check out Hefman=B4s web site:

http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

He is now saying that the whole thing about a UFO being recovered
by KGB officers is a hoax. He says that the footage was staged.

Take care.

A. J. Gevaerd
editor, Brazilian UFO Magazine
Private: gevaerd@ufo.com.br
Corporate: ufo@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 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                               A Simple Quote

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 19:54:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:36:58 -0400
Subject: A Simple Quote


Dear credulous individuals:


Here is a qoutation from none other that Bertrand Russel. His
clear statements remain his, and most definitely not mine.

-----


"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the
absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with
bad ones."

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), British philosopher,
mathematician. Unpopular Essays, "An Outline of Intellectual
Rubbish" (1950).

-----

I wish I had said that first!   -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 >
   Oct > Oct 11

             Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:57:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:40:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:42:16 +0200
>Subject: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>For copyright reasons list only!

<snip>

Semi-"old timers" will know that we are fast coming up on the
20th anniversary of the disappearance of Frederich Valentich
who disappeared along with his small plane over the Bass Strait
while flying from Melbourne to King Island.

Date: Oct. 21, 1978, 7:12:28 pm local time, just after he said
"...is hovering and it's not an aircraft...."

Fred had described a strange object traveling back and
forth over his aicraft:"It's got a green light and a sort of
metallic light.  It's shiny on the outside."

Whym you may ask, dare I write quotes from a person who
disappeared (and hence was never "properly interviewed" about
his UFO sighting)?

Answer:   quote are abstracted from the AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
CENTER (Melbourne) audio tape of the incident.   Fred was in
communication with the radar, but, unfortunately, was below the
altitude at which the radar would detect him..... and the other
object.

Yes, the bones of many reside at the bottom of the ocean, but on
the other hand, there was no evidence of problems with
Valentich's plane and.... no residue, flotsam, jetsam, junk,
evidence of any kind was ever found, yet there should have been
had he "simply" crashed into the ocean.

Fred was gone.....

is gone......
RIP.

(A search of the Bass Strait was carried out for several days.
Nothing was ever found)

Also:  Dec. 31 will be the 20th anniversary of the (formerly)
famous New Zealand sightings (multiple witness visual, 16 mm
color movie, ground radar, airplane radar, air traffic control
center audio tapes of the event, tape recording made by reporter
on the plane,  guaranteed "impossible" images under the
circumstances of the filming,  tons of analysis,etc., etc.)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                          Re: The Lunar Conspiracy

From: "Gt Mccoy" <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:02:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:31:17 -0400
Subject: Re: The Lunar Conspiracy


>From: Jim Mortellaro Jsmortell@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Lunar Conspiracy

>I would like very much to open a thread on a subject that, since
>I have been here, which is not very long albeit, I have not seen
>addressed. The subject is our moon.

>There are a number of issues which I have read lately,
>attempting to give ground to theories on the condition of this,
>our nearest neighbor in space.

>Among these are the following:

>- The moon is an artificial satellite

No, it is a natural satellite-ask say,Pliny,Tycho,Gallieo,Newton
and Copernicus.

>- The moon is hollow

With Reference to Mr Newton, if the Moon was hollow, how do you
expliain tides? Unless the hollow moon was made of say, depleted
Uranium.

>- We have ceased exploration on the "orders" or "agreement" of
> Aliens who would have us stay away from their labors there

Not shure about that one,can't really comment.However, it may
have somthing to do with national apathy at the time, and
Nixon's problems. I remember spacefight as somthing of a joke in
Disconia,er the 70's.

>These various rationales appear to be conspiratorial in nature
>and connote additional damning evidence of governmental
>repression. In truth, my interest is not only curiosity, but
>stems from research which has been forced upon me by a client.
>This research should have nothing at all to do with the
>aforementioned theories
>However, I have run into some dichotomous information, the
>explanation of which may be related to these theories.

>Anyone out there have _facts_ which they are willing to share?

Just did.

>Any and all information would be appreciated.

>Jim

Okay I didn't mean to be condesending just truthful.

Physics is Physics, Orbital mechanics have been around a long
time. The mass of the moon is (Partly)calculated by the
gravitational pull on the Earth.

If the Moon was hollow, it would be different unless the skin of
the Moon was very massive-hence my remark abut depleted Uranium.
Now, as far as Aliens on the Moon, I do not know, there is so
much static out there (infordisinformation). Who really knows
the Truth, you can make a case for a cover-up, but is that a
conspiracy? or is it that we really _don't_ want to know that
the Moon is really infested with Klingons?

Or did we cut a deal with whomever? We will not get that answer
straight away. I feel that the field of UFO research should base
it's foundation on Observation and Testing (somthing which both
"believers" and "sceptics" don't do) in other words - Science
and the other part of this truth telling, is accurate reporting
(also lacking among the faithfull/less) in the media.I don't
want to respond to a new thread with a nasty put down or get a
fight started, but I think that when we hear of such rumors as
facts. facts should count, but when we can't deny a rumor or
story dosn't mean it's not true, or more likely, have an
element of truth.

-GT McCoy






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 11

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:14:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>snip<

>Has anybody ever noticed how often Klass and CSICOP are attacked in
>Jerome Clark's commentary? Are they that powerful that their
>image needs to be tarnished continuously? Actually, they are not
>even relevant to this or any discussion involving the state of
>ufology because they are not responsible for ufology's woes.

Whoa, stop tape........

Mr Stuart, you can't possibly believe that the aforementioned
debunkers aren't relevant to your discussion. You know perfectly
well how UFO witnesses, no matter their background or
credibility, are treated by these purveyors of
explanations-that-defy-rationality. Might not ufology have more
of the necessary people at it's disposal if not for the public
floggings given on so regular a basis by those who know more
about the sighting than the witness?

Case in point: Mr. Sagan (who by now probably believes
wholeheartedly in the Devil) loved to pontificate about the ever
present human need to believe in the supernatural, hence UFOs
are the modern day equivalent to goblins and leprechauns and the
like. He referred to all UFO sightings as "nonsense", most of
the time not even bothering to revert to the old "misidentified
natural phenomena" line. "Anecdotal stories are absolutely
worthless", he would say. Besides stretching his obvious
distrust for his fellow man to an absurd and unreasonable level,
he provided more than enough incentive for many people _not_ to
join ufology who otherwise might have proved invaluable, and
thus the field has not progressed to it's potential.

Given the way the subject is treated by Phil Klass and his ilk,
is it any wonder ufology is still struggling? Talk about an
uphill battle. Now, if they were to fight fairly, ufology might
be doing a bit better, but the concocted and far fetched
explanations used by debunkers to dispose of sightings certainly
makes the PR job of ufologists a hell of a lot tougher, wouldn't
you say? Unless of course you believe the explanations, in which
case you are as guilty of being a won't-believer as much as you
accuse Mr. Clark of being a "believer".

Mr. Stuart, the debunkers _are_ part of the problem.

Greg







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 11

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Edoardo Russo <edoardo.russo@torino.alpcom.it>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:05 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:51:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

Hello Jerry!

Sorry to interrupt your lively exchange with Ed...

>>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>An excellent paper on the strong involvement of scientists in
>the UFO controversy, especially in the 1970s, is Steven J.
>Dick's "Edward U. Condon, UFOs, and the Many Cultures of
>Science," read at the History of Science Meeting in Washington,
>D.C., on December 28, 1992.


Was it published anywhere?

I'd be interested in getting a copy of it.

Best regards






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 11

               Sonoran Crash 1941 (UFO And Secrecy Since 1940)

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:51:09 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:41:31 -0400
Subject: Sonoran Crash 1941 (UFO And Secrecy Since 1940)


Source: APRO Bulletin Volume 32 Number 2, May 1984 via Parazone

http://privat.schlund.de/P/ParaZone/

This page:

http://privat.schlund.de/P/ParaZone/page_6.htm

Best regards

Stig Agermose

*******

UFOs And Secrecy Since 1940

(Sonoran Crash 1941, probably New Mexico)

UFOs and Secrecy Since 1940

Courtesy:James A. Harder, Ph.D.

The Aerial Phenomena Research Organization was one of the first
and best UFO organizations in the world, and it was based right
here in Tucson, Arizona. APRO was disbanded in 1987 following
the deaths of its founders, Coral and Jim Lorenzen. Our
newsletter will occasionally include an article from the APRO
Bulletin that we hope is of continuing interest. This article is
from Volume 32 Number 2, May 1984.

In the last issue I described how the Policy Chief from the
National Security Agency (NSA) had released a censored version
of a top secret affidavit he had submitted to federal Judge
Gesell in support of the NSA claim that his agency did not have
to release documents under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
suit brought by Peter Gersten and Citizens Against UFO Secrecy.

Within the sanitized version, in an explanation of why certain
sections of a previously released document had been deleted,
there occurs the statement "The matter in this paragraph
concerns the organization and operational activities and
functions of the NSA...." The dots represent deletion of 15
characters on one line and 17 characters on the next line. Bill
Moore has supplied an interpretation of these deletions that
fits the context, fits the style of the author, and of course
fits exactly the spaces available.

In his interpretation the deletions are "with respect to the UFO
phenomena", so that the passage reads, "...concerns the
organization and operational activities and functions of NSA
with respect to the UFO phenomena." It is this information that
the NSA is apparently trying to hide from public view.

This instance of censoring matters concerning UFO activities is
only the latest in a series of clues that can be used to
reconstruct the course of US government secrecy over the
decades. The problem of uncovering this pattern is not unlike
trying to discern the bottom contours of the Pacific Ocean from
a few soundings and the appearance of a few islands that break
the surface. We do know that the ocean is there, and that parts
of it are very deep. What follows is an integrated picture of
the contributions of many tireless UFO investigators.


Photos of Bodies


One starting point is the recovery of a crashed UFO from the
Sonoran desert of Mexico in late 1941. This recovery was
accomplished by a team from Navy Intelligence, which was at the
time the premier US intelligence agency in terms of scientific
background.

One member of the team, unable any longer to contain the vast
import of what had been discovered, brought home to share with
his immediate family a sheaf of 8 by 10 inch glossy prints
showing the UFO. One of the prints showed his friend holding by
the wrists one of several dead bodies they had recovered. I was
present during the hypnosis session wherein a member of the
family was able to clearly recover the images of the photographs
seen.

>From this case we know a very early date for the beginning of
government involvement and the branch of service that was
involved at that time. Other details are still under
investigation at APRO headquarters. Intelligence agencies do not
communicate their findings to other agencies, even other
intelligence agencies, unless there is a "need to know";
therefore staff at the Air Materiel Command (AMC)
Wright-Patterson Army Air Force base at Dayton, Ohio (AMC was a
part of Army Air Force Intelligence) did not know in the summer
of 1947 that there was already another player in the field.

Stimulated by the Kenneth Arnold sighting (flying saucers over
Mount Rainier) on June 24, 1947, the staff at AMC gained
permission to investigate the so-called flying discs. In a
letter to the Commanding General, Army Air Forces,Washington DC,
Lt. General N.F. Twining wrote in a secret report that the
"considered opinion" was that the so-called flying discs were
"something real and not visionary or fictitious... the reported
operational characteristics such as extreme rates of climb,
maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be
considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly
aircraft and radar,lend belief to the possibility that some of
the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or
remotely..."

As a result of Twining's letter, dated 23 September 1947. the
AMC was given priority2-A and a project name "SIGN"` for the
investigation. One important reason for staff concern was a fear
that the aircraft reported were something that the Russians had
developed, perhaps based on secret design information gained
from the Germans at the end of World War II.


Estimate of the Situation


After several months of investigation, the AMC was in a position
to come to an "estimate of the situation." In a Top Secret
Report, the estimate was that the sightings were of
extraterrestrial spacecraft. When this report got to General
Hoyt S. Vandenberg, Air Force Chief of Staff in Washington, he
would have none of it. Even when a delegation of scientists came
from the AMC to bolster their report, he could not be budged.
Apparently he had learned something in the meanwhile that the
folk at AMC did not know.

>From that time the Air Force operation was put into a holding
position of making some investigations, but with the main job of
denying that there was anything to UFO sightings except mistakes
and frauds. In February of 1949 the name of the project was
officially changed to "GRUDGE:'' with what some personnel saw as
an indication of an official attitude.

In the meanwhile AMC had become the Air Technical Intelligence
Center (ATIC) with headquarters at Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base in Dayton, Ohio. In all probability the personnel at ATIC
thought off themselves as being the only ones in the Air Force
concerned with UFO matters and were never told differently.

What General Vandenberg must have known is that there was
another branch of Air Force Intelligence involved with UFO
research; we don't know its name, but subsequent events would
show that somehow the personnel or the activities that were
originally with Navy Intelligence had moved over to Air Force
Intelligence. This secret and serious group of UFO researchers
does not seem to have been known to the personnel at Project
GRUDGE or its successor, project BLUEBOOK.

However, the Air Force Intelligence staff at ATIC were not the
only ones to find that the field had been preempted.

The summer of 1952 saw an extraordinary outpouring of reports
from all over the United States; UFOs were seen over the White
House during the Democratic Convention, and it was all the Air
Force could do to prevent the cover from blowing off.

All of this activity sparked an interest at the Office of
Scientific Intelligence (OSI) at the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA). There is massive evidence compiled by Brad Sparks of the
extensive interest of the "substantive issues" of UFO research
at OSI during the fall of 1952. A conference was planned, later
to be known as that of the Robertson Panel. But by the time the
OSI could get started on the subject, there was a change of
personnel as the new president, Dwight Eisenhower, promoted Alan
Dulles from deputy director to the directorship of the Central
Intelligence Agency.

The secret group within Air Force Intelligence had carried the
day against the interlopers from OSI. From being a discussion of
the substantive issues of UFOs, the Robertson Panel was diverted
to a discussion of the dangers posed by the phenomena; this was
seen to be of two sorts: one, that there was a danger that UFO
sightings would be mistaken for those of enemy aircraft and that
reports of them might clog military channels of communication in
an emergency; and the second Subjectivity of(the) public to mass
hysteria and greater vulnerability to possible enemy
psychological warfare. One of the recommendations of the panel
was that there be a double barrel program of training and
debunking.

The training (for Military personnel) would result in the proper
recognition of unusually illuminated objects that were assumed
to be at least partly the stimulus for UFO reports. The
debunking aim was to "result in (the) reduction of (the) public
interest in `flying saucers' which today invokes a strong
psychological reaction. This education could be accomplished by
mass media such as television,motion pictures and popular
articles. Basis of such education would be actual case histories
which had been puzzling at first but later explained. As in the
case of conjuring tricks there is much less stimulation if the
'secret' is known. Such a program should tend to reduce the
current gullibility of the public and consequently their
susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda...''


APRO Mentioned


In further action, the panel took note of civilian UFO study
groups (including APRO) and warned that such organizations
should be watched because of their potentially great influence
on mass thinking if widespread sightings should occur (the wave
of sightings of the previous summer was a lesson in this
regard). Further remarks were made that the 'apparent
irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for
subversive purposes should be kept in mind..." In their
conclusions section there is the statement: "...the continued
emphasis on the reporting of these phenomena does, in these
perilous times, result in a threat to the orderly functions of
the protective organs of the body politic... and the cultivation
of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile
propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust
of duly constituted authority."

The Robertson Panel report was classified SECRET, and might
never have been discovered except that it was seen in the files
at ATIC headquarters by Dr. James McDonald; apparently it had
been improperly declassified, for when he turned it back in and
asked for a copy, it was not provided, and he was told that it
was no longer available as a declassified document.

A somewhat amusing side effect was felt at APRO headquarters,
where it was discovered that a "volunteer worker" had been
secretly making reports to his superior officer of his
observations at APRO. At one time there were as many as three
former CIA operatives on the board of directors of the National
Investigations Committee for Aerial Phenomena (NICAP).

Courtesy: James A. Harder, Ph.D.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                 Aliens Exist - Just Ask The Man On The Moon

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:34:42 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:44:47 -0400
Subject: Aliens Exist - Just Ask The Man On The Moon

Source: The Sunday Times

Stig

*******

Sunday October 11 1998

WORLD: UNITED STATES

=A9

Lending credence: former astronaut Edgar Mitchell supports claims that
the truth about UFOs has been covered up

Photograph: Nasa

Aliens exist - just ask the man on the moon

by Tom Rhodes
New York


THERE are no little green men on the moon. Edgar Mitchell knows this
because in 1971 he became the sixth man to walk on it. He is positive,
however, that aliens have landed on Earth.

Sharing the podium at a conference in Connecticut yesterday with "alien
abductees" and others who claim to have had contact with unidentified
flying objects (UFOs), the former Nasa astronaut intensified his
campaign to persuade Washington to acknowledge life beyond our skies.

Mitchell argues that life is almost certain to exist on any other
planet with a supportive environment. Some physicists, he points out,
now believe it is possible to travel faster than light, even if humble
earthlings have yet to achieve it.

He is 90% certain that many of the thousands of UFOs recorded since the
1940s belonged to visitors from another planet. Although some have been
delusions and others natural phenonema, too many remain unexplained, he
said. "This suggests there are humanoids manning craft which have
characteristics not in the arsenal of any nation on earth that we know
of. That is very alarming," he said.

It was a startling departure for a scientist who, up to now, has been
wary of appearing with ufologists widely regarded as cranks.

"Until recently I was very cautious about such conferences," Mitchell,
68, admitted before the opening of an annual convention entitled the
UFO Experience. "But now I believe there is sufficient circumstantial
evidence to warrant a scientific understanding in this area."

Mitchell, who holds a doctorate from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, does not fit easily into the ranks of the UFO fanatics.
Although he acts as a consultant to The X Files, the cult television
series, he is scornful of "disinformation" about aliens and flying
saucers that emanates from the Internet and marginal UFO organisations
in America.

"The notion that there are structures on Mars or the moon is bonkers,"
Mitchell said. "I can certainly attest to the latter - I've been there.
We saw no structures at the landing site and none was reflected in my
helmet, as has been alleged."

Mitchell bases his credo on established cosmology - in which he became
closely involved after gazing at his tiny, distant planet from the
command module of Apollo 14. He felt "an overwhelming sense of
universal connectedness and perceived the universe as in some way
conscious".

In the early 1970s, after leaving Nasa, he founded the Institute of
Noetic Sciences in California. Dedicated to the study of psychic and
spiritual phenomena, it subjected luminaries such as Uri Geller, the
Israeli spoon bender, to scientific scrutiny.

Mitchell says his research - including conversations with people who
have worked in intelligence agencies and military groups - has
convinced him that the American government has covered up the truth
about UFOs for 50 years. He is trying to persuade Congress to grant his
sources immunity to tell "the real story" of events such as the
so-called Roswell incident - the alleged crash of a flying saucer in
New Mexico in 1947.

"Many of these folks were under high-security clearances, they took
oaths and they feel they cannot talk without some form of immunity,"
Mitchell said. "It takes a brave person to come out on something like
this."

A poll by Time magazine last year suggested that 22% of the population
share Mitchell's conviction that other planets have been in contact
with humans; 17% said intelligent life had abducted humans to
experiment on them.

The high level of interest has encouraged other speakers at this
weekend's conference. They include Robert Wood, a retired aerospace
engineer from California, who claims to have new evidence of the
existence of MJ12, a clandestine military unit trained in recovery and
disposal of aliens and their craft.

The true believers could hardly conceal their delight at the former
astronaut's endorsement. Walter Andrus, international director of the
Mutual UFO Network, the largest organisation of its kind in America,
said: "There's no doubt in my mind that Ed Mitchell gives us all
credibility."


Copyright 1998 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on Times
Newspapers' standard terms and conditions. To inquire about a licence
to reproduce material from The Times, visit the Syndication website.












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                        Ufology: The Good and the Bad

From: Matt Helbing <sarcosm@email.msn.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 03:58:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:42:05 -0400
Subject: Ufology: The Good and the Bad


Greetings UpDates List:

'Watch The Skies' magazine at

http://www.watchtheskies.org

is an internet-based publication which is devoted to a critical
examination of what is wrong with ufology: where the discipline
has gotten off the beaten path in the last two decades, or so,
to presently wander in an intellectual wilderness where
proliferation of fantastic and unsubstantiated ideas is the
norm, and where sound scientific investigation is the exception.

The staff of 'Watch The Skies' magazine believes there may be,
as the late J. Allen Hynek once suggested, "scientific paydirt"
in the UFO phenomenon. We are also aware that scientific paydirt
requires science - not flights of fancy fueled by the "will to
believe," as is so common today.

Therefore, we are soliciting volunteer articles from the
ufological community discussing what's wrong with ufology and
how these problems might be fixed, to lead us onto a path
commensurate with scientific investigation - a method of inquiry
which has proven itself again and again, in countless areas of
inquiry.  We also are also seeking articles that examine what is
RIGHT in ufology - meaning discussions of good, rational work
which is  presently being done. Similarly, pertinent news items
from the world of ufology will be considered for publication,
along with reviews of critical books on the topic. All articles
will be considered in light of our editorial policy. 'Watch The
Skies' magazine's editorial policy  is available at:

http://www.watchtheskies.org.

So come, see, and consider contributing to our magazine.

Rod Brock, Site Coordinator

Inquiries may be directed to
mailto:wtsorg@hotmail.com
or visit our site at
http://www.watchtheskies.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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Looks Deceiving

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:21:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:09:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:31:06 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Looks Deceiving

>>From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
>>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:28:13 -0700
>>Fwd Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:35:24 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Looks Deceiving

John, Roger and the rest of the "old farts" on the list,

>>"What if Eleanor Roosevelt could (could not) fly?" (My
>>apologies to the "Firesign Theater", circa 1970.)

>First, I'm glad to see that someone other than an old fart like
>me remembers Firesign Theater. Good writing, that. Funny stuff.

Just in case anyone is interested, Firesign Theater has a new
(1998) release entitled "Give Me Immortality or Give Me Death".

For those not familiar with this genre of 60's humor, it
apparently evolved from a California radio comedy show and there
were several conspiratorial themes that they played with in
their own creative way.  This includes a classic release
entitled, "Everything You Know Is Wrong", which followed a
'government conspiracy'/'alien visitation (or invasion)' theme.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                      Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:38:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:07:51 -0400
Subject: Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants


>From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:32:43 -0700 (MST)
>To: Updates@globalserve.net,
>Subject: Rebuttal to Derrel Sims Implants

>From: Virgil Priscu

>I am a physician, specialist in anesthesiology, head
>of a Department in a teaching hospital in Israel. I have
>also a long time interest in UFO phenomena.

>regarding the alleged "implants" and he gave inadequate
>answers regarding such specific topics as the dose of
>local anesthetic used for the extraction of the so called
>"implants".

>I know a thing or two
>about what we call "Foreign Bodies" (FB) found quite
>often, especially in the feet of some unsuspecting
>patients by an incidental X Ray made for another purpose.

Well, Mr. Simms is not a physician and maybe he had forgotten
that Dr. Lear only needed 1 or 2 ml of Xylocain for the local
anesthesia.

As a specialist in general surgery for more than 20 years and
with some experience in traumatology, since I work in our
emergency room for more than 8 years, I can confirm these "FB's"
are found quite often. They are metallic remnants from wars, of
accidents at work and of all the other sources you have
mentioned.

So when I saw Dr. Lear's X-Rays for the first time they looked
quite familiar, and my first impression was the same as yours:
this does not look "alien" at all.

Of course, I would stay very sceptical regarding "alien
implants" if the X-Rays were the only proof. But didn't
Simms/Lear present additional information about the patients
such as abduction events?

Joachim Koch, Berlin







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:16:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:17:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:06:23 -0700
>From: Jerry Anderson <ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

>>From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:12:49 +0200
>>Subject: Mystery Metal Tubes Parachuted Into Irish City

<snip>

Maybe a few arrests and some hefty fines might be in order. Wasting
resources when they might be required elswhere in an emergency is no
laughing matter. Nor is it art.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                        Re: BWW Media Alert 19981011

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:23:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:11:41 -0400
Subject: Re: BWW Media Alert 19981011


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).


October 11, 1998

I'm happy to announce that I have worked out the new system for updating the
website.  While I am particularly busy right now, it does mean that I've been
able to add books to the Master List (and to the UFO books page).

I do want to apologize that I missed listing John Stossel's THE POWER OF
BELIEF on ABC last week.  One of my correspondents sent me a heads-up, but it
was too late to include and I didn't get a supplement out.  I really
appreciate it when someone takes the time to send me information.  I can't
always get it out to the list, depending on time and other circumstances.

RADIO
Fans of weird stuff may or may not be happy that Darian O'Toole has returned
to San Francisco Bay Area radio.  In the previous incarnation of her show, she
could be counted on for many paranormal-themed guests, such as Stan Johnson,
the bigfoot contactee.  With her former co-host Sean Kelley as a moderating
influence, she would let them tell their stories and yet ask the obvious
questions.  In what I have heard of the show since she has been back (on KSAN
107.7 FM, 5:00 AM to 9:00 AM), she has been less likely to let guests be hoist
on their own paradigm, so to speak.  For instance, she just had a
representative from the Unarius Academy on, and he seemed to realize she
fancied it a farce from the start.  I'm hoping she hits the delicate balance
she had before, when it was such an extraordinary  combination of common sense
and uncommon wit.  She has reportedly been sick, and any reconfiguration of
your working group takes some fine-tuning.  It is definitely worth listening
still, and it will be interesting to see the direction it takes as she works
back towards having the number one commute time show in one of the biggest US
radio markets.

TELEVISION

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, October 11, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: THUNDERBIRD
Thursday, October 15, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT LIZARD (Features
Australian cryptozoologist Rex Gilroy)
Friday, October 16, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT LIZARD (Features
Australian cryptozoologist Rex Gilroy)
Saturday, October 17, 2:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
SPONTANEOUS HUMAN COMBUSTION
Saturday, October 17, 2:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
MYSTERIES FROM HEAVEN (Shroud of Turin, etc.)
Next Sunday, October 18, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT LIZARD (Features
Australian cryptozoologist Rex Gilroy)
Next Thursday, October 22, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS ("The
Beast of Bodmin", a reported big cat in the UK)
Next Thursday, October 22, 9:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline
pilot witnesses and film from New Zealand)
Next Friday, October 23, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS ("The
Beast of Bodmin", a reported big cat in the UK)
Next Friday, October 23, 1:30 AM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline
pilot witnesses and film from New Zealand)

THE HISTORY CHANNEL
Wednesday, October 14, 11:00 AM, THE 20TH CENTURY WITH MIKE WALLACE: ARE WE
ALONE? (UFOs)
Wednesday, October 14, 4:00 PM, THE 20TH CENTURY WITH MIKE WALLACE: ARE WE
ALONE? (UFOs)
Next Sunday, October 18, 7:00 PM, HISTORY UNDERCOVER: ROSWELL: AN ALIEN
OBSESSION
Next Sunday, October 18, 11:00 PM, HISTORY UNDERCOVER: ROSWELL: AN ALIEN
OBSESSION

THE LEARNING CHANNEL
Two weeks from Friday, October 23, 9:00 PM, UFOs: STORIES OF ABDUCTION

MTV
Sunday, October 11, 3:30 PM, ROAD RULES (The episode has something to do with
UFO stories.  It may not actually be appropriate for this list, but its hard
to tell.)
Sunday, October 11, 5:30 PM, ROAD RULES (haunted hotel)
Monday, October 12, 1:30 AM, ROAD RULES: UFO
Monday, October 12, 3:30 AM, ROAD RULES (haunted hotel)
Next Monday, October 19, 10:00 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO

THE SCIENCE CHANNEL
The new schedule is weird programming for an hour each at 6:00 AM, 2:00 PM,
and 10:00 PM.  Rotating shows include: INTO THE UNKNOWN, STRANGE BUT TRUE, and
ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE.

THE SCI-FI CHANNEL
Sun, October 11 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3023: past-life regression;
heartland ghost; extraterrestrials and nuclear arms; snake handlers; near-
death experiences.
Sun, October 11 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3023 past-life regression;
heartland ghost; extraterrestrials and nuclear arms; snake handlers; near-
death experiences.
Mon, October 12 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #206: Pennsylvania UFO in 1965
(probably Kecksburg, a reported crash and recovery investigated by Stan
Gordon); demonic possession.
Tue, October 13 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3024: Middle East UFOs; child's
near-death experience; search for Bigfoot; Gettysburg; pollution; UFO defense
manual.
Tue, October 13 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #207: Hudson Valley New York UFOs
Tue, October 13 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #207: Hudson Valley New York UFOs
Wed, October 14 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3025: UFOs and Air Force hangar 18;
psychic detective; life between lives; alien abduction; luck; life on Mars.
Wed, October 14 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #208: Parapsychologists look for
ghosts in a Scottish castle; self-proclaimed vampire.
Wed, October 14 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #208: Parapsychologists look for
ghosts in a Scottish castle; self-proclaimed vampire.
Thu, October 15 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #3026: UFO technology; head trauma
and psychic ability; soul exchange; Bahamian rites of Obeah; UFO sightings in
Mexico; healing and intuition.
Thu, October 15 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #209: "Epidemic of Evil". Doctors,
attorneys, a killer and the Rev. Jerry Falwell discuss satanism.
Fri, October 16 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4027: Secret UFO tape; psychic
seeks girl missing for 25 years; alien autopsy; Bigfoot.
Fri, October 16 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #210: English crop-circle mystery;
Lake Champlain monster; British royal family curse.
Fri, October 16 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #210: English crop-circle mystery;
Lake Champlain monster; British royal family curse.
Sun, October 18 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4028: Psychic policeman; ghosts
aboard the Queen Mary.
Sun, October 18 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4028: Psychic policeman; ghosts
aboard the Queen Mary.
___________________________

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                          Re: The Lunar Conspiracy

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:50:50 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:11:04 -0400
Subject: Re: The Lunar Conspiracy


>From: Jsmortell@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Lunar Conspiracy

>I would like very much to open a thread on a subject that, since
>I have been here, which is not very long albeit, I have not seen
>addressed. The subject is our moon.

>There are a number of issues which I have read lately,
>attempting to give ground to theories on the condition of this,
>our nearest neighbor in space.

>Among these are the following:

>- The moon is an artificial satellite

>- The moon is hollow

>- We have ceased exploration on the "orders" or "agreement" of
> Aliens who would have us stay away from their labors there

>These various rationales appear to be conspiratorial in nature
>and connote additional damning evidence of governmental
>repression. In truth, my interest is not only curiosity, but
>stems from research which has been forced upon me by a client.
>This research should have nothing at all to do with the
>aforementioned theories.

>However, I have run into some dichotomous information, the
>explanation of which may be related to these theories.

>Anyone out there have FACTS which they are willing to share?

>Any and all information would be appreciated.

>Jim


Facts I am willing to share:

The moon is 100% natural.

The moon is not hollow.

We have not ceased exploration of the moon and are, in fact, studying
it in great detail at present.

There is no conspiracy about the moon.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                 Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:51:57 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:41:14 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist


>Date:  8 Oct 98 18:36:41 EDT
>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>To: Levine@wnet.org, johno@advdata.net
>Subject: UFO KGB Files. New data and new twist. Legal Threat.

>There is a twist in the story with UFO KGB files.

>I received outrageous legal threat from the production company in
>respond to the numerous inquires for an additional information
>and last notion of the new discovery made regarding dubious
>credibility of some presented documents.

>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

>Alex Hefman

>P.S. Any advise?


>More information from Russia is expected soon.


Alex,

Any advice is dependant upon the exact nature of the legal threat and
what your local laws are in relation to that threat.

If it is a Copyright issue you can always set up your page on a server
that is in a country that is not a signatory to the international
copyright concention (if you can find one).

Regards,

Leanne.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  UFOMIND: Bigelow Group Reveals Personnel

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 03:35:22 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:48:14 -0400
Subject: UFOMIND: Bigelow Group Reveals Personnel


Received from the UFOMIND mailing list October 11.

Stig

*******

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:24:30 -0800
From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas)
To: ufomind@lists.best.com
Subject: UFOMIND: Bigelow group reveals personnel

For the first time (to my knowledge), Robert Bigelow's National
Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) has revealed the members
of its scientific advisory board.

In an undated web page at:

http://www.anv.net/nids/personnel.shtml

the board members are listed as Martin Piltch (chairman), Edgar
Mitchell, Melvin Morse, Douglas Ferraro, Harold Puthoff,
Theodore Rockwell, Gian-Carlo Rota, Johndale Solem, Jessica
Utts, Jacques Vallee, Jim Whinnery, and Albert Harrison.

All of these members hold Ph.D.'s, and the web page includes a
one-paragraph profile of each.

The publication of the list breaks from the previously secretive
nature of the group. The list also confirms the departure of
former chairman Christopher "Kit" Green, who was supposedly a
pro-secrecy advocate.

The scientific advisory board meets in Las Vegas several
weekends a year. Members are paid for their participation, with
accommodations provided by one of Bigelow's hotels.

Moderator Comment: The web page does not provide the "Aviary"
bird names of the participants (Penguin, Owl, Goose, etc).
Please consult Dr. Boylan for these. In any case, with that many
Ph.D.s in one room, control of the planet does not seem likely.

In addition, John Alexander is listed as Director for Scientific
Liaison; Eric Davis and George Onet are Scientific Staff; and
Colm Kelleher is Deputy Administrator (leaving open the question
of who the Head Administrator is).

I have updated Ufomind web pages accordingly and added some new
people pages (below). I welcome any corrections or
amplifications, and I encourage readers to add new links and
info too.

Glenn

+--------------------------------------------------------------+
|                    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: Paranormal personalities

Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/n/nids/
   comments: Web page lists scientific advisory board and staff
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/m/morse/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/p/puthoff/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/m/mitchell/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/p/piltch/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/v/vallee/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/a/alexander/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/d/davise/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/u/utts/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/f/ferraro/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/s/solem/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/k/kelleher/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/o/onet/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/h/harrison/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/w/whinnery/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/r/rota/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/r/rockwell/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/u/utts/
Index: http://www.ufomind.com/people/g/green/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                     Edgar Mitchell On The UFO Cover-Up

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:16:21 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:37:12 -0400
Subject: Edgar Mitchell On The UFO Cover-Up


[List only]

Source: The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/national/981011/1930047.html

Stig

*******

Sunday 11 October 1998

UFOs: It'S A Coverup

Astronaut Asks Washington To Tell Truth About Aliens

Tom Rhodes Times of London; with files from Tod A. Mohamed

The U.S. Congress should grant immunity to high-level officials
so they can tell the real story about alien visits to Earth,
says a former astronaut.

Edgar Mitchell, who holds a doctorate from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and was the sixth man to walk on the
moon, wants Washington to acknowledge what he believes is
long-standing knowledge of extra-terrestrial life.

Mr. Mitchell says he is 90 per cent sure that many of the
thousands of unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, recorded
since the 1940s, belong to visitors from other planets. Although
some have been delusions and others natural phenomena, too many
remain unexplained, he said at a conference in Connecticut
yesterday.

"This suggests there are humanoids manning craft which have
characteristics not in the arsenal of any nation on Earth. That
is very alarming."

And Mr. Mitchell says he has witnesses -- many of them from
intelligence agencies and the military -- who convinced him that
the American government has covered up the truth about UFOs for
50 years.

"Many of these folks are under high-security clearances, they
took oaths and they feel they cannot talk without some form of
immunity," Mr. Mitchell said. "It takes a brave person to come
out on something like this."

One person who has come out is Graham Hancock, a former East
Africa correspondent for The Economist. He believes that NASA
refuses to acknowledge aliens because of "a lingering Cold War
mentality and a fear that evidence of alien life will have
destabilizing political, economic and social consequences."

His new book, The Mars Mystery, postulates that life once
existed on Mars but was wiped out by meteor impacts, much as the
dinosaurs are thought to have been made extinct on Earth 65
million years ago.

He adds that NASA has done "laughably little" to investigate
extra-terrestrial evidence, and in fact it has an official "duty
to withhold ... information classified to protect the national
security."

"What we see here is a mindset, not a conspiracy," writes Mr.
Hancock.

"And yet to be perfectly honest, we will always have a lingering
suspicion that there could be something ... going on behind the
scenes, something much bigger "

Mr. Hancock and Mr. Mitchell disagree on some aspects of the
theory that life existed on Mars, but both point to the holy
grail of conspiracy theories, the Roswell incident -- the
alleged crash of a flying saucer in New Mexico in 1947 -- as one
piece of a government coverup.

Some claim the object that crashed into a farmer's field in June
of that year contained the body of alien astronauts, but the
U.S. military has offered several alternative accounts.

In Report: Case Closed released last year on the 50th
anniversary of the Roswell crash, the U.S. air force explained
that the 'extra-terrestrials' were actually crash-test dummies
used in high-altitude parachute trials.

In a previous attempt to explain the incident, the air force
reported that the "spaceship" wreckage found by a farmer in a
field was the remains of a balloon used to monitor atmospheric
evidence of Soviet nuclear tests.

"The claim that the bodies were just life-size dummies from
parachute drops is an admission that there was at least
something at Roswell that could be mistaken for alien bodies,"
writes Mr. Hancock.

"What is to be made of statements from several of the witnesses
that one of the 'aliens' survived the crash and was seen
moving?"

Mr. Mitchell says his witnesses can provide the truth about
events such as Roswell and his campaign is bolstering other
"believers."

"There's no doubt in my mind that Ed Mitchell gives us all
credibility," said Walter Andrus, international director of the
Mutual UFO Network, the largest organization of its kind in
America.

But Mr. Mitchell said that until recently he has been leery of
appearing with ufologists, widely regarded as cranks.

"I was very cautious," he said.

Although he acts as a consultant on the X-Files, the cult
television series, he is scornful of "disinformation" about
aliens and flying saucers that emanates from the Internet and
marginal UFO organizations in America.

"The notion that there are structures on Mars or the moon is
bonkers," said Mitchell. "I can attest to the latter -- I've
been there. We saw no structures at the landing site and none
was reflected in my helmet, as has been alleged.

But while gazing at the earth from the command module of Apollo
14, Mr. Mitchell said he did feel " an overwhelming sense of
universal connectedness."

Since leaving NASA he has studied psychic and spiritual
phenomena and submitted luminaries such as Uri Geller, the
Israeli spoon bender, to scientific scrutiny. In his research he
has come to believe in life beyond our skies.

Now, he says, "there is sufficient circumstantial evidence to
warrant a scientific understanding of this area."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                     Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:21:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:05:34 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'


>Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 15:49:48 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: TNT's KGB/UFO show was a hoax

>For what it's worth, this comes as no great surprise (at least to me):

>>Date:  9 Oct 98 14:58:38 EDT
>>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>>To: el51@dial.pipex.com
>>Subject: it is the hoax..

>>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

Did you check out this website recently? He's been forced to take
it down.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, East London,

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:02:57 -0400
Subject: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, East London,


Dear Colleagues,

I have just received the following sighting report from a
colleague of mine who is one of the ELUFON investigators, for
East London.


Ten Strange Light'S Dance Over Walthamstow

At Approx 6:28pm on Sunday 11th October, a series of strange
lights were seen over Walthamstow (East London)

Whilst standing outside the back of his house ELUFON
Investigator Tony Golbourn, observed a series of strange lights,
which were described as immense high-altitude flashes.

These were nothing like lightning or freak weather conditions.
There were about ten lights that seemed to flash on and off
simultaneously. When several of the lights were flashing, Tony
noticed (through binoculars) that there seemed to be a structure
of some kind, which the flashing was illuminating.

After the sighting, the lights were described as being "as
small as satellites but all moving at once". The light show
lasted for some minutes before they disappeared.

Info will be updated, as it arrives.

PS: Look out for the next issue of the official ELUFON magazine
'Down to Earth' Issue 4, which is due out in 2 weeks. This is a
stonker of an issue, with some excellent articles news etc. For
more info please e-mail me at the above address.

PPS. You can now also buy 'Down to Earth' in shops. For info
on where to purchase a copy of the mag please contact me.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                          Re: The Lunar Conspiracy

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 20:16:12 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:10:44 -0400
Subject: Re: The Lunar Conspiracy


>From: Jsmortell@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Lunar Conspiracy

>I would like very much to open a thread on a subject that, since
>I have been here, which is not very long albeit, I have not seen
>addressed. The subject is our moon.

>There are a number of issues which I have read lately,
>attempting to give ground to theories on the condition of this,
>our nearest neighbor in space.

>Among these are the following:

>- The moon is an artificial satellite

>- The moon is hollow

>- We have ceased exploration on the "orders" or "agreement" of
> Aliens who would have us stay away from their labors there

>These various rationales appear to be conspiratorial in nature
>and connote additional damning evidence of governmental
>repression. In truth, my interest is not only curiosity, but
>stems from research which has been forced upon me by a client.
>This research should have nothing at all to do with the
>aforementioned theories.

>However, I have run into some dichotomous information, the
>explanation of which may be related to these theories.

>Anyone out there have FACTS which they are willing to share?

>Any and all information would be appreciated.

>Jim

G'day Jim (& List)

Anybody confronted with this topic(?) need only consult Isaac
Newton and the numbers - absolute hogwash!

Go to the beach and enjoy the tides for what they are - evidence
of the moon's mass and orbit _plus_ proof that it has been there
enough billions of years to have icontrovertibly contribute to
the evolution of tidal life forms.

No offence but your client may need a basic education.

Regards,

Leanne






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:26:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>snip<

>>Has anybody ever noticed how often Klass and CSICOP are attacked in
>>Jerome Clark's commentary? Are they that powerful that their
>>image needs to be tarnished continuously? Actually, they are not
>>even relevant to this or any discussion involving the state of
>>ufology because they are not responsible for ufology's woes.

>Whoa, stop tape........

>Mr Stuart, you can't possibly believe that the aforementioned
>debunkers aren't relevant to your discussion. You know perfectly
>well how UFO witnesses, no matter their background or
>credibility, are treated by these purveyors of
>explanations-that-defy-rationality. Might not ufology have more
>of the necessary people at it's disposal if not for the public
>floggings given on so regular a basis by those who know more
>about the sighting than the witness?

>Case in point: Mr. Sagan (who by now probably believes
>wholeheartedly in the Devil) loved to pontificate about the ever
>present human need to believe in the supernatural, hence UFOs
>are the modern day equivalent to goblins and leprechauns and the
>like. He referred to all UFO sightings as "nonsense", most of
>the time not even bothering to revert to the old "misidentified
>natural phenomena" line. "Anecdotal stories are absolutely
>worthless", he would say. Besides stretching his obvious
>distrust for his fellow man to an absurd and unreasonable level,
>he provided more than enough incentive for many people _not_ to
>join ufology who otherwise might have proved invaluable, and
>thus the field has not progressed to it's potential.

Dr. Sagan's view of the world encompased far more tolerance than
I have heard from you.

I don't know your background Mr. St. Pierre but Dr. Sagan was
one of the reasons UFOs & EBEs are even discussed among people
who are not part of 'Ufology'. His steadfast support for space
exploration and wonderful, clear description of how likely, how
almost certainly, there is other intelligent life in our
Universe, let alone all the others, has brought many people,
myself included, to accept the existence of other life forms.

His skepticism of what sounds like an extraterrestrial traffic
jam over our heads for half a century and his very soundly based
biological objections to the vast number of 'humanoid' EBE's has
irritated many people who want to believe in the simplest and
easiest to understand cosmology, I know.

Just because he didn't join in the debate of 'little greys' and
'big blues' and all that other bull does not make him an enemy
to people who believe in extraterrestrial life.

If you have any scientific training at all - even the little bit
that comes in high school - you will know that anecdotal
evidence, _by_itself_, does not, in any school of science, mean
anything. If supported by evidence, it then carries more weight.

Having interviewed witnesses to various non-UFO related
incidents all my life, I can tell you that 3 people witnessing
the same thing will tell 3 subtly different stories - if they
don't, then they have discussed it or heard it discussed.

Actually, three people witnessing a crime will often give a
description of a tall/short male with dark/light/red hair with
or without a beard, tattoos or scars wearing jeans and a jacket,
a running suit and a tuxedo.

It is hard to imagine that witnessing a UFO would be less
exciting/frightening than observing a crime.

Please, it is not necessary to demonize a respected man and a
wonderful communicator ('Cosmos' probably brought many people
into the mind frame necessary to think about UFOs etc) just
because he disagrees with you and may actually have good arguing





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

               Re: Sonoran Crash (UFOs And Secrecy Since 1940)

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:43:52 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:30:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Sonoran Crash (UFOs And Secrecy Since 1940)


I wrote:

>UFO UpDates Mailing List

>Sonoran Crash 1941 (UFO And Secrecy Since 1940)

>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:51:09 +0200
>Fwd Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:41:31 -0400
>Subject: Sonoran Crash 1941 (UFO And Secrecy Since 1940)

<snip>

>UFOs And Secrecy Since 1940

>(Sonoran Crash 1941, probably New Mexico)


Should be Mexico, of course. Sorry.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Abduction To The Far Reaches Of The Mind

From: Matthew Favaloro <eagle1@flex.com.au>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:08:57 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:28:39 -0400
Subject: Abduction To The Far Reaches Of The Mind


Abduction To The Far Reaches Of The Mind

The UFO phenomena, like any covert operation builds instant
distrust by it's very nature of secrecy and hidden agendas.

A new phenomena which I have called "Master / Slave" has come to
the fore. An abductee's mind has been so messed up by ongoing
abductions, mind scans, mis- information from the aliens that
they look inside to the spiritual sense of the abduction.

Such phrases as, "you are special", or "chosen", or "you are
saving the human race from certain cataclysm", no matter, builds
a "mission quest" into the psyche. This I feel stops the
abductee going insane. (Often the search for deeper meaning and
understanding in any experience either good or bad triggers the
beginning of the healing process). You want to understand it.

Abductees have conveyed to us that the greys show them viewing
rooms of earth's future, usually apocalyptic in nature and even
give dates and events of pending disasters. (Most of the dates
have come and gone.) The disasters have simply not occurred.!

Women who get to see their hybrid children only at abduction
time, start to look forward to the abductions no matter how
terrified they are and no matter how terrifying the experience,
so as to see their hybrid children in the longing to mother. An
interesting phenomena is that in 80% of cases so far studied by
us, where the abductee has an earth family of only girls, then
the hybrid child shown them is a boy and if the abductee has an
earth family of only boys, then the hybrid child shown them is a
girl, this intensifies the abductees lost longing and need to
bond with the hybrid child.

A Master/ Slave situation develops. Where the slave is very
dependant on the master and actually is bound and conditioned to
accepting the subjugation even to the point of total loyalty and
love to the abductors.

Another point to the phenomena is the so called "Channeled
Alien" also with messages relayed through a trance medium. Often
these messages are of "love and light", often these messages are
highly moralistic, sickly sweet and condemn mankind for some
thing or another.

It is amazing how these messages contain God loves you stuff. It
appears that God loves you but can't visit you personally but
has to go through a trance medium and also has to sent by an
extra terrestrial to boot !!!!!!!

Many people believe trance information as gospel (always from a
higher unquestionable source) and the chance for a "Cult"
developing is great. One only has to think back to the
"Hale-Bopp" comet UFO mission and the people who killed
themselves to join a UFO. All based on supposed channeled ET
"love and light" messages.

The channeled stuff is an illusion, a masking to the seriousness
of the abduction itself.

Abduction is not a nice spiritual word... is it.... Abduction
means to be taken against your will...Abduction predominates in
most UFO books, no other word in UFO lore has central agreement.

ABDUCTION... not vision, not invitation, not "See you at the
coffee shop" but Abduction..........think about it folks !!!!
Abduction is not a nice spiritual word... is it....!!!

I repeat, The UFO phenomena, like any covert operation builds
instant distrust by it's very nature of secrecy and hidden
agendas. Where there is no openness, there is no honesty.

Did One fly over the cuckoo's nest???? A new phenomena where you
have the abductees running the support groups for other
abductees, while well intentioned, the abductees can be lost in
a maze of misinformation and disinformation from the aliens and
themselves.

Now mind you, a small minority of groups run by abductees do
well and are necessary, simply because most main stream health
professionals refuse to look at the phenomena and abductees have
nowhere else to turn!

I was at a UFO conference where the validity of hypnosis was
questioned. (fair enough) There is a vast difference between
Hypnosis UFO research and Hypnotherapy.

As a Clinical Hypnotherapist I have found that hypnotherapy and
counseling has great value to an abductee. It is one thing for
abductee running a support group to tell other abductees that
they are okay, it is another, for a professional hypnotherapist
/ counselor to say that you are okay, but lets explore your
experience further.

>From our point of view, the abductees well being and
sensibilities, always comes first and takes priority over the
UFO material.

90% of most UFO groups focus on the UFO material, and will use a
UFO hypnotist to retrieve the data. A UFO hypnotists job is not
necessarily that of working with the abductee from a caring
humanistic point, that of helping the abductee come through the
experience. (a hypnotist is not necessarily a hypnotherapist)

That is why "Australia UFO Encounters" ( My colleagues and
myself) are not a UFO group per say. We are professionals
offering our services to any abductee, and to all UFO groups who
need help, support and our assistance.

Matthew Favaloro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                           Help Wanted: UFO Expert

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:26:49 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:17:02 -0400
Subject: Help Wanted: UFO Expert


Hello list, one and all.....

Today's Sesame Street is brought to you by the word "expert'.

Seems to be much bally-hoo going on in the list regarding who's
an expert on UFOs and who isn't. (Misters Todd, Clark, Stewart,
are you listening?) In addition, the amount of energy being
expended trying to either justify and/or deflate ufology as a
science mystifies my sense of proportion altogether.

Is it just me, or does anyone else on the list see the obvious
truth buried within the many layers of pro/con rhetoric?

In short: Everyone's right and no one's right.

Why? Because the very reason that the existence of UFOs can't
be proved is the same reason they can't be discounted; namely,
lack of hard evidence! Evidence is something that can be studied
by everyone, believers and non believers alike, whether it be
physical or not.

I use the terms 'believers' and 'non-believers' because when you
get right down to it that's about as involved as you can get,
mentally, on this issue. Oh, sure, give us some proported saucer
fragments or some alien tissue to analyze and then someone can
become an 'expert' on something by either proving or disproving
the veracity of the provided materials. But, short of that (and
we're mighty short of that), everyone involved is pretty much
divided into two simple groups; 'believers' and 'non-believers'.

Sorry, guys; but, despite all the intellectualizing and
sophisticated essaying on display by both sides, it's really
just a shoving match. It's all about what you believe. Or, more
to the point; what you want to believe.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. In fact, those that
scorn ufology as a 'religion' and not a 'science', don't really
realize how closely related the two really are. In my opinion,
most research starts out based on only an idea or a belief and
then gradually works its way toward maturity as results begin to
pile up. On occasion, there's even a short circuit of this
process. Some of the greatest breakthroughs in science have come
from a leap of faith that would equal anything found in the
ministry. After all, if you don't believe something will work,
then it never will.

Of course, skeptics will point to the lack of 'real' results in
ufology as an indicator that it isn't a science or that it
'refuses to account for its current state of yadda, yadda,
yadda..."

Please.

No one has yet to actually 'see' an atom of air, yet there are
'experts' on the science of aerodynamics. We know how to work
with it, to manipulate it, to control it to do our bidding; yet
we have no real proof that it exists (other than we don't die).
No one can see a 'thought', yet there are thousands of 'experts'
charging $125.00 an hour analyzing what people 'think'. The same
can be said for jury consultants and poets and doctors and
lawyers and artists as well as many other professions where
'experts' are recognized in very conceptual fields that produce
no 'real' results.

So what is an expert?

An expert is someone that is as up to date as possible on the
subject at hand; in this case, UFOs. Does that mean he/she is
supposed to have all the answers? Of course not! Even doctors
admit that what they do is a 'practice'; they are continually
learning something new.

The real difference between an 'expert' in ufology and an
'expert' in debunking is that willingness to learn something
new. And this, of course, comes right back around to the basic
principle of faith. The debunker has no faith while the believer
has, perhaps, too much faith.

Maybe we should coin a new phrase that better describes the
efforts of the person seriously studying UFOs. Rather than
calling him/her an 'expert', which invites the kind of endless
debate we've seen recently, perhaps a better term would be
'practitioner' ala the medical profession.

'Practitioner' doesn't, in my mind at least, imply any sort of
bias regarding the belief or non-belief of UFOs. If fact,
debunkers could also call themselves 'practitioners' since they
would, presumably, be looking at the same 'evidence' as the
believers. And for the ufology religious fanatics that consider
such a suggestion heresy, remember that real atheists know the
Bible better than most Christians! The atheists have simply come
to a different conslusion based on the evidence at hand.

Well, there's my two cents, for what it's worth.

But let me tell you, if anything I've said makes sense, then
it's a sad state of the world we live in when someone like me
can be the voice of reason on any subject.

Bury the hatchet, guys.

No one cares which one of you is right and you're messin' up the
view.

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:30:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:30:25 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


I wrote:

>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>Hi Errol and list,

>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>opinions.

>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>pilots saw.

>What your take on this? Looking for input.


Hello all,

What is it here? You are all talking about the obvious fake
footage at the end of the KGB Files show. I don't give a rats
ass about that portion of the show. You are all throwing the
baby out with the bath water here.

I have receive not one comment on the above piece. Did I not
state this clearly enough? Or is it that this piece is so
obviously true that no comment is necessary. You are all
searching for something legit and fail to see what is possibly a
piece of truth. It would take only a few shorts lines to state,
'Donnie you have lost your mind. I feel for you. Get some
psychiatric help.'. But no, no creative or not so creative
comments what so ever.

Disgruntled,
Donnie Shevlin





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #274

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 05:50:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:10:35 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #274


[My filters processed this Ode before I got a chance
 to post it. Please note the date above - Alfred
 wrote this prior to Elaine's  'John Ford Speaks'
 post                                         --ebk]

Apology to MW #274 (For October 7, 1998)

"All things in moderation" covers _even_ moderation! So -- to flip out,
now and then, is _best_ allowed. And keep your eyes wide open, friend --
and hear, this time, my soap box 'cause the reasons for it build, and
_won't_ be cowed. I'll play the tune I see --  standing fast to watch
_you_ flee those drooling jaws that are the fear you've just imagined,
but the fear's in _other_ places far _beyond_ your sense's graces, and
you run afoul its claws in hapless fashion!!

Remember _one_ that's run afoul -- for fit of wounded pique! Remember
John Ford's _silly_ crime that foams, or squirts, and leaks? Remember
he's in gulag now for _years_ without a trial? Can't you see him sitting
quietly with his face that never smiles? Don't you wonder what the deal
was? Its premise badly fashioned . . . the truth, perhaps if known to you
-- just _slow_ assassination!!! . . . We'd have an answer, at the last --
we'd be refreshed, refueled and gassed if Johnny Ford's restored, and
re-impassioned!

Not mentioned since our summer of abnormal discontent, still, Johnny
Ford's committed minus bail. This is _not_ incarceration, it is _likely_
obfuscation, and it's _so_ much more than prison, or a jail. A *threat*
to dangerous shadows, he is locked up in their hole; he is incommunicado;
he is totally controlled. He is fed his spice-less meals lacking interest
or confection, and he's led around in routine's mindless grunge, less
expectation. He is made to follow orders from the folks he'd disrespect,
but he's drugged to an indifference -- indistinct and he forgets. And I'm
sure they've had occasion, and I'll bet it's off the books  . . .
there've been 'lectrodes on his temples, and they've zapped him -- brain
cells cooked! . . .Bet the piss ran down his pants leg, and he fouled his
issue shorts. I'll bet he trembled in convulsion, shallow breathing --
gasping snorts. His jaws were sore for days, I'll bet, for clenched
electrocution. He wondered what the hell -- he wept -- he wallowed his
confusion.

And that was just the _high_ point. It's a pay back, day by day. He
challenged *their* authority -- you can bet *they* make him pay. He had
the gall to stand up straight, and ask the tougher questions. He
questioned the hypocrisy, so he suffers their correction. What he did --
I have _no_ courage. . .and neither, friend, have you.  We're paralyzed
by Ford's example, as the facts of it are true.

Go too _hard_ against a current even though you have the right -- it
won't MATTER it's America if the *man* _abuses_ might.  It won't MATTER,
then, your facts are straight, you studied hard -- you stayed up late. It
matters _not_ your conscience screams for other people's nightmare
dreams. It _shall_ not matter ground you hold is higher held, and brave,
or bold -- Culture can . . . _will_ grind you down to wilt you brown, and
hurt profound. . .

Cool Hand Luke was just a movie, so it's likely John _was_ broken. Beyond
repair, he breaths some spit, and coughs -- and I'm not jokin'. It's
unlikely we _can_ bring him back; he is likely so far gone. He's in the
gut of culture where it grinds you twixt harsh stones. It has swallowed
up his message, and it�s neutralized his effort; it has cancelled, at the
last, his contribution, mind, and spirit. It has buried very deeply what
it truly fears -- his synergy. To serve its ends? The same for you! It's
_fearful_ of your energy.

And that's a point! First him, then _you_ -- and finally down to me <g>!
And this _despite_ good service, or an honor bright, you see! Expect them
to be living with the rules they make for you, and be sadly disappointed,
friend, or boiled in their stew! Bottom line? It's double standard. It's
a tilted playing field. The rich get rich; the poor get poor; the weakest
have no shield. The best lack all conviction, and are neutralized by
fear; the worst (?) _intense_ with passion, and they _take_ you from the
rear!  Get in their way -- you're in the grinder, and you're subject to
their sword. _Without_ regard to righteousness . . . brought down like
Johnny Ford!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford!


--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                     Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:35:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:54:49 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'


>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:21:34 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: TNT's KGB/UFO Show Was A 'Hoax'

>>>Date:  9 Oct 98 14:58:38 EDT
>>>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>>>To: el51@dial.pipex.com
>>>Subject: it is the hoax..

>>>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

>Did you check out this website recently? He's been forced to take
>it down.

Alex has shut down the site due to pressure from the legal threats he has
recieved.  I think that the defensive reaction by the production company
says something about the show's credibility.  Of course, they went to great
lengths to make sure the audiance knew that it was "Entertainment" and I
guess we should have all taken them at their word. . . . . <g>

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                          Re: The Lunar Conspiracy

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald  Ledger)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:08:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:53:34 -0400
Subject: Re: The Lunar Conspiracy


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The Lunar Conspiracy
>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 20:16:12 PDT

>>From: Jsmortell@aol.com
>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:20 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Lunar Conspiracy

>>I would like very much to open a thread on a subject that, since
>>I have been here, which is not very long albeit, I have not seen
>>addressed. The subject is our moon.

>>There are a number of issues which I have read lately,
>>attempting to give ground to theories on the condition of this,
>>our nearest neighbor in space.

>>Among these are the following:

>>- The moon is an artificial satellite

>>- The moon is hollow

>>- We have ceased exploration on the "orders" or "agreement" of
>>Aliens who would have us stay away from their labors there

>>These various rationales appear to be conspiratorial in nature
>>and connote additional damning evidence of governmental
>>repression. In truth, my interest is not only curiosity, but
>>stems from research which has been forced upon me by a client.
>>This research should have nothing at all to do with the
>>aforementioned theories.

>>However, I have run into some dichotomous information, the
>>explanation of which may be related to these theories.

>>Anyone out there have FACTS which they are willing to share?

>>Any and all information would be appreciated.

>>Jim

>G'day Jim (& List)

>Anybody confronted with this topic(?) need only consult Isaac
>Newton and the numbers - absolute hogwash!

>Go to the beach and enjoy the tides for what they are - evidence
>of the moon's mass and orbit _plus_ proof that it has been there
>enough billions of years to have icontrovertibly contribute to
>the evolution of tidal life forms.

>No offence but your client may need a basic education.

>Regards,
>
>Leanne

Don't be so polite Leanne. Errol, we could all save some
bandwidth on the download and finger fatigue from deleting this
thread if you would do it on your end.

Hollow moon! Cheesh. Arguing about it gives it some degree of
legitimacy.

Don






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald  Ledger)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:28:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:47:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:57:12 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Fred And King Island
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:42:16 +0200
>>Subject: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>>For copyright reasons list only!

><snip>

>Semi-"old timers" will know that we are fast coming up on the
>20th anniversary of the disappearance of Frederich Valentich
>who disappeared along with his small plane over the Bass Strait
>while flying from Melbourne to King Island.

>Date: Oct. 21, 1978, 7:12:28 pm local time, just after he said
>"...is hovering and it's not an aircraft...."

>Fred had described a strange object traveling back and
>forth over his aicraft:"It's got a green light and a sort of
>metallic light.  It's shiny on the outside."

>Whym you may ask, dare I write quotes from a person who
>disappeared (and hence was never "properly interviewed" about
>his UFO sighting)?

>Answer:   quote are abstracted from the AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
>CENTER (Melbourne) audio tape of the incident.   Fred was in
>communication with the radar, but, unfortunately, was below the
>altitude at which the radar would detect him..... and the other
>object.

>Yes, the bones of many reside at the bottom of the ocean, but on
>the other hand, there was no evidence of problems with
>Valentich's plane and.... no residue, flotsam, jetsam, junk,
>evidence of any kind was ever found, yet there should have been
>had he "simply" crashed into the ocean.

>Fred was gone.....

>is gone......

>RIP.

>(A search of the Bass Strait was carried out for several days.
>Nothing was ever found)

Hello Bruce,

If ever there was a case of the international UFO community
falling down on the job, the Valentich case is it. Why the
heavyweights of Ufology of the time didn't jump on this with
both feet is beyond me.

This was an Australian incident but one with international
concerns because there can be no doubt that a life was lost due
to a close encounter with a UFO (please spare me the nonesense
that there were claims of his being spotted later after his
supposed death).

Certainly it must have been evident after several months had
gone by, that the man perished. He was in an aircraft, in
contact with Air Traffic Control, sightings had been going on
all evening, and - correct me if I'm wrong - there were radar
contacts as well.

The big guns of ufology, the press, the RAAF and the federal
government of Australia failed Valentich miserably.

Aussie UFO  researcher Bill Chalker has investigated and written
about this incident so I guess he is the one who should be
consulted.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Strieber Keynote Speaker In A 3-Day UFO Conference

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:03:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:19:36 -0400
Subject: Strieber Keynote Speaker In A 3-Day UFO Conference


Are we alone? UFO Conference launches today in Cocoa Beach

By Billy Cox FLORIDA TODAY

COCOA BEACH, Fla. - Of all the images jamming the expressway to
the millennium, few have matched the macabre impact of those
from Rancho Santa Fe, Calif., in March 1997:

Thirty-nine dead "true believers," close-cropped hair, matching
black outfits and sneakers, overdosing on phenobarbital after
posting Web site farewells. Their goal: To rendezvous with an
alleged unidentified flying object streaking toward Earth behind
comet Hale-Bopp.

As details of the Heaven's Gate UFO suicide cult began to
dribble out of the San Diego suburb, few were as troubled as
Whitley Strieber. On the eve of his lecture during the Space
Coast UFO Conference in Cocoa Beach, the author still wonders
whether the tragedy could've been prevented.

"I was extremely upset, I took it very personally," Strieber
recalls from his home in San Antonio. "I thought, `If only I had
worked harder. If only I had communicated better, maybe these
people would've been in a better place, and they would've
realized the belief system they had evolved was a total
fantasy."

The irony is that, almost single-handedly, Strieber helped
elevate the level of discourse on space aliens into the pop
mainstream.

Overnight in 1987, a man who had enjoyed considerable success as
a futurist/horror novelist became a best seller on The New York
Times' nonfiction list for a first-person account of what he
claimed were his ongoing alien abductions. Battered by skeptics
and embraced by believers, Strieber's Communion - and its cover
art of a bug-headed alien with huge black eyes - sprouted legs
to emerge as an archetypical symbol.

"It has become something that we've been getting used to," he
said. "You even find it on bluejeans now. We have demystified
and disempowered those great black staring eyes, and we have
absorbed them into our culture. If this involves alien contact,
and if a process of acclimatization is going on, then my main
job seems to have been to communicate that face, more than
anything else I've done."

Strieber is a keynote speaker in the three-day UFO Conference
beginning today at the Cocoa Beach Hilton. Sponsored by a Gulf
Breeze organization called Project Awareness, the conference
offers a mixed bag for the alternative crowd. In addition to
veteran UFO researchers Stanton Friedman and Bob Oechsler, the
fare includes lectures on remote viewing (Skip Atwater), Mars
anomalies (Vince DiPietro), Egyptian mysteries (Zecharia
Sitchin), after-death communication (Judy Guggenheim) and
channeling (Mary Jo McCabe).

UFOs have come a long way since Communion hit the bookstands.

Exploited most recently for megabucks in "The X-Files" and
"Independence Day," UFOs have attained a momentum that was
supposed to have been quashed in 1969, when the Air Force
dismissed the phenomenon in Project Blue Book.

In June 1992 - as a result of so many abduction reports cropping
up in therapy sessions - an Abduction Study Conference convened
at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. There, scientists,
theologians, historians, folklorists and medical professionals
compared notes and gleaned insights. In July 1997, about 50,000
people converged on Roswell, N.M., for the 50th anniversary of
an alleged flying saucer crash. In March, assisted in part by a
report financed by philanthropist millionaire Laurance
Rockefeller, the Journal of Scientific Exploration called for a
renewed official study of UFOs.

Now the momentum has spilled over to cyberspace. Log onto the
Internet and you can find countless UFO conspiracy sites.

Trying to understand

Cocoa psychologist Duncan Bowen is an interested bystander who
hosts a weekly talk show on WMEL radio called "UFO Live." In the
years since Communion, Bowen has converted to the possibilities
raised by Strieber.

"I do believe the phenomenon is real," said Bowen, who'll
moderate a NASA forum at the conference this afternoon. "But
obviously, it's hard to pinpoint, because I think it involves a
reality we don't understand yet."

Despite the government position of official indifference on
UFOs, weird, fleeting images in the sky continue to be scarfed
up by cameras and camcorders, which gives conference speakers
plenty to talk about. Secret government investigations,
coverups, the weight of evidence - for three days, ufologists
will make their case in a court of public opinion.

One of the conference organizers, Vicki Lyons, first got
involved in 1987. She had just finished reading Communion when
she saw a local television report of UFO sightings in her own
back yard - just across Pensacola Bay, in Gulf Breeze. It was
the first of a number of sightings that would establish the
sleepy Panhandle community as one of the nation's UFO hot spots.
Scores of eyewitnesses eventually would see, photograph or
videotape strange red lights over the Gulf of Mexico waters.

As the Gulf Breeze UFO "flap" reached its zenith in the early
'90s, Lyons and fellow skywatchers Pat and Buddy Crumbley of
Mobile, Ala., formed Project Awareness to get the word out. But
after staging more than a dozen conferences, Lyons says answer
to the riddle remain elusive.

"One thing we've learned is, there aren't many answers, just
more questions," Lyons said.

The Heaven's Gate incident wasn't exactly the best PR for
ufology, either. "We don't need to create a new religion,"
Strieber warned. "We have enough trouble as it is."

But the Heaven's Gate cult - led by Marshall Applewhite - made
the parallel difficult to ignore. Rushing into the vacuum of
faith, Applewhite and his disciples methodically took their own
lives, leaving behind dreamy videotaped testimonials about the
eternal bliss awaiting them aboard the UFO.

"There are fringe elements in every group you can think of -
politics, religion, you name it," said Pat Crumbley. "After
(Heaven's Gate) happened, I had a sister call me up and say, `I
have to ask you one question: Is that what you believe?' She
didn't understand that we haven't figured this thing out, that
what we're doing is research."

But for growing numbers of people, the debates long have
surpassed the "is-it- real?" stage. They are now wrestling with
meaning. One could even argue that discussions are polarized
along sectarian lines, with at least two academicians addressing
the masses from media pulpits: Pulitzer Prize-winning Harvard
psychiatry professor John Mack ventures the UFO visitors are
likely benign and instructive; Temple history professor David
Jacobs' books advance nightmare scenarios of trauma and
violation.

It's all for sale

And like religion, it is all for sale - alien talismans,
candles, self-help books for abductees, videos, T-shirts, bumper
stickers. The holy water concept has yet to be alienized, but
for $9.95, you can buy what Andent of Waukegan, Ill., advertises
as "strange, glowing earth from Roswell, N.M." UFOs shadow the
rock music charts. The Foo Fighters borrowed the name from
glowing spheres tailing warplanes in World War II; Sheryl Crow
sings, "they may be angels."

The cumulative effect has been an inescapable awareness of high
strangeness, no matter which side you're on. But, Strieber says,
prodding society's institutions to give UFOs more serious
consideration is another matter.

After Communion was published, Strieber was deluged with letters
from people reporting similar experiences. So he established the
Communion Foundation to coordinate research efforts among a
number of scientific disciplines.

Over the years, Strieber says researchers have recovered eight
so-called implants, those small, mysterious foreign objects
abductees claim were inserted into various parts of their
bodies. One of them came from Strieber, which he discusses in
his latest book, Confirmation.

Talk about your Xfiles. In Strieber's words: "I had an object in
the outside part of my left ear. I remember the incident; it was
May 1994. Last year, since this implant stuff was having success
with other people, I decided to have it removed. It was a
simple, in-office surgery. The doctor opened it up. He found in
there what he described as a little white disc.

"He touched it with a scalpel and it moved away. He opened the
incision up a little more and touched it more aggressively and
cut off a little edge of it. Whereupon the object moved about an
inch down into my earlobe. A full inch."

Strieber says the recovered fragment was a crystallization of
collagen and calcium carbonate, both of which are found in the
body. But the process that crystallized it - and mobilized it -
remain a mystery.

Lab work conducted on implants usually is done in secret, by
curious scientists at odds with their administrations. Strieber
also says there's more work to be done by analyzing abductees'
brain-wave activity, a technique called PET scanning. So far,
half a dozen labs have refused to get involved.

"Unfortunately, we live in a society where the scientific
community that could provide us with some focus in this area is
reluctant to do so," Strieber said. "And as science continues to
stick its head in the sand, superstition just grows and grows.
The few studies that have been done are much too thin to give us
any more than a directional idea of what might be going on.

"Consequently, I think there are people out there with
phenomenally evolved belief systems that haven't got a scintilla
of proof behind them at all. I'm afraid that what we saw with
Heaven's Gate can happen again."

Space Coast UFO Conference schedule


Lectures $10, special events $15, tickets available at the door
at Cocoa Beach Hilton

TODAY

11 a.m.: Judy Guggenheim lecture, "After Death Communication"
1:30 p.m.: NASA forum 3:15 p.m.: Whitley Strieber special event,
Panel of Abductees 6:30 p.m.: Skip Atwater, retired military
intelligence officer lecture 8:15 p.m.: Bob Oechsler lecture,
"UFO evidence"

SATURDAY 8:45 a.m.: Skip Atwater special event, "Out of Body
Experiences" 10:45 a.m.: Vincent DiPietro lecture, "Mars
Investigation" 1:45 p.m.: Judy Guggenheim special event,
"Investigating Inner Spiritual Wisdom" 3:45 p.m.: Zecharia
Sitchen lecture, "UFOs and Ancient Texts" 7 p.m.: Whitley
Strieber lecture 8:45 p.m.: Mary Jo McCabe special event,
"Spirits' Interaction With Audience"

SUNDAY 9 a.m.: Zecharia Sitchin special event, "Egypt" 10:45
a.m.: Mary Jo McCabe lecture, Visionary and Spiritual Medium
1:15 p.m.: Stanton Friedman lecture, "Cosmic Coverup: New
Revelations"

---------------------------------------------------
UFOSEEK's ongoing Y2K poll: "How serious is the Y2K problem?"
See what many people think and will be doing. Vote!

Keep up with the latest UFO and alternative news: Visit UFOSEEK
and find the source... http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                 Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:24:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:05:30 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist
>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:51:57 PDT

>>Date: 8 Oct 98 18:36:41 EDT
>>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>>To: Levine@wnet.org, johno@advdata.net
>>Subject: UFO KGB Files. New data and new twist. Legal Threat.

>>There is a twist in the story with UFO KGB files.

>>I received outrageous legal threat from the production company in
>>respond to the numerous inquires for an additional information
>>and last notion of the new discovery made regarding dubious
>>credibility of some presented documents.

>>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

>>Alex Hefman

>>P.S. Any advise?

>>More information from Russia is expected soon.

>Alex,

>Any advice is dependant upon the exact nature of the legal threat and
>what your local laws are in relation to that threat.

>If it is a Copyright issue you can always set up your page on a server
>that is in a country that is not a signatory to the international
>copyright concention (if you can find one).


Perhaps there are a number of attorneys' out there who would
consider advising Alex as to his legal rights. It seems to me at
least, highly inappropriate that a man cannot opine with
impunity, most especially on this subject. This is still a free
country.

And perhaps all of us should consider the use of a word which
all too often goes unused, or underutilized at best. It is a
good word, which has character and in point of fact, is
indicative of character.

It is a word which represents truth, justice and the American
way... a lot like Superman. In fact, I for one, have much more
confidence in those who use that word, in lieu of the
prognostication of testatory and testosterone-producing words
presently in use. An example or two ... "Fact" or "Truth"

"I am right! I speak truth! Don't argue with me I know what I am
talking about!" Etc.

The word to which I refer is "opinion." It is often used in the
following context,  "In my _opinion_ ..." or "It is my _opinion_
that ..."

If more folks used that word, the science of ufology might take
on a level of enhanced class rather than the present level of
Klass, eh?

Heck, this is my opinion. On the other hand, I should not have
an opinion since I have not submitted my Curriculum Vitae to the
list. Until then, my opinions are akin to those of royalty
without portfolio.

It's a curse.

Jim Mortellaro








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:51:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Has anybody ever noticed how often Klass and CSICOP are attacked in
>>Jerome Clark's commentary? Are they that powerful that their
>>image needs to be tarnished continuously? Actually, they are not
>>even relevant to this or any discussion involving the state of
>>ufology because they are not responsible for ufology's woes.

>Whoa, stop tape........

>Mr Stuart, you can't possibly believe that the aforementioned
>debunkers aren't relevant to your discussion.

It is not a question of belief. It is a question of whether
ufology will ever be mature enough of a discipline to take
responsibility for its own or not. As long as the prevalent
attitude and state of mind within ufology is to find demons,
dead or alive, to blame for their present status, ufology will
never be able to grow into a mature discipline.

>You know perfectly
>well how UFO witnesses, no matter their background or
>credibility, are treated by these purveyors of
>explanations-that-defy-rationality. Might not ufology have more
>of the necessary people at it's disposal if not for the public
>floggings given on so regular a basis by those who know more
>about the sighting than the witness?

I don't really know where the basis of your critique is coming
from. On one hand Klass has been critisized for not even
speaking to witnesses and Sagan for not investigating UFO cases.
In Klass's Skeptics UFO Newsletter he seldoms address witnesses
unless they have already reached public status usually by having
written a book or having appeared and made statements in a mass
media like a TV show. Critiquers like to have it both ways at
their convenience, but it makes for faulty logic.

>Case in point: Mr. Sagan (who by now probably believes
>wholeheartedly in the Devil) loved to pontificate about the ever
>present human need to believe in the supernatural, hence UFOs
>are the modern day equivalent to goblins and leprechauns and the
>like. He referred to all UFO sightings as "nonsense", most of
>the time not even bothering to revert to the old "misidentified
>natural phenomena" line.

Your perception of Sagan is not based on fact. Sagan was
critical that aliens where sharing time and space with us and
that there was any linkage between UFOs and alien cruisers. He
did not deny that UFO reports should be investigated. He is on
the written record that

         "there isn't enough data...and that an open mind
       should be kept."
                Carl Sagan in UFOs: A Scientific Debate, 1972

What a dastardly position to take!

>"Anecdotal stories are absolutely worthless", he would say.

Anecdotal stories are absolutely worthless in the context of
scientific proof. They are important in the right context of
supporting evidence if ufology ever is able to show linkage
between allegedly supporting data points. A paper by a colleaque
of Sagan, Phillip Morrison in Sagan's and Page's UFOs: A
SCIENTIFIC DEBATE, "The Nature of Scientific Evidence: A
Summary" addresses this issue and outlines why ufological
evidence has always fallen short of the standard of scientific
proof, but on the positive side it outlines what ufology needs
to do to strenghten their contentions - but almost thirty years
later, ufology still hasn't listened.

>Besides stretching his obvious
>distrust for his fellow man to an absurd and unreasonable level,
>he provided more than enough incentive for many people _not_ to
>join ufology who otherwise might have proved invaluable, and
>thus the field has not progressed to it's potential.

Again, your perception of Sagan is not based on fact. It is true
that he was not involved with the UFO community or involved in
investigations of actual cases, but he helped ufology in many
ways.

        1) Sagan advocated declassification of relevant UFO
information from decades ago (Demon-Haunted World, pp. 89).

        2) He edited, with Thornton Page, one of the most important
UFO books produced: UFOs: A SCIENTIFIC DEBATE. Important for
many reasons, notwithstanding the fact that it is one of the few
books available to the mass public which includes a paper by Dr.
James Macdonald, as well as other pro-ufo advocates. As a
populizer of science, this book carrying Sagan's name still
receives wide distribution.

        3) The above book was a record of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science UFO debate in 1969. A debate that
Sagan was an advocate for inspite of high-level government
criticism and personal threat of criticism for advocating such a
debate before such an institution and helping to organize it to
its success. The UFO problem has never received such favorable
exposure before or since.

>Given the way the subject is treated by Phil Klass and his ilk,
>is it any wonder ufology is still struggling?

If only Phil Klass and his ilk would stop criticising, ufology
would move forward. Yup, that is taking responsibility for
ufology's woes.

>Talk about an
>uphill battle. Now, if they were to fight fairly, ufology might
>be doing a bit better, but the concocted and far fetched
>explanations used by debunkers to dispose of sightings certainly
>makes the PR job of ufologists a hell of a lot tougher, wouldn't
>you say?

Let me see. Critical analysis, discernment, logic, strict
interpretation of data, linkage and independent verification are
all weapons used by Phil Klass and his ilk. Those guys just
don't fight fairly. Be serious! Who really cares what cases Phil
Klass and his ilk "dispose of"? If a case is valid, ufologists
will still pursue the evidence and build a stronger case
regardless of Phil Klass. If the case his weak and susceptible
to debunking, and investigators can't find evidence to
strenghten the case, Phil Klass and his ilk have done ufology a
favor by removing clutter from the table top. Of course, there
is one way to defeat those dastardly villains keeping ufology
from its right place in the sun. Ufology needs to come up with
compelling evidence to support its extraordinary claims. All is
really needed is one case that stands up to critical analysis,
discernment, logic, linkage of data and independent
verification. Only ONE CASE! In the meantime let's keep blaming
a dead exobiologist and popularizer of science and a
seventy-year-old man for ufology's woes and inability to raise
itself from its self-created hole.

>Unless of course you believe the explanations, in which
>case you are as guilty of being a won't-believer as much as you
>accuse Mr. Clark of being a "believer".

People can believe anything they want and most are independent
in their belief systems. But if ufology is to be dominated by
beliefs, then it needs to reside in the domain of beliefs and
admit to itself that it is a religion, an area that science has
no jurisdiction.

>Mr. Stuart, the debunkers _are_ part of the problem.

For fifty years now, the above analysis of the situation seems
to be the prevalent analysis. Greg, I am sorry to say that I
suspect that yours is the prevalent opinion in the circles of
ufological wisdom much to the consternation for any hope that
ufology will ever mature.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK

From: Angelo Zammit <hoops@netcomuk.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:47:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:01:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK


>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow East London UK
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Dear Colleagues,

>I have just received the following sighting report from a
>colleague of mine who is one of the ELUFON investigators, for
>East London.

>Ten Strange Light'S Dance Over Walthamstow

>At Approx 6:28pm on Sunday 11th October, a series of strange
>lights were seen over Walthamstow (East London)

>Whilst standing outside the back of his house ELUFON
>Investigator Tony Golbourn, observed a series of strange lights,
>which were described as immense high-altitude flashes.

>These were nothing like lightning or freak weather conditions.
>There were about ten lights that seemed to flash on and off
>simultaneously. When several of the lights were flashing, Tony
>noticed (through binoculars) that there seemed to be a structure
>of some kind, which the flashing was illuminating.

>After the sighting, the lights were described as being "as
>small as satellites but all moving at once". The light show
>lasted for some minutes before they disappeared.

>Info will be updated, as it arrives.

>PS: Look out for the next issue of the official ELUFON magazine
>'Down to Earth' Issue 4, which is due out in 2 weeks. This is a
>stonker of an issue, with some excellent articles news etc. For
>more info please e-mail me at the above address.

>PPS. You can now also buy 'Down to Earth' in shops. For info
>on where to purchase a copy of the mag please contact me.

>Regards

>Roy..


Just too add to this, I was listening to James Whale last night.
Approx: 11:30 a caller called from Kent saying that they had
also seen some lights, I think he said 7 of them....

I know he said where he was, but I damned if I can remember. I
was just on the edge of falling into sleep mode.  :o/

Could it be the meteor shower ??
Anybody know anything on this ??


Regards.
Hoops






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                       London, UK Crop Circle Lecture

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:16:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:41:28 -0400
Subject: London, UK Crop Circle Lecture


LONDON UFO STUDIES Present A Crop Circle Lecture by Busty Taylor

Date: October 30th
Venue: The United Reformed Church
Speaker: Busty Taylor
Time: 8.00pm - 11.00pm (Doors Open 7.30pm
Admission: =A34.00, =A32.00 Senior Citizens & children

Further information can be obtained from:

Roy Lake
10a Tudor Road
Barking
Essex
IG11 9RX

Phone: 0181 270 9919

Thanks,


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                         People Links: SMiles Lewis

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 12 Oct 1998 15:17:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:57:35 -0400
Subject: People Links: SMiles Lewis


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 19:06:23 PDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:54:31 -0400
>Subject: Not 'Links' But People Facts

----------------------------------------------------------------


please reply ONLY to
mailto:elfis@ccsi.com
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin

Howdy UFO UpDates Listers,

This message is mostly for Leanne and those who liked her idea
of People Links.

I am a newbie lister of a few months. I've been webbing for
about 4 or 5 years. I've still never used Chat or NewsGroups but
have enjoyed the wheat/marrow of this list despite its abundance
of chaf/grisle. (Ratio consistent with 80-90% of UFO reports
actually being IFOs [Irrational Fear & Fury of others'
Observations & Opinions])

I applaud those who can discuss a topic extensively in the face
of obvious skepticism/debunking, for it is those who can
entertain their own detractors views who hold the most important
survival value which is the evolutionary act of questioning
one's own assumptions. Even those who have spewed the most venom
within this list must surely have occassional moments where they
question there own beliefs/assumptions. (Or am I truly deluded
here?)

I've read Clark, briefly met and seen Friedman speak (several
times), read and met Stacy (and been pleased at his work with
MUFON's journal and his and Patrick's ANOMALIST series), but am
familiar with perhaps only 10% of the others who commonly post
to this list.

I consider all those who contribute to this list, even those who
don't hold the same belief, assumptions, and evidential validity
rating standards that I do, to be a valuable resource for ufo
research. Tho I cringe at the slightest instance of animosity,
arrogance, or venom spewing, I realize that where ever beliefs
are HELD there will be emotional outbursts. (Convictions create
Convicts - Robert Anton Wilson) Even when those beliefs are the
"unbiased", "rational" realms of science; which is itself simply
a tool which features an assumption that the laws of nature
generally hold true everywhere all the time (I personally prefer
the Habits of Nature approach of Rupert Sheldrake and others).

So anyway, on to Leanne's request for People Links=

>Stefan & List,

>A link exchange would be great but for a newbie to this area I would
>really appreciate a people list so as to to appreciate more the goings
>on of the arguments bouncing around this list.

>For example:
>Fred Bloggs: name & address
>Fred's email and webpage
>Fred's direct interest in list
>     (e.g. just eaves-dropping, likes new siting reports)
>Fred's area of expertise in list contributions
>     (e.g. film analysis, abduction experiencer)
>Fred's affilliations that may be of a conflict of interest with list.
>     (e.g. collects tid-bits for publishing for profit - may have a )
>     (vested interest in sensationalizing events for monetary gain. )
>Fred's employment history of concern to the list
>     (e.g. airforce pilot, film technician, secret service agent)
>Pertinent comments (non-slandering and non-defamatory) by other list
>members who have dealt with Fred.
>Agreed reliability rating by the list members
>     ( say from  -5 for a known hoaxer or disnformant through to )
>     (            0 for an unknown quantity in this category to  )
>     (           +5 for utterly reliable informant/contributor   )
>     (              or specialist in the field                   )

>Other relevant categories

>I'll show you mine if you show me your's. Now there's a can of worms
>for you . . .  :-)

>Regards,

>Leanne Martin
>Computer Engineer @ WANG GLOBAL Australia

Stephen MILES Lewis (aka SMiles)

Po Box 33509
Austin, Tx 78764
phone number available upon request

mailto:elfis@ccsi.com

http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin
(ELFIS domains coming soon)

SMiles' direct interest in list= use of as archive for any and
all ufo related studies as well as forum for discussing info
thus archived. (see my Beliefs and Interests category at end of
post)

SMiles' area of expertise [definition of expert by my high
school sociology teacher="An ExSpurt is an unemployed drip under
pressure."]

I am an expert fence sitter & 27 yr old (call the BBC!) Gemini
psiberpagan.

I have been labeled both believer and debunker.

I'm a good listener and can suspend judgement/belief in order to
apply my associative logic to the corraling of possibly related
data.

I ran the Austin Texas UFO Abductee/Experiencer Support
Group/Forum and Study Group for almost a decade.

I have a life-long interest in ufos and related areas of
psi/mind research triggered by early childhood viewings of Carl
Sagan's COSMOS and the STAR WARS universe as well as personal
experiences with psi and syncrhonicity.

I have a library of over 500 ufo/psi related books, nearly as
many magazines as well as voluminous paper files all slowly
going on-line thru archive projects associated with my web
sites.


SMiles' affilliations that may be of a conflict of interest with
list= (my will to inform)

I have tried my hand at off-line zine publishing and found it
extremely difficult. I am always looking for new insights from
this list which could lead towards the UFO writings I would like
to actually see published into book form.


SMiles' employment history of concern to the list= (not much,
boring really)

I currently work for the State Of Texas Library within its
Talking Book Program for the blind and physically handicapped.
Nearly all my work experience has been with library related jobs
including the City of Austin Public Library (3 and a half years)
back in the early 1990s. I've produced audio/video projects of
small consequence. Oh yeah, I helped make flood zone insurance
determinations for awhile which effected the lives of thousands
of home owners in the state of Washington.

Pertinent comments (non-slandering and non-defamatory) by other
list members who have dealt with SMiles: (come on fellas, which
of you out there has dealt with me?)


Agreed reliability rating by the list members: (rate me, rate
me!)

Rating myself on Leanne's scale (-5 to +5) I'd give me a
whopping +1 which in my estimation means I give anyone the
benefit of the doubt in areas I know little or nothing about.

Other relevant categories:

SMiles' Beliefs and Interests=

Psi phenomena as they relate to Jungian concepts of collective
(un)consciousnesses, syncrhonicity and the human anthropomorphic
experiencing of non-human consciousnesses and intelligences (aka
transpersonal psychology and contact phenomena). Psychotronics
(effecting of mind/matter thru psi and/or electromagnetics) both
natural and techno. Thus my interest in the possibilities of EM
phenomena like hypothesized Earth Lights, BOLs, etc as
documented by Paul Devereux, Michael Persinger, Jenny Randles,
Greg Little, Greg Long, Albert Budden and others. But my
interest in said natural psychotronic processes leads inevitably
towards those interpretations of SOME ufo/abduction experiences
as possibly instigated / manipulated by unknown human and
non-human agencies (powers and principalities) which have been
described as The Controllers ala Martin Cannon and before him
Jacques Vallee.

As to the why of ufo phenomena= I am interested in the
folkloric/anthropological perspectives which can teach us much
about the ufo phenomena's effects upon the individual
experiencer and thus society/culture. This may be the only way
we can discern any agenda on the part of UFO
occupants/intelligences.

Nuff said? Ask and ye shall receive. . . . (even if after some
delay)

SMiles

please reply ONLY to
mailto:elfis@ccsi.com
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 41

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:35:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:44:23 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 41


    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 41
October 12, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

SAUCER LANDS IN MALAYSIA

     On Friday, October 2, 1998, at 2:15 a.m., night-shift
nurse Jonis Juanin was making the rounds of the wards
at the government hospital in Beluran, Sabah province,
Malaysia when a curious glow caught her gaze.
     "Three of us saw a round, bright orange-color light
flashing with very small black dotted things at 2:15 a.m.,"
Ms. Juanin reported.  "The UFO seemed to be landing.
The distance was about two kilometers from our place
of work, and we witnessed it for about five minutes until
all its lights turned off.  The sky that early morning was
dark with no moon or stars visible."
     "This is the first time in my life that I have been a
witness to this kind of thing.  Before this, I never even
heard of things like UFOs before."  (See Filer's Files #40
for 1998.  Many thanks to George A. Filer of MUFON for
letting us utilize this news item.)

NEW UFO SIGHTING STARTLES
THOUSANDS IN CHILE

     On Monday, September 28, 1998, between 9 and 10
p.m., an unusual ring-shaped UFO was seen by throngs
of people up and down the length of Chile.
     Cities ranging from the Chilean Antarctic to the
northern border with Peru reported sightings of the
strange UFO.  According to the newspaper La Tercera,
the UFO was seen in Punta Arenas, Valdivia, Temuco,
Pitruquen, Mulchen, Talca, Paine, San Felipe and
La Serena, which was the site of a UFO flap earlier
this year.
     According to La Tercera, "An OVNI (Spanish
acronym for UFO--J.T.) flew over our skies last night,
causing much excitement among the people who saw
this object.  It was described as 'a ring of smoke.'"
     "La Dirrecion de Aeronautica Civil (DCA) said they
did not receive any reports and that their airport radars
had not reported any strange objects in the sky."
     Chilean ufologist Patricio Diaz interviewed many of
the eyewitnesses in La Serena, a city 440 kilometers
(275 miles) north of Santiago de Chile, the national
capital.  Diaz reported, "People all over La Serena saw
this big, blue, gas-cloud-like ring-shaped object in the
sky.  It was the size of a full moon, moving north at
a slow speed."
     In Ovalle, 70 kilometers (42 miles) south of La Serena,
"hundreds of people saw the object," Diaz reported, "Ovalle
and the surrounding towns were having a fiesta, and many
people were in the streets.  Even local journalists saw the
UFO.  They were so startled that they forgot to take
photos."
     The incident is being investigated by Chile's new
Comite de Estudio de Fenomenos Aereos Anomales
(CEFAA), a coalition that includes Chile's armed forces,
the DCA and Agrupacion de Investigaciones
Ovniologicas (AION), the country's foremost UFO
study group.  (Muchas gracias a Luis Sanchez Perry
para esas noticias.)

UFO SEEN IN CENTRAL ITALY

    On Saturday evening, October 3, 1998, a 50-year-old
policeman in Rieti, a city in Italy's Lazio province,
spotted "a metallic discoidal object with a diameter of
five meters (16 feet) flying at a low altitude over the
valley of the river Tevere."  Rieti is 100 kilometers
(60 miles) north of Rome.
     The UFO descended to the river, "brushed the
top of the water," and took off in a southwesterly
direction.  The object was later seen flying over
the Ponte Marconi bridge in Rome.  (See the newspaper
Il Giornale for October 4, 1998.  Grazie a Simone
Luccarini, Massimiliano Teso e Edoardo Russo di
Centro Italiano di Studi Ufologici per questo rapporto.)

HASSALL BLOWS THE LID OFF
THE 1979 KAIKOURA CASE

     UFO author/researcher Peter Hassall convinced
the New Zealand Ministry of Defence to lift the Top
Secret rating on documents dealing with the 1979
Kaikoura UFO case.  NZMoD had originally sealed
all of the documents until the year 2004.
     The ministry also gave Hassall permission to
reprint the original reports in their entirety in his
new book, THE NZ FILES.
     THE NZ FILES contains a comprehensive review
of all the UFO cases in New Zealand dating back
to the 1880s.  Hassall, who lives in Upper Hutt on
North Island about 75 kilometers (45 miles) northeast
of Wellington, contacted the ministry and asked to
review the Kaikoura file.  The ministry gave him
permission to "reprint it in its entirety in the book."
     In late December 1978, air freight pilots reported
seeing unusual bright lights hovering over Kaikoura,
N.Z.  Two weeks later, in January 1979, the mysterious
lights returned and were videotaped by Australian and
New Zealand TV news agencies.
     Following the sightings, the Royal New Zealand
Air Force (RZNAF), the police and the Centre
Observatory in Wellington cooperated in an investigation,
the results of which were stamped Top Secret and
lodged in the National Archives in Wellington.
     Calling the report "a whitewash," Hassall was
quoted by the New Zealand Press as saying, "They
discussed how to deal with the problem of (UFO)
reports and they all agreed to cooperate and investigate...
but not tell the public they were exchanging information.
Secretly they were trying to figure it out.  No one wanted
to deal with the problem of UFO reporting.  They didn't
know what to do about them, partly through a lack of
resources to adequately investigate them."
     The NZMoD report concluded that the Kaikoura
UFOs were caused by Venus or reflections of light
from a squid boat offshore or a train or a passing car.
     "Venus had not risen over the horizon when most
of the sightings were made," Hassall said  "No one
knows for sure what the Kaikoura sightings were.
It could have been a natural phenomenon.  They just
made a complete shambles of the whole affair."
(Many thanks to Errol Bruce-Knapp for forwarding
the original news story.)

BIGFOOT TERRIFIES CAMPERS
IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

     On Saturday, September 26, 1998, Tim Ford, 22,
and James Harmon, 28, were camping out in the
Trinity National Forest near Hayfork, California
(population 2,605) when they spotted a Bigfoot
9 feet (2.7 meters) tall.
     Ford, who lives in nearby Redding, Cal., "said he
was on a camping and hunting trip near Mud Springs
south of Hayfork...when his friend, 28-year-old James
Harmon of Reno, Nev. (Nevada--J.T.) heard a loud
screeching in the trees as they roasted marshmallows."
     "While he got his flashlight (torch in UK--J.T.) to
investigate the noise, Ford said he spotted an
enormous, furry creature slinking about 50 yards
(15 meters) on the other side of a creek."
     The "elusive man-beast" was also described as
being "a nine-foot-tall, yellow-eyed beast making
bloodcurdling screams...They said the creature
stayed a distance from the campground all night,
but was near enough that they could hear its
screams."
     Ford talked about the encounter with officials of
the California Department of Fish and Game on
Thursday, October 1, and claims that the creature
"left tracks 6 inches (15 centimeters) wide and
20 inches (50 centimeters) long" in the forest.
     "Paul Wertz, a Fish and Game spokesman in
Redding said that Bigfoot sightings are not unheard
of in Trinity County but that the agency probably
wouldn't investigate Saturday's sighting."
     "'We don't have a management plan for Bigfoot,'
Wertz said."
     Hayfork is about 200 miles (320 kilometers)
north of San Francisco.  (See the Redding, Cal,
Record-Searchlight for October 2, 1998.  Many
thanks to Bufo Calvin for this news story.)

JUPITER TRIGGERS A UFO
SCARE IN MELBOURNE

     The planet Jupiter set off a mild UFO scare in
Melbourne, capital of Australia's Victoria state,
on Sunday, October 4, 1998, at about 6:30 p.m.
     At that hour, Jupiter, which resembled a bright
yellowish-white star, "was within one lunar diameter
of the full moon."
     Phone calls flooded the newsroom of the
Melbourne Herald-Sun from anxious residents who
reported seeing "a yellow UFO orbiting the moon."
     "James Cowland of the Australian UFO Reporting
Centre said that because of the proximity of the planet
to the moon, it could quite easily be taken for a UFO
instead of a planet."  (Many thanks to Alex McMurray
of Encounters and Melbourne Community Radio for
this report.)

TUFOIC SAYS CURRIE UFO
CASE IS PROBABLY A HOAX

     The Tasmanian UFO Information Centre has
investigated the recent sightings in Currie, a town
on the west shore of King Island about 200
kilometers (120 miles) south of Melbourne, and
concluded that the case is probably a hoax.
     Between Thursday, September 24, and Monday,
September 28, 1998, Currie residents saw "bright
orange fireballs" floating in the sky from 6:30 to 7:30
each night.
     According to Paul Jackson of TUFOIC, his
group believes that the UFOs were the same "orange
garbage-bag balloon" hoax seen in Hobart two years
ago.
     TUFOIC based its conclusions on the following
facts:
     (1) The UFOs "just floated gently along in the
same direction as the prevailing wind."
     (2) There are "around 50 children" in Currie
"on school holidays from Victoria."
     (3) "The events all took place after dark, yet
not late at night" but early enough for children to
still be up and around.
     (4) "They were all seen in the same general area--
north and north-northeast of Currie, and probably
originated somewhere between the Racecourse and
the Airport."
     TUFOIC investigators believe that the alleged
UFOs were "plastic garbage bags being used as
hot-air balloons with an attached box containing
a flammable substance."  (Many thanks to Paul
Jackson of TUFOIC for this news story.)

ELLIPTICAL UFO SEEN IN
THE MOJAVE DESERT

     On Sunday, October 4, 1998, at 4:30 p.m., an
unidentified family was in their backyard in the
Mojave Desert not far from Red Mountain,
California, about 85 miles (136 kilometers) north
of Los Angeles, when they saw a UFO.
     "There was a lot of aircraft noise," the father
reported.  "This caused us to look up.  We saw a
silver object above us.  Its brightness seemed to be
pulsating (dim, bright and then dim again)  At first
we thought it might be something caught up in a
dust devil (desert whirlwind--J.T.)  It gradually began
to ascend.  There was no sound associated with
this sighting."
     "I returned with a pair of field glasses.  I could
see it was elliptical (in shape) and horizontally
aligned.  It was climbing pretty fast and then just
vanished, the last I saw of it."
     He added that this was the family's third
sighting of a UFO in the area during 1998.  The
previous two sightings took place at night.
(Email Interview)

AMBER-COLORED UFO SEEN
IN BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA

     On Thursday, October 1, 1998, at 10:02 p.m.,
ufologist Lynn Taylor was on the deck of his house
in Bloomington, Indiana (population 60,633) when
he heard nearby dogs barking excitedly.
     As he looked to the east, "from nowhere, a
fairly bright amber-colored object appeared just
above the tree line.  It moved slowly in a northward
direction, speeding up, then slowing down and almost
stopping at regular intervals."
     "But as I continued to watch, referencing the
object's position to the outlines of the trees on the
ridge, I concluded that the object was clearly
changing its airspeed.  The intensity of the object
remained the same as it passed through the area."
     "Also saw a conventional aircraft with standard
(FAA) lights that flew directly over my position in a
northeasterly direction.  It was flying at 2,000 feet,
which was fairly low but considerably higher than
the object.  I don't see how the pilot would not be
able to observe the object, as well."
     Taylor went to bed afterward.  "But at 12:15 a.m.
I woke up and went outside just in time to see a
similar or the same object pass behind the trees
and out of sight as the dogs barked excitedly."
(Copyright 1998 by Lynn Taylor.  Many thanks,
Lynn, for letting UFO Roundup quote from your
report.)

TRIANGULAR UFO SIGHTED
IN PENNSYLVANIA

     On Sunday, October 4, 1998, three male
college students were driving back to campus on
Highway 77 in Spartanburg, Pennsylvania,
about 32 miles (59 kilometers) southeast of
Erie when they spotted a UFO.
     "As we were near the little town of Spartanburg,
at about 7:45 p.m., we saw on the horizon an
object with a few blinking red lights that did not
look like a plane.  As it got closer, we grew more
curious, and we pulled off the road, only to watch
it suddenly speed up and disappear over a hilltop."
     "However, ten minutes later, we encountered
something of the same brightness.  It was first
approaching down the passenger side where i was
sitting.  We pulled off the road again to watch, and
the object actually slowed down and hovered above
us.  It had a definite triangular shape, with steady
pale blue lights on the bottom and red blinking
lights on the sides."
     "My friend Randy stepped out of the truck to
look, and my friend Aubrey and I rolled down the
window and could hear a whirring sound as the
object suddenly picked up speed and began
moving through the sky."
     The witnesses also saw another car pull
over 30 feet behind them to watch the UFO.
(Many thanks to Stig Agermose for forwarding
this news story.)

SCIENTIST SAYS NEW MARS
PHOTOS BEING WITHHELD

     Speaking at the Space Coast UFO Conference
at the Hilton Hotel in Cocoa Beach, Florida on
Friday, October 9, 1998, Vincent DiPietro, who
worked for NASA's Marshall Spaceflight Center for
23 years, claimed recent photographs taken by the
Mars Global Surveyor were being withheld from
the scientific community.
     DiPietro, a scientist who was first to evaluate
photos of the surface of Mars taken by the Viking
landers in 1976, cited "a September Space News
report on the growing number of planetary scientists
disgruntled over the slow release of photographic
data from the Mars Global Surveyor" and "suggested
that new images were being consciously withheld."
     Images are radioed to Earth and downloaded by
Malin Space Systems, Inc. of San Diego, California,
NASA's contractor.
     "DiPietro criticized MGS camera operator Michael
Malin, whose (NASA) contract gives him a six-month
proprietary embargo on the images.  He and other
scientists reported Malin had taken numerous photos
of the so-called Face on Mars, other than the single
one released by NASA in April, that appeared to
reflect natural terrain rather than artificial features."
     "'This leads me to believe that we are not getting
all the facts from Malin Enterprises,' DiPietro said."
(See the newspaper Florida Today for October 10,
1998, "NASA, news media rapped at UFO conference,"
by Billy Cox.  Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for
forwarding the newspaper article.)

NEW GALAXIES DISCOVERED
12 BILLION LIGHT-YEARS AWAY

     "The faintest and most distant objects ever sighted--
galaxies of stars more than 12 billion light-years away--
have been detected by an infrared camera on the
Hubble Space Telescope."
     "The sighting penetrates for the first time to
within about one billion light-years of the very
beginning of the universe, astronomers said, and
shows that at even that very early time there already
were galaxies with huge families of stars."
     "'This is new territory,' said Lisa Storrie-Lombardi,
an astronomer with Carnegie Observatories in
Pasadena (California)  'We really didn't know what
we would see.'"
     "We are seeing farther than ever before,' said
Rodger I Thompson, a University of Arizona
astronomer and the principle researcher in the
study.  'We have not reached the edge (of the
universe), but we have made a step into a new
area.'"
     "Thompson and his team focused an
infrared instrument on the Hubble on a narrow
patch of sky that had previously been photographed
in visible light.  The intrument detected about
100 galaxies that were not seen in the visible
light and 10 of these were at an extreme
distance."
     "He said the galaxies are seen as they were
when the universe was only about 5 percent of
its current age.  Astronomers generally believe
the universe began with a massive explosion,
called the "Big Bang," which occurred about
13 billion years ago."  (See the Providence, R.I.
Journal for October 9, 1998, page 2.)

KOUVELIOTOU TEAM LOOKS
FOR MORE MAGNETARS

     Astrophysicist Chryssa Kouveliotou of
Universities Space Research Association and her
team have been scanning the skies for more
magnetars, i.e. unusual neutron stars with
super-strong magnetic fields, like the one that
blasted Earth on August 27, 1998.
     According to the November 1998 issue of
Sky & Telescope, team members "have pinpointed
the strongest magnetic fields known to science."
     "SGR1806-20 is a neutron star in (the
constellation) Sagittarius that occasionally gives
off brief bursts of gamma rays, making it a member
of a rare class of objects known as soft gamma-
ray repeaters, or SGRs."
     The magnetar that sent its blast wave to Earth
was SGR1900+14, which is 20,000 light-years
away in the constellation Aquila.
     "During one active phase in November 1996,
Kouveliotou and her colleagues tracked
SGR1806-20 with the Rossi X-Ray Timing
Explorer and found that the object is also an
X-ray pulsar, a rapidly spinning neutron star
that showers Earth with X-rays every 7.47
seconds."
     "SGR1806-20's spin rate is dropping but
not rapidly enough to account for the star's
luminosity.  In Nature for May 21st, scientists
say that a strong but decaying magnetic field
is a likelier power source.  The inferred magnetic
field strength, 10,000,000,000,000 Gauss,
is roughly one hundred trillion times that of
Earth, and it outranks by a factor of 10 or so
the magnetic fields attributed to other pulsars."
(See Sky & Telescope for November 1998,
"Magnetic Field Records," page 23.)

from the UFO Files...

1973: CHARLIE AND CALVIN

     October 11 marked the twenty-fifth anniversary
of the abduction of two Mississippi fishermen, the
event that touched off "The UFO Siege of '73,"
the biggest UFO flap since Roswell in 1947.
     On October 11, 1973, at 9 p.m., Charles Hickson,
42, and Calvin Parker, 19, were fishing on a pier in
Pascagoula, Mississippi near the Shaupeter
Shipyard.
     "They heard a buzzing behind them, turned
around and were terrified to see a 10-foot-wide,
8-foot-high, glowing egg-shaped object with blue
lights hovering above the ground about 40 feet
away."
     "As they watched, a door appeared at the
bottom of the object and three gray-skinned
creatures floated out."
     "The aliens were about five feet tall, had
bullet-shaped heads without necks, slits for
mouths and conical structures (like carrots
from a snowman's head) sticking out where
their noses and ears would be.  They also
had rounded feet, clawed hands and no eyes."
     "Two of the beings grabbed Hickson, while
the third grabbed Parker.  The 19-year-old
immediately fainted with fright.  Hickson, who
remained conscious, claimed that the
creatures floated them into a brightly lit room
aboard the UFO.  The two men were examined
with some sort of electronic eye that Hickson
reported 'hung in mid-air with no visible
connection to any other part of the compartment.'"
     "Twenty minutes after the incredible events
began, Hickson and Parker were returned to the
riverside.  The UFO rose straight into the air and
shot out of sight."
     "They said that none of the creatures
communicated with them; the only sound coming
from the aliens was buzzing.  To this day,
Hickson believes that the mechanical-like
movements and buzzing indicates the
abductors were robots."
     Parker, now 44, lives in Texas.  Hickson is
67 and currently resides in Gautier, Mississippi.
In 1983, he wrote a book about his encounter
entitled UFO Contact at Pascagoula.  (See the
Alexandria, Virginia Journal for May 23, 1998.
See also the Biloxi, Mississippi Sun-Herald
for October 12 through October 17, 1973.
Many thanks to Lou Farrish of UFO Newsclipping
Service for this feature story.)

FUN UFO WEBSITES:
     Jim Colonna has a new website devoted to
UFO sightings in Pennsylvania.  It's at this URL:
http://members.tripod.com/~bandusa/index.html
     Be sure to visit our parent website, UFO INFO.
Drop in any time at http://ufoinfo.com
     Back issues of UFO Roundup can be accessed
and downloaded at our webpage.  Stop by and
browse awhile at http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

     Today in history, on October 12, 1964, Earth's
first multi-seated spacecraft blasted off from the
Baikonur Cosmodrome.  The Voshkod 1 was
the roomiest manned spacecraft of the period,
and, with the ejector seats removed, was able
to accomodate three Russian cosmonauts--
Konstantin Feoktistov, Viktor Komarov and
Boris Yegorov.
     Hurled into orbit by the new Soviet A-2
booster rocket, Voshkod reached an apogee
of 400 kilometers (250 miles) and made 18
trips around the Earth before its reentry the
following day.  This flight also marked the first
time a Russian spacecraft transmitted a TV
image from orbit.

     We'll be back next week with more saucer
news from around the planet, brought to you by
"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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                              Art Bell 'Quits'

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:46:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:46:03 -0400
Subject: Art Bell 'Quits'





Source: http://artbell.com/artquits.html


The Art Bell Website

Art Quits

On October 13th, at 2:55 AM, Art announced to his listening
audience, he is quitting his talk radio show. The full
transcript of Art's announcement is below. The web site will
stay operational for as long as possible and may be the web site
for what ever replacement forum comes along. I will keep you
informed of any changes and will update the site with any new
information. We'll all have to wait and see what Jacor/Premier
Networks decides to do. (Good thing I didn't quit the day job!)


Transcript

You may recall about a year ago... I told you that there was an
event, a threatening terrible event occured to my family, which
I could not tell you about. Because of that event, and a
succession of other events, what you're listening to right now,
is my final broadcast on the air. This is it folks, I'm going
off the air and will not return. And what I will tell you now is
what I told you then. When the time comes when I can tell you
what occurred, I will tell you, through the press, through the
media, of one sort or the other. I will explain to you the
entire thing, it's not that I want to hold anything back from my
audience, however, for the protection of my family, until it is
otherwise revealed, I can't discuss it, I won't discuss it. And
if you were in my position, you would do exactly the same thing.
And when you finally hear whatever it is, what it is, whenever
you hear it, I think you will then understand.

At any rate, I wanted to tell you, I didn't want to go without
saying a word, so I'm telling you now. What you are listening
to, is MY FINAL BROADCAST. It's been a good run, and you've been
a great audience, and it's been an absolutely incredible forum.
And my presumption is, that the forum will continue. At any
rate, it certainly is my hope, that the forum will continue.

And again when the time comes, when this information can be
released, you can be sure that I will release it, and I would
assume because of the magnitude of the forum that I have held,
at that time, you'll get the whole story. But the time will come
when I will tell it.

So for now and the foreseeable future, that's it! That is the
end of this man's broadcast career. So, thank you, and
goodbye...

                        -- Art Bell, 2:55 AM, Oct 13, 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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                 Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:36:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:19:22 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist

Dear Alex, Leanne et al:


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>Re: UFO UpDate: UFO KGB Files - New Data And New Twist
>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:51:57 PDT

>>From: Alex Hefman <ufokgb@usa.net>
>>To: Levine@wnet.org, johno@advdata.net
>>Subject: UFO KGB Files.. Legal Threat.

>>There is a twist in the story with UFO KGB files.

>>I received outrageous legal threat from the production company in
>>respond to the numerous inquires for an additional information
>>and last notion of the new discovery made regarding dubious
>>credibility of some presented documents.

>>http://members.tripod.com/~ufokgb

>>Alex Hefman

>>P.S. Any advise?

>>More information from Russia is expected soon.

>Alex,

>Any advice is dependant upon the exact nature of the legal threat and
>what your local laws are in relation to that threat.


Yes! I believe you are free to:

a) Quote short passages from the UFO/KGB presentation for
purposes of review and comment. That has a long-standing
precedent, and any producer, writer, publisher knows that. So
does every lawyer worthy of the name.

b) You are also free (I believe) to quote, or at least
paraphrase, from their threatening messages to you!

c)  If their letters, emails themselves say you cannot quote
from their threats, I would quote those statements.

They cannot have it both ways.   -LH

>If it is a Copyright issue you can always set up your page on a
>server that is in a country that is not a signatory to the
>international copyright concention (if you can find one).

>Regards,

>Leanne.

Frankly, the TNT/UFO/KBG films etc. are so thoroughly suspect
that there seems little to be gained by further criticism.

It is a segment of the general public, which may take the show
for real. Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling few
people on this list
do.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:57:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:22:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow, UK


>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Strange Lights Seen Over Walthamstow East London UK
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Ten Strange Light'S Dance Over Walthamstow

>At Approx 6:28pm on Sunday 11th October, a series of strange
>lights were seen over Walthamstow (East London)
>Whilst standing outside the back of his house ELUFON
>Investigator Tony Golbourn, observed a series of strange lights,
>which were described as immense high-altitude flashes.

Roy, wasn't Tony Golbourn once described by you and Don as being
an attention seeker and accused him behind his back of making up
his back garden UFO sightings?

>These were nothing like lightning or freak weather conditions.

This is interesting, can you enlighten us as to how your group
can identify freak weather conditions? I'm sure your scientific
knowledge of the causes of these conditions may help other UFO
groups and ufologists discount them whilst investigating UFO
sightings. Perhaps you could describe the methods you use to
ascertain freak weather against unknown phenomena.

>There were about ten lights that seemed to flash on and off
>simultaneously. When several of the lights were flashing, Tony
>noticed (through binoculars) that there seemed to be a structure
>of some kind, which the flashing was illuminating.

You don't seem to describe the formation of the lights but
couldn't the flashing lights create an optical illusion of a
structure?

>After the sighting, the lights were described as being "as
>small as satellites but all moving at once". The light show
>lasted for some minutes before they disappeared.

Earlier you mention the lights as being immense but now they are
as small as satellites, is this contradiction an attempt at
sensationalising a mundane unknown sighting, or did the lights
alter their magnitude?

>Info will be updated, as it arrives.

It will be interesting to see if you can find some independant
corroborating witnesses.

>PS: Look out for the next issue of the official ELUFON magazine
>'Down to Earth' Issue 4, which is due out in 2 weeks. This is a
>stonker of an issue, with some excellent articles news etc. For
>more info please e-mail me at the above address.

Is this the crop circle edition? It ceases to amaze me that UFO
groups continue to report on this man-made art, and attempt to
link it with the UFO phenomenon. In your experience where have
you found evidence that UFOs are responsible for the manufacture
of crop circles? If this edition does carry crop circle
investigations, can you briefly outline how your group goes
about testing the formations for authenticity? I assume that
your are objectively looking at crop circles and have the circle
makers opinion to balance out your views, or have you opted for
the pro-eth opinion that crop circles are messages from other
planets?

>PPS. You can now also buy 'Down to Earth' in shops. For info
>on where to purchase a copy of the mag please contact me.

Could you please list the outlets where the magazine is
available so I can get hold of a copy. Btw, what circulation are
you getting these days excluding the complimentary copies you
send out?

Tony
The Truth Hurts






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                   NIDS Essay On Astronautical UFO Theory

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 12 Oct 1998 16:28:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:29:14 -0400
Subject: NIDS Essay On Astronautical UFO Theory


Hello again ya'll, (please reply ONLY to mailto:elfis@ccsi.com)

Just been reading over the many essays caught in the NIDS
contest net and found one on a ufo theory I am unfamiliar with -
tho it sounds a lot like the Straight Line Mystery hypotheses of
past books.

The essay is at:

http://www.anv.net/nids/DuttonAshpole_essay.shtml

It cites the book by Edward Ashpole: 'The UFO Phenomena',
Headline Book Publishing, London, 1996, and says that "Chapter
15, provides illustrations and a detailed account of the
development of the Astronautical Theory."

Is anyone on the List familiar with this hypothesis? Any
comments? It seems like this was the only essay really dealing
with masses of UFO reports in a systematic way as it related to
the NIDS essay contest.

SMiles
mailto:elfis@ccsi.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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:43:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:38:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>
>>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


<snipped Mr. Stewart's shallow distortion and blatant fawning to
the seemingly infallible alter of his worshiped science>

>Ed Stewart
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
>There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
>   Going On!      ,>'?'<,  |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
>Salvador Freixedo ( O O )  |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
>---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------


I've always been puzzled by Mr. Stewart's ironic reference to
the prescient Alexander Pope, and would suggest that Pope was
very _much_ aware that what we see is, often times, not what we
get! AND, while _we_ are aware that the preceding certainly
applies to a beligured ufology -- as regards science, " 'Tis but
a [small] part we see, and not a whole"!

If Mr. Stewart read more fully of Pope's _Essay on Man_, he
might have found --

        Presumptous man! the reason wouldst thou find,
        While formed so weak, so little, and so blind?
        First, if thou canst, the harder reason guess,
        Why formed no weaker, blinder, and no less!

Or --

        All nature is but art, unknown to thee;
        All chance, direction, which thou canst not see;
        All dischord, harmony not understood;
        All partial evil, universal good:
        And spite of pride, in erring reason's spite,
        One truth is clear: Whatever IS is RIGHT!

All things are possible when you think, wait, and read to the
period. The anomalous has streaked the sky for thousands of
years and we do NOTHING -- smothered in the robes of our
priests, dazzled by the jewels of our kings, and hiding in the
cloying folds of our scientists lab coats . . . invariably
forgetting that, "Whatever _is_, is right"!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

              Re: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:39:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:44:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:30:11 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>I wrote:

>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

<snip>

>>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>>pilots saw.


>Hello all,

>What is it here? You are all talking about the obvious fake
>footage at the end of the KGB Files show. I don't give a rats
>ass about that portion of the show. You are all throwing the
>baby out with the bath water here.

>I have receive not one comment on the above piece. Did I not
>state this clearly enough? Or is it that this piece is so
>obviously true that no comment is necessary. You are all
>searching for something legit and fail to see what is possibly a
>piece of truth. It would take only a few shorts lines to state,
>'Donnie you have lost your mind. I feel for you. Get some
>psychiatric help.'. But no, no creative or not so creative
>comments what so ever.

>Disgruntled,
>Donnie Shevlin

Alas, (or is it at last?).... I looked over my VCR tape over and
over and over again. I cannot find the "look" you saw. My tape
was made at the fastest possible speed, I looked it over frame
by frame and still, I saw nada.

Why is this so important, anyway? That piece of footage could be
real or, it could have been selected just for that "look" to
which you refer, (or is it reefer?).

Cant you hear it now, in the cutting room!?

"Yo, ma main man, look at what I got? We gonna make sure that no
matter what the content, this look-see over the shoulder (which
I couldn't see) is gonna be the clincher! Man, if that don't do
it, nuthin will!"

Jim






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                     Re: London, UK Crop Circle Lecture

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:33:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:53:59 -0400
Subject: Re: London, UK Crop Circle Lecture


An apology - I forgot to give 'Barking, Essex' in the venue location
for the talk :(

LONDON UFO STUDIES Present A Crop Circle Lecture by Busty Taylor

Date: October 30th
Venue: The United Reformed Church, Barking, Essex
Speaker: Busty Taylor
Time: 8.00pm - 11.00pm (Doors Open 7.30pm
Admission: =A34.00, =A32.00 Senior Citizens & children

Further information can be obtained from:

Roy Lake
10a Tudor Road
Barking
Essex
IG11 9RX

Phone: 0181 270 9919

Thanks,


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:44:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:52:25 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:30:11 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>I wrote:

<snip>

>I have receive not one comment on the above piece. Did I not
>state this clearly enough? Or is it that this piece is so
>obviously true that no comment is necessary. You are all
>searching for something legit and fail to see what is possibly a
>piece of truth. It would take only a few shorts lines to state,
>'Donnie you have lost your mind. I feel for you. Get some
>psychiatric help.'. But no, no creative or not so creative
>comments what so ever.
>
>Disgruntled,
>Donnie Shevlin
>

G'day Donnie,

I believe one List member pointed out a few weeks back that it
'appeared' obvious that the long object was superimposed into the
footage. This was judges to be the case by it's motion relative to
the filming plane.

It has not been shown here (Oz) yet so I can't comment directly.

I have I have recalled it correctly for you.

Regards,

Leanne.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:59:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:05:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:42:33 +0200
>Subject: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania

>Sources: alt.ufo.reports, October 6.

>Stig

>*******

>UFO sighted Route 77 in PA Oct.4 1998=BF

>Author:=BFgator
>Email: gator@alleg.edu
>Date:1998/10/06
>Forums:alt.ufo.reports

>I was traveling back to college this past weekend, Sunday Oct.
>4, 1998, with two friends. We were on Route 77 in PA, just
>outside of Corry. As we were near the little town of
>Spartansburg at about 7:45pm, we saw on the horizon an object
>with a few blinking red lights that did not look like a plane.
>It had a definite triangular shape, faint steady pale blue
>lights on the bottom, and red blinking lights on the sides.

>*****


><snipped>

>Great to know I am not the only PA person to see this UFO. I
>saw it a little bit later around Blairsville, PA.

Stig, please keep me posted as this is investigated. Especially
if there are more witnesses. These triangles with red and blue
lights seem to be getting more pervasive.

I don't know Pennsylvania. How far was this from Stan Gordon's
turf around Kecksburg?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                     Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:58:20 -0400
Subject: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

I don't want to open up the can of worms of Roswell debates, but
aside from the witnesses who have been discredited I have not
seen any credible evidence that would make me want to put higher
ranking officer statements (Gen.Exon and Gen. Dubose, two among
many) into question.

I have a tape of Kevin Randle's interview with General Exon
where he does describe flying over the Brazel crashsite and then
over a second site where he saw the crashed craft with several
little bodies laid out on the ground. Later, when he was the
commander of Wright Patterson AFB he was not involved with the
remains there but recited things reported to him from other
officers directly involved. He stated that the bodies were no
longer at his base but were sent off to a military mortuary.
Unfortunately, he is now deceased and can't be questioned
further.

General Dubose was present at Carswell. He was in a position to
know the truth shared with General Ramey. I would like to know
what motive the above named officers along with many other
officers would have to concoct a fantasy between themselves. It
seems extremely dubious that they each seperately decided to
spin yarns. They would not want to trash their reputations in
that manner. Can any Roswell debunkers prove that they were not
being truthful? It certainly wasn't a disinformation campaign
for the government, as the content of their interviews was just
what the USAF does not want the people to beleive regarding
Roswell.

Now Lt.Col.Corso's case was strange. For over two years we have
speculated what his motives might have been. Disinformation
could have been one motive as his story was full of mistakes, an
account so  ludicrous that people would have a hard time
accepting it unless they were very naive. Or maybe Corso just
did not care and needed more money for his family. Whatever his
motives he certainly destroyed his reputation. Rather strange,
isn't it?

So, People who say Roswell could not have happened as being a
crashed UFO, how can you discount the higher ranked officers
statements? I dare you to do so as long as you stay rational
about it. Ranters, please don't bother.

Perhaps the telegram in Ramey's hand can be further decoded and
prove also to be a deciding factor. J. Bond Johnson, you were
there in Ramey's office for a short time to photograph.
According to Dubose's statements there may be a lot that you
were not priviledged to know. Those people who who published
enhanced photos of the wreckage on the floor, the latest
generation enhancement showed me nothing that I could identify
in any way.

Finally, my heart goes out to all fellow combat veterans on UFO
Updates. I just watched "Vietnam: A Soldiers Story - The Tet
Offensive". I was in combat then and the show brought up a lot
of feelings. While I recompose myself and finish my post I just
want to say thanks to all who have bravely fought. It took me
years to come to terms with my memories and feelings from there.
It took a lot of hard work and help to get me out of active
PTSD. Thanks to the Veterans Administration I receive 100%
Service Connected disability for the parts of my body I lost,
the physical pain I still have from injuries, and the emotional
traumas.

Civilians have no real way of knowing what it was really like.
Hopefully, "Saving Pvt. Ryan" can show them a good view and they
will further understand why war should be avoided at all costs.

The Serbs have been given more than enough chances to avoid NATO
swatting them. Milosevic should have been captured and sentenced
as a war criminal long before Kosovo. Hopefully we are painfully
evolving to be a planet with less warfare. It's a hard and slow
process.


Thanks for listening,
Josh Goldstein







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                          Bell: And So It Begins...

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:34:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:34:22 -0400
Subject: Bell: And So It Begins...

Source: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg19975.shtml

IUFO Mailing List



From: Keith Woodard
Subject: IUFO: The Quittening
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:17 -0700


-> IUFO Mailing List

There are some interesting comments about this on
alt.fan.art-bell, where they're calling it "The Quittening." I
can't really repost them here because this is a family-oriented
list. However, here are a few excerpts:

***************** Begin copy text ******************

>man I just heard this. think it has anything to do with Jacor
>being taken over.

<snip>

>what was the cosmic stuff about his family and we;ll kno when
>the time is right?

Some time ago, Art came on the air really angry and shaken. He
started asking for a witch to call in - not one of them nice
wiccans, he wanted an evil witch, someone he could pay to cast a
spell on someone. Art was quite clear that he wanted to get
revenge on someone, but he wouldn't say what it was about. This
went on for a while. Dannion Brinkley talked to him on the air,
it became apparent that Art was planning to kill somebody.
Dannion went to his house to talk him out of it.

***************** End copy text ******************

Here's another, although I have misgivings about posting it.
Please be aware that Art's fan's were long ago driven off AFAB
by a merciless gang of Art-bashers, some of whom are competent
satirists. I don't believe for a moment that Clinton's "goons"
got to Art, but this *is* I_UFO, isn't it? ;-)

***************** Begin copy text ******************

From: goober@wigglenet.com (Garf Goober)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.art-bell
Subject: ART QUITS UNDER THREATS FROM CLINTON GOONS!!!!
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:45:31 GMT

Okay.......I don't wanna say I told ya so.......

Art's problems started when he began entertaining conspiracy
theories about Ron Brown's death.....

Then.....when Art called on the President to resign August
17th..... the goons threatened Art so severely that he faked the
porch fall to give him a few days to ponder his options.....

And when Slick Willy the ***** ****** president had his South
African buddies deliver a blatant threat against Art's family
unless he started a strong on-air campaign against
impeachment....well, Art and Ramona got together and thought,
"We've got several million dollars....a bunker in
Nevada..... who needs this...."

***************** End copy text ******************

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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:09:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:47:48 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38


>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 13:05:02 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38

>Volume 3, Number 38
>September 21, 1998
>Editor: Joseph Trainor

<snip>

>NEW ALIEN SIGHTING NEAR
>PERUGIA IN ITALY

>     On Friday, August 21, 1998, residents of Citta di
>Castello, a suburb of Perugia, a city in Italy's Umbria
>province, about 145 kilometers (87 miles) north of Rome,
>claimed to have seen a "flying humanoid alien."

>     The encounter took place in a field on the outskirts
>of Citta di Castello.  Witnesses spotted a "small alien"
>in the field, "crouched like an old woman gathering herbs."
>When the figure failed to respond to shouts from the
>onlookers, the people began a cautious approach.

>    "When they got within 200 meters, a thing like a
>silver cylinder appeared."  The UFO hovered "about two
>meters above the ground."  The humanoid reportedly
>levitated into the hovering object, and "with that, it
>accelerated quickly in a vertical direction, disappearing
>in a couple of seconds."  (See the Italian newspaper
>Corriere dell'Umbria for August 28, 1998.  Grazie a
>Edoardo Russo e Simone Cumbo di Centro Italiano di
>Studi Ufologici, CISU, per questo rapporto.)


Dear List,

This story seems to be an interesting one!

Any of you got more info. on this incident?

Hopefully, photo(s) are available - since there were
many witnesses?

Cylinder- or cigar-shaped objects seem to appear
in many sightings nowadays. Is this a new trend?



Best regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                       The First Transmute Conference

From: Niklas Rasche <niklas@transmute.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:52:03 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:52:05 -0400
Subject: The First Transmute Conference


Steal a march on the plebs and Kindred Spirit readers -
Special advance warning for 'UFO Updates' people!

On The Occassion Of The Last Vernal Equinox Of The Millennium

Quaternity Presents

The First Transmute Conference

Who'S Running This Show Anyway...!?
A Multi-Paradigm Exploration

At the Guildhall, Salisbury, Wiltshire, England

March 19-21 1999

Robert Anton Wilson; Dr John Mack (and "Experiencer")

Alan F. Alford; Michael Baigent; Lindsay Clarke;
Neil Freer; Charles Ginenthal; Patrick Harpur;
Rob Irving; Richard Leigh; David Marsh;
Lynn Picknett; Clive Prince; Michael Poynder;
Peter Tompkins; Steve Wilson; Roger Woolger

and Ken Campbell!

Plus Late Additions and Special Guest

Conference Times: Fri. 3pm-10pm; Sat. 9am-11pm; Sun. 10am-6pm.
Tickets =A3150 (Conference ticket only, includes printed programme
and tea/coffee & biscuits on all days)
Places are strictly limited
Special Solstice Discount:
=A3130 if purchased before December 21st 1998

Please make cheque payable to: Quaternity
Send to: Transmute Conference, 8 Livingstone Mansions,
Queens Club Gardens, London, W14 9RW

http://www.transmute.co.uk/ (from 1 November)
For further information and speaker biographies
(If line-up is subject to change notification will be posted 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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:00:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:59:15 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment
>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:44:17 PDT

>G'day Donnie,

>I believe one List member pointed out a few weeks back that it
>'appeared' obvious that the long object was superimposed into the
>footage. This was judges to be the case by it's motion relative to
>the filming plane.

>It has not been shown here (Oz) yet so I can't comment directly.

>I have I have recalled it correctly for you.

>Regards,

>Leanne.

I don't think that's the segment that Donnie is referring to,
but the point you make is valid (IMHO).  The long "craft" or
"object" seemed to move in the same direction as the visable
items in the cockpit as the jet vibrated as it flew, against a
background of (apparently) stationary clouds.  The density of
the tubular craft was also very thin, and I swear I could barely
see the clouds through it (which really does make it sound like
it was superimposed. .  . <g>).

I think that Donnie is referring to another segment in which you
see another jet flying at about the same elevation to the left
and forward from the jet shooting the film.  I didn't notice the
head movement that is mentioned, but I think that's the only
segment that would fit his description.  In this sequence, there
is a small "object" that appears to move parallel with the jet
and then descents into a cloud.  As it descends, you can see its
shadow on the clouds below move toward it and merge with it as
it enters the cloud bank.  This is impressive, but certainly can
be duplicated by a serious hoaxer.

This segment is most interesting, but if the "debris" segment is
proven to be a hoax then this part of the program is highly
suspect as well.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: A Simple Quote

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:30:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:55:45 -0400
Subject: Re: A Simple Quote


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 19:54:42 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>Subject: A Simple Quote

>Dear credulous individuals:

>Here is a qoutation from none other that Bertrand Russel. His
>clear statements remain his, and most definitely not mine.

>-----

>"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the
>absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with
>bad ones."

>Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), British philosopher,
>mathematician. Unpopular Essays, "An Outline of Intellectual
>Rubbish" (1950).

>-----

>I wish I had said that first!   -LH


Larry,

Please comment the following quote:

"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the
absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with
bad ones."

>From Bertrand Russell in his "An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish"
>(1950).

Minimum length of the work: 8 pages (typed), in which you will
try to clarify what the renowned philosopher truly meant. As
usual, we are not interested in your opinion; you will thus
support each and every assertion you will make with quotes from
other renowned philosophers. Of course, pro and con opinions
are essential to enlighten the matter.

This counts for 60% of the session. Deadline: 16:00 on December
the 20th.

Those were the bad days.

<VBG>

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    UFO Formations Seen SSW of Nowra, OZ

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:59:07 +1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:42:53 -0400
Subject: UFO Formations Seen SSW of Nowra, OZ

Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au
*******************************************

Hi Everyone

Fifteen objects in changing formations seen SSW of Nowra last
night (12 oct 98).

All heading South at first, range from 5km going away to 15-20km,
then returning and hovering and performing "ballet like"
manuevers.

Total observed time around 30 minutes from 11pm to 11.30. Objects
seen through binocs were "bell shaped with steady light on top
and fluctuating coloured lights around the bottom rim. All seemed
to be translucent".

Description reminds me of the photos from Gulf Breeze.

Source: Brad Mildern bradm@fastrac.net.au

Regards Diane Harrisson






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                        Re: Bell: And So It Begins...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:38:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:21:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Bell: And So It Begins...


In a message dated 10/13/98 2:06:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
updates@globalserve.net writes:

> From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

>  Source:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg19975.shtml

>  IUFO Mailing List

>  From: Keith Woodard
>  Subject: IUFO: The Quittening
>  Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:17 -0700

>  -> IUFO Mailing List

>  There are some interesting comments about this on
>  alt.fan.art-bell, where they're calling it "The Quittening." I
>  can't really repost them here because this is a family-oriented
>  list. However, here are a few excerpts:

>  ***************** Begin copy text ******************

>  >man I just heard this. think it has anything to do with Jacor
>  >being taken over.

>  <snip>

>  >what was the cosmic stuff about his family and we;ll kno when
>  >the time is right?
>
>  Some time ago, Art came on the air really angry and shaken. He
>  started asking for a witch to call in - not one of them nice
>  wiccans, he wanted an evil witch, someone he could pay to cast a
>  spell on someone. Art was quite clear that he wanted to get
>  revenge on someone, but he wouldn't say what it was about. This
>  went on for a while. Dannion Brinkley talked to him on the air,
>  it became apparent that Art was planning to kill somebody.
>  Dannion went to his house to talk him out of it.

>  ***************** End copy text ******************

<snip>

Oh my.  This appears to be turning into the land of the
fee and home of the knaves.

Maybe those black helicopter conspiracists guys have
something after all.

Then again, this is the "silly season" for most of us, it
being the end of a millenium.

Jim Mortellaro






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                            Re: Art Bell 'Quits'

From: gt mccoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:04:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:27:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Art Bell 'Quits'


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
To: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 8:04 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: Art Bell 'Quits'


>From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

>Source: http://artbell.com/artquits.html

>The Art Bell Website

>Art Quits

>On October 13th, at 2:55 AM, Art announced to his listening
>audience, he is quitting his talk radio show. The full
>transcript of Art's announcement is below. The web site will
>stay operational for as long as possible and may be the web site
>for what ever replacement forum comes along. I will keep you
>informed of any changes and will update the site with any new
>information. We'll all have to wait and see what Jacor/Premier
>Networks decides to do. (Good thing I didn't quit the day job!)

I wonder if this isn't some publicty stunt, I haven't forgiven
Art for his Hale-Bopp fiasco (and the possible enabling of the
"Heavens Gate" suicides).

However, if his family _is_ in real trouble I wish him well. No
one deserves trouble or fear, even if you disagree with them.

GT
McCoy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:34:55 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:07:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Roswell Statements

>I don't want to open up the can of worms of Roswell debates, but
>aside from the witnesses who have been discredited I have not
>seen any credible evidence that would make me want to put higher
>ranking officer statements (Gen.Exon and Gen. Dubose, two among
>many) into question.

>I have a tape of Kevin Randle's interview with General Exon
>where he does describe flying over the Brazel crashsite and then
>over a second site where he saw the crashed craft with several
>little bodies laid out on the ground.

<snip>

Exon did not see bodies on the ground; he claimed to have flown
over the two crash sites _later_, long after any material had
been recovered. He also testified to a gouge in the ground, which
is contradicted by other witnesses. His testimony about bodies
which were allegedly stored at Wright-Pat and then later moved is
entirely secondhand. See Randle/Schmitt, The Truth About the UFO
Crash at Roswell, pp. 61-65.

<snip>

>Thanks for listening,
>Josh Goldstein


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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                        Re: Bell: And So It Begins...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:06:53 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:14:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Bell: And So It Begins...

>From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

>Source: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg19975.shtml

>IUFO Mailing List

>From: Keith Woodard
>Subject: IUFO: The Quittening
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:17 -0700

<snip>

My own guess is that Art Bell has made way, way too much money
and wants to start keeping normal hours. Of course he'll still
have to stay up late to spend it all, but that shouldn't be any
problem, not with Las Vegas just down the road.

Meanwhile, maybe Linda Moulton Howe can step in to take up the
slack.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                                Re: High Heat

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:54:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:13:06 -0400
Subject: Re: High Heat


>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>Subject: High Heat
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:13:16 +0200

>Reports recently issued by bio-physicist, W.C. Levengood,
>have provided tantalizing scientific evidence which may
>link three of the greatest mysteries of modern times. It
>appears that many animal mutilation sites, crop circles and
>UFO landing traces have at least one common characteristic:
>"the evidence of high heat apparently originating in the
>microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum."

If Dr. Levengood would demonstrate that he is able by his
methods (in a double blind test) to successfully distinguish
between known hoaxed circles and those where hoaxing has not
been proven, the rest of this article would be far more
convincing.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:11:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

I've pretty much stayed out of this, since much of it has been
no higher than mudslinging. But now that we're getting to some
meaty issues, I think it's worth stepping in.

>It is not a question of belief. It is a question of whether
>ufology will ever be mature enough of a discipline to take
>responsibility for its own or not. As long as the prevalent
>attitude and state of mind within ufology is to find demons,
>dead or alive, to blame for their present status, ufology will
>never be able to grow into a mature discipline.

First of all, maturity has not been attained in ufology, and we
cannot even pretend that it has. We have a miniscule number of
journals, even fewer peer-reviewed journals, and little or
nothing exists in the way of influence over the media by
responsible analysts and investigators. If anything, the
irresponsible have more leverage, and much as we might desire
otherwise, this is not easily changed.

Without an infrastructure, we cannot even pretend that there is
such a thing as a mechanism for enforcing any sanction on the
fringe claimants.

After all, the process Ed refers to occurs in fields such as
physics through denial of publication by journals and
conferences. Fringe personalities in physics and other sciences
don't get to the podium because peer review prevents it, and the
respect accorded to peer-reviewed fora is so high that most
media won't touch those who can't or won't run that gauntlet.

But where the subject of UFOs is concerned, the media consider
it simply to be entertainment, and such standards do not apply.
Changing that mindset, without money or infrastructure, is
impossible. But the infrastructure must come first.
Unfortunately, it also comes slowly.

Beyond that, I have to say that there has been plenty of
criticism here and elsewhere over specific individuals or the
handling of specific cases. Perhaps not as much of this surfaces
in the popular journals (IUR and MUFONJ) but those journals have
a tightrope to walk between presenting credible UFO related
material in a positive light, and showing the appropriate
internal critiques of theories and investigations. In general,
they seem to be doing a good job. The various "UFO", "alien" and
"paranormal" magazines also occasionally feature critical
articles (UFO Magazine recently featured an article critical of
the Face On Mars theorists, for instance). How much more can we
expect under current conditions?

Now let's move on to the idea of "demons to blame".

There can be no question among reasonable people that ufology
has seen several turning points in its relation to science, and
that those have been almost uniformly negative.

1) Rejection of the 'Estimate'.
2) Project Sign becomes Project Grudge
3) Robertson Panel recommends official debunking
4) Project Blue Book follows recommendations
5) Condon provides negative evaluations of scientific relevance
of ufology, despite contradictions between conclusion, project
output, and individual project member opinions, this conclusion
is endorsed by the National Science Foundation and accepted by
the Air Force.

It has been well documented that most non-US governments
followed the lead of the US both in deciding if an inquiry was
appropriate and in terms of the methodology selected. Thus, the
AF policy of debunking, initiated in response to the Robertson
panel, had far-reaching effects beyond the US.

In terms of good relations between ufology and individual
scientists, one needs only look at Menzel and Condon, two
extremely prominent and influential scientists who were
adamantly anti-UFO, going so far as to distort or misrepresent
both the data and the results of research. These men between
them had more effect on the availability of funding and
scientists to pursue the UFO phenomenon than anything done by
CSICOP.

In his capacity with Aviation Week, Klass also had
significant influence over whether good UFO related work
would recieve any notice in the aviation press. Obviously, he
did not use that influence to help.

I think it is fair to say that these events and persons had a
negative effect on the development of a science of ufology.
Further, the rejection of ufology did not stem from a lack of
proof or the poverty of good work in the field. The stances of
these people and organizations were either driven by political /
security concerns, or were the results of prejudged positions on
the probability of unusual phenomena. If given the opportunity
to examine the data, people like Condon turned away from it as
fast as possible - hardly a scientific attitude.

So pointing out these events and persons as having a determined
and negative effect on the scientific status of ufology is
hardly a search for "demons", or an attempt to avoid
responsibility.

Not everyone interested in UFOs is suited to doing good science.
Many are attracted by its sensational nature or its
entertainment value. Scientists, by their inclinations, tend to
avoid sensational fields. The risks are very high in those
areas, and the possibility for career payoff is very small. With
major government agencies and prominent scientists aggressively
working to poison the well, it can hardly be imagined that
established scientific talent will be attracted to this field.
Therefore the serious work is left to amateurs and part timers,
and progress is necessarily slow. Once again, this is just a
simple consequence, not a search for "demons" or an attempt to
avoid responsibility.

>Anecdotal stories are absolutely worthless in the context of
>scientific proof. They are important in the right context of
>supporting evidence if ufology ever is able to show linkage
>between allegedly supporting data points. A paper by a colleaque
>of Sagan, Phillip Morrison in Sagan's and Page's UFOs: A
>SCIENTIFIC DEBATE, "The Nature of Scientific Evidence: A
>Summary" addresses this issue and outlines why ufological
>evidence has always fallen short of the standard of scientific
>proof, but on the positive side it outlines what ufology needs
>to do to strenghten their contentions - but almost thirty years
>later, ufology still hasn't listened.

I have addressed the applicability of scientific methods to UFOs
and to anecdotal evidence in a number of writings. The short
summary is that it is not data which must be scientific, it is
the method of dealing with that data which is or is not
scientific. It is perfectly possible to deal with anecdotal data
in a variety of contexts, to form and validate hypotheses on
that data, and so forth - in other words, to treat it
scientifically.

Furthermore, there are a variety of valid sciences which operate
outside the laboratory context, and there are also sciences
which operate on transient or uncontrollable data (such as
economics, sociology, and studies of wild animal behavior).
There are other sciences where the actual subject of the science
is not experimentally reproducable at will or even at all - such
as cosmology, some areas of astronomy, and some areas of
geology. The principles and methods derived from such sciences
can certainly be applied with positve effect to ufology.


>Let me see. Critical analysis, discernment, logic, strict
>interpretation of data, linkage and independent verification are
>all weapons used by Phil Klass and his ilk.

I hope this isn't an attempt to seriously characterize debunker
methodology. It doesn't take much to dispose of such contentions
about their explanations. Just take Klass' stance on the Coyne
case or Menzel on the Gill case, or Kottmeyer on Exeter as
examples.

>Ufology needs to come up with
>compelling evidence to support its extraordinary claims. All is
>really needed is one case that stands up to critical analysis,
>discernment, logic, linkage of data and independent
>verification. Only ONE CASE!

Levelland
Socorro
The RB-47 case
Bentwaters / Lakenheath
Exeter

Do we need more? They exist. Let's not pretend they don't.

Let's also look at the "extraordinary claim" claim.

Which is more extraordinary:

1) Solid metallic and / or luminous objects, often structured
and animated, which affect instruments (radar, magnetic,
radiation) and the environment (ground traces, medical effects,
etc) are reported by a demographically normal sample of the
population (with a skew towards aviators and technical personnel
in appropriate categories of sightings) and responsible persons
who take risks with no apparent benefit to report such phenomena
to police, government, and scientific authority; these reports
are of a consistent, objectively existent phenomenon.

2) Solid metallic and / or luminous objects, often structured
and animated, which affect instruments (radar, magnetic,
radiation) and the environment (ground traces, medical effects,
etc) are reported by a demographically normal sample of the
population (with a skew towards aviators and technical personnel
in appropriate categories of sightings) and responsible persons
who take risks with no apparent benefit to report such phenomena
to police, government, and scientific authority; these reports
are no more than misperceptions of a wide variety of normal
natural phenomena caused by excitability, social influences, and
simple silliness.

Personally, and scientifically, I find (2) to be lacking. 50
years of attempts to prove it have failed, and the more narrowly
the sightings were selected to provide less opportunity for
misperception, the higher the percentage of unknowns (AF
vs. Condon, for instance).

>For fifty years now, the above analysis of the situation seems
>to be the prevalent analysis. Greg, I am sorry to say that I
>suspect that yours is the prevalent opinion in the circles of
>ufological wisdom much to the consternation for any hope that
>ufology will ever mature.

It is certainly appropriate to want to see better work in
ufology.

Yes, there is much more that can be done. Even relatively simple
quantitative estimates can be obtained from witness accounts,
and that seems to be escaping us day after day as we simply
accumulate data but never use it.

But I think there are a lot better things to be doing than
apportioning the blame or denying history.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 13 Oct 1998 17:48:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:39:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Roswell Statements

<snippity doo da>

>It certainly wasn't a disinformation campaign
>for the government, as the content of their interviews was just
>what the USAF does not want the people to beleive regarding
>Roswell.

But they _do_ want us to believe!

I am sure this has been addressed by the List before but, given
that we know UFOs have been used as cover stories for other
activitites by our (and other) government agencies (military and
intelligence) before, is it not possible that Roswell WAS
disinformation? Would it not be in the military's best interest
to convince the world that WE, the mighty US of A, had flying
saucer technology? Was the OSI (or whichever intelligence
agencies existed then) ignorant of this possibility for
exploitation of information and belief after having dealt with
Foo Fighters and Ghost Rockets. The standard assertions that the
ALLIES thought these were the AXIS' and the AXIS thought they
were the ALLIES' supports the contention that we FEARED the
other side might have much more advanced flying devices.

Considering the many connections among early era ufo researchers
and saucer groups to psychological warfare this seems like an
idea which would have been considered. It is in a military's
best interest to convince its enemies that you have more
powerful technology at your disposal than they do.

Does anyone know whether or not the principles involved in
Roswell had backgrounds in psychological warfare?

For an imaginative speculation on this idea I suggest you read
Jacques Vallee's fictional 'Fast Walker' and his non-fiction
'Messenger's of Deception'.

SMiles
mailto:elfis@ccsi.com
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                        MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:52:26 -0400
Subject: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


Hello List,

At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
using an "autopen" or "multiple machine." It consisted of 4 pens
driven by a fifth master pen which the signer held, all attached
to a long board of some sort upon which his secretary would have
papers to sign all laid out. The 4 slave pens were linked
through a mechanism (like a series of parallelograms I suppose)
so that they'd reproduce the motions of the lowermost master
pen. Each pen was separated horizontally from the others by
several inches, to allow space for the different letters and
memos. Thus, except for minor slop in the mechanical linkages,
the other four signatures would be identical to the master
signature except perhaps also in intensity of the ink trace.

They learned that this multi-pen apparatus had followed Truman
to the White House. So it's not at all implausible that during
hectic periods of his presidency, Truman decided to save a few
minutes of time by using the multi-pen. In fact, I think this is
more plausible than that a clever hoaxster in everything else
wouldn't know enough to be aware that no two signatures are
supposed to be identical.

A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
nearly identical signature. They need to be fairly close to the
same date for this to be a valid explanation. Perhaps someone
can fill me in on that.

As time permits Bob and Ryan are interested in examining many
other Truman signatures of the appropriate time period in case a
third or fourth or even fifth of the same identical appearance
can be found. And in case two or more identical Truman
signatures different from this other one can be found, that
would at least indicate that he had used the multi-pen apparatus
while in
office.

  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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                              Re: People Links

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:20:30 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:56:48 -0400
Subject: Re: People Links


>From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us
>Subject: People Links: SMiles Lewis
>To: Errol Bruce-Knapp <updates@globalserve.net

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com
>>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 19:06:23 PDT
>>Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:54:31 -0400
>>Subject: Not 'Links' But People Facts

>mailto:elfis@ccsi.com>>http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin>>
>Howdy UFO UpDates Listers,>>
>This message is mostly for Leanne and those who liked her idea
>of People Links.

>I am a newbie lister of a few months. I've been webbing for
>about 4 or 5 years. I've still never used Chat or NewsGroups but
>have enjoyed the wheat/marrow of this list despite its abundance
>of chaf/grisle. (Ratio consistent with 80-90% of UFO reports
>actually being IFOs [Irrational Fear & Fury of others'
>Observations & Opinions])

<snip>

>Thanx SMiles (but keeping it to one screen would suffice),


As promised - I'll show you mine:

Leanne Martin 43 Citizen of Oz (where women glow and men thunder!)
C/o Level 1 Tower 1, Lawson Square
Redfern, New South Wales, 2016
Australia
Phone (61) (2) 9319 8217 (work - goes to mobile if unattended)

Email: leanne_martin@hotmail.com (no web page as yet)

Direct interest in list: Self information and hoping to
contribute to sensible, logical and edifying debate. UFO
discussion newby otherwise seeking a reason to believe i.e.
undeniable proof.

Area of expertise: Computer hardware engineer, incurable
observer, 'supremely high above average I.Q.'(points not
divulged to me)wanting to put it to good use. [I guess it just
means I am good at I.Q. tests] Like playing Devil's Advocate to
get the best out of protagonists.

Employed (for a 2nd time) by a US multinational computer
company. As far as I have been informed said company is not a
security/military supplier.

Affilliations? None of any conflict that I am aware.

Pertinent comments and reliability as guaged by the List? Well,
that's up to you . . .

Anyone else?

Regards,
Leanne.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

              Spectacular New Pictures Of Mars, Jupiter And Its

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:05:53 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:13:38 -0400
Subject: Spectacular New Pictures Of Mars, Jupiter And Its


Source: Astronomy Now

Stig

*******

ASTRONOMY NOW NEWSALERT: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 @ 1720 UT
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.astronomynow.com


STUNNING NEW VIEWS OF THE RED PLANET
------------------------------------
NASA's Mars Global Surveyor has captured some spectacular new views of
Olympus Mons, the largest volcano in the solar system, and a system of
giant channels on the red planet known as Kasei Vallis.

  FULL STORY: http://www.astronomynow.com/breaking/981013mgs/index.html


THIS WEEK ON GALILEO
--------------------
The sole task this week for NASA's Galileo probe is to process and
transmit to Earth science images stored on the spacecraft's onboard
tape recorder.

  FULL STORY:
http://www.astronomynow.com/breaking/981012galileoweek.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                              Re: People Links

From: Jason Martell <jason@mars-earth.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:21:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:11:49 -0400
Subject: Re: People Links

Here is a complete list of all the sites I am currently running.
Which are the officail site for:

1) Dr. Roger Leir
2) Derrel Sims
3) Steve Neill
4) Jason Martell

-----------------------

Jason Martell - Webmaster
http://mars-earth.com>Mars-Earth.com

Steve Neill
http://alienfx.com>AlienFX.com

Dr. Roger Leir & Derrel Sims
http://firstevidence.org>FIRSTevidence.org

Jason Martell (site 2)
http://xfacts.com>Xfacts.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 20:32:55 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:25:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

>>>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:33:09 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>First things first. Inspite of Jerome Clark's continued
>demonization of Robert Todd, Todd is on record on this mailing
>list disavowing himself from my commentaries. He has stated
>previously that he has never ever cared if his name has appeared
>in any of his books at any time. But, it apparantly tickles
>Jerome Clark's ego to continue attributing my rhetoric to Robert
>Todd and vice-a-versa.

Odd that one of ufology's resident demonologists, Ed "Never Had
a Good Day" Stewart, should be so obsessed with what's in my
encyclopedia. I do appreciate his interest, however.

. I am afraid all it does is it provides continuous
>evidence of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty and contrived
>pettyness.

It's spelled "pettiness," dude. And I think you mean
"continual." Incidentally, what exactly _is_ "contrived
pettyness [sic]"?

>>I don't claim ultimate wisdom in these matters, so again, if Ed
>>disagrees, rather than rant about it he ought to write his own
>>history showing why he believes Todd to be a towering figure.

>I don't consider Robert Todd to be a 'towering figure'.

I agree -- though in the annals of sheer rudeness in ufological
discourse, I think you would agree, he has certainly made his
mark.

>His main contribution has been the de-mystification of the UFO
>problem.

Any good ufologist has contributed to the "demystification of
the UFO problem." If I were to list the honor roll of ufologists
who have worked hard to do that, it would be a long one indeed.

His intentions, by my understanding, were never to
>debunk the subject, but to tackle a subject he originally found
>to be intriguing. Unfortunately, the evidence was not there to
>support the many government conspiracy models the ET crowd needs
>to help pump-up their continuing belief system.

Since I have written repeatedly against conspiracy theories, I
assume our friend is not referring to me here. And knowing how
emotional Todd is, I have never felt much confidence in the
conclusions he comes to. After all, since he has repeatedly
accused me of things that are not even remotely true, why should
I trust him when he is writing on something I know less about
than I do about myself? Todd has a _huge_ credibility problem
with me, and no doubt with anybody else whom he has unfairly,
and imaginatively, vilified.

>And there lies
>the real reason why his contributions have been ignored. He is
>in good company. Hendry is ignored. Jeffries has been ostracized
>for his position. Todd has been written out of the UFO
>Encyclopedia because Jerome Clark claims he can't think of any
>significant contribution. (GRIN)

Write your own encyclopedia, my friend, as I said. Don't waste
time vilifying your betters on the internet. Write a good
encyclopedia and prove to us that you are more than just some
supremely unpleasant soul whose imagination is as wild as his
temper is foul and his spirit is mean.

I don't know who "Jeffries" is. Never heard of him. There is a
guy named Kent Jeffrey, who's a master of civility and a
valuable member of the UFO community, whom I have praised both
on this list and in print, and with whom I am on excellent
terms. I am sure you are not referring to him, knowing of your
disdain for elementary civility.

Hendry has hardly been ignored, though it's hard to keep paying
attention to somebody who left the field around 1982. When I was
working at Fate, I saw to it that his articles were published
therein, and I wrote an article about him for Saga's UFO Report,
and I discuss his contributions in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd
Ed., along with his reasons for leaving the field, not to
mention the reasons for his detestation of the debunkers whom Ed
holds in inexplicably high regard (see pp. 481-83).

The man who truly has been forgotten in this field is James
McDonald. Only a few of us seem to have any appreciation of his
extraordinary contribution to scientific UFO research.
Apparently, sadly, our friend Ed's idea of a scientific UFO
researcher is Philip J. Klass or a Robert G. Todd. My idea of a
ufological hero is McDonald, who at no time, one might add, ever
lowered himself to engage in ranting, raving, and name-calling
(RRNC hereafter).

>>>That is as low as an
>>>individual can commit themselves.

>>Don't you mean "as low as an individual can commit _himself_?"
>>You mean as low as Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson, Charlie
>>Starkweather, Vlad the Impaler? History will record that Jerome
>>Clark, who went as low as an individual could commit himself,
>>was one of the vilest villains of the 20th Century, identified
>>as such by no less than that eminent demonologist Ed Stewart.

>And Jerome Clark continues his intellectual dishonesty creating
>allegations that originated in his own head and attributing them
>to me. Nowhere, at any time have I ever associated him with any
>of the characters above.

Well, Ed guy, you say I had taken myself, with your
characteristic lack of grammar, "as low as an individual can
commit themselves [sic]." I think most of us would regard
somebody like a Stalin or a Saddam Hussein or a Hitler or a Pol
Pot or whomever as somebody who has behaved "as low as an
individual can commit" himself. It's your hyperbole, dude, and
none of my own. If you're going to point a finger, direct it
your way.

>>Apparently Ed is so desperate for ammunition against me, since
>>little or none seems to exist in the real world, that he's
>>manufactured a statement I never made.

Well said, Jerry. Allow me to repeat myself: Ed is desperate for
ammunition. He makes stuff up all the time.

Unless, of course, as more and more occurs to me, Ed's talking
about _another_ Jerry Clark who exists, I gather, in some
parallel universe.

>Anybody interested in what is fabricated and by who, has the
>archival record to guide them. One of the reasons I always use
>quotes when attributing a statement to some else, is so that
>there is no question of my integrity.

Hoo boy. If there is, at least in your mind, no question of your
integrity, why do you keep having to make up stuff about me? To
make yourself feel important?

>>I believe I've already answered that. Those of you looking for a
>>balanced, rational discussion of ufology's problems re science
>>are, I'm afraid, not going to find them in our friend Ed
>>Stewart's frenzied and tedious polemics.

>No, It hasn't been answered. If ufology had ever taken any
>responsibility for its own sorry state, I wouldn't be here
>bringing it up.

Ufology certainly has its problems, as do ufology's would-be
debunkers, and I have written at length on both subjects, as
have other critics and commentators considerably more rational
and lucid than Ed has shown himself to be.  Ed, however, has
proved himself a past master at such things, all the while --
hilariously -- telling the _rest_ of us that we're the problem
with ufology!

It is entirely possible, of course, that Ed thinks science
conducts itself via RRNC and that there's too little of it in
ufology. Maybe that's his _real_ complaint.

>What I don't understand is how a mentally normal person can be
>simultaneously intellectually dishonest and believe their own
>rhetoric?

_His_ own rhetoric, Ed, not "their."

>We know from the archival record of this thread that
>your rhetoric is intellectually dishonest. That leaves two
>choices. Either you do not believe your own rhetoric, or you are
>not normal? I think you believe your own rhetoric as dishonest
>as the archival record shows it to be.

You're starting to RRNC, Eddie boy. And now you add mental
abnormality to intellectual dishonesty and all those other nasty
charges. Ever heard of the psychological phenomenon known as
projection, Ed?

>>(Incidentally: Ed never did answer my challenge to him to
>>provide evidence that Oberg and other debunkers have ever --

>>even once -- tried to clean their own house.)

>Who really gives a hoot what skeptics or debunkers do in their
>own house?

Obviously not Eddie Boy. Of course house-cleaning is what
science, about which our demonologist friend evidently knows
little, is about. For all their faults, ufologists do it.
Whatever their other virtues (if any), UFO debunkers don't.

>That is not an issue or concern to the state of ufology.

Of course it is. If you knew anything about how debate and
research are conducted (a hint here, guy: they don't involve
RRNC), you would know the crucial role internal review and
criticism play in truth-seeking. As one who traffics in nasty
fiction, you don't care much, I gather, about truth-seeking.

>It reverts back to whether ufology has ever taken
>responsibility for its own state of being? It is obvious that
>Jerome Clark is not willing to take that responsibility and
>continues to point a finger as if that relieves or enhances
>ufology in the eyes of the world.

Since, as I've said, I've written as much critical material on
ufology's problems (and done so without resorting to RRNC) as
anybody, Demonologist Stewart apparently has me confused with
somebody in a parallel universe.

>What is hilarious is that I have never called you a charlatan.
>But your intellectual dishonesty compels you to attribute that
>statement to me. I suspect that you consider it fashionable to
>come across as a 'true-believer' on this mailing list, but I
>have seen you shuffle many times in the past over the decades so
>I strongly suspect that whether you are a true-believer or not
>is temporal in nature. What has been established here is your
>continuous intellectual dishonesty.

Let's see. I have no integrity or honesty, as you have stated
over and over again, and I am _not_ a charlatan? But how could I
have no integrity or honesty and _not_ be a charlatan? Get your
slurs straight, guy. You're adding incoherence to RRNC.


>>An excellent paper on the strong involvement of scientists in
>>the UFO controversy, especially in the 1970s, is Steven J.
>>Dick's "Edward U. Condon, UFOs, and the Many Cultures of
>>Science," read at the History of Science Meeting in Washington,
>>D.C., on December 28, 1992.

>I haven't read this paper, so I can't address it. I will track
>it down and read it. I am familiar with Dick and his role as a
>SETI historian.

Let me provide a specific quote:

The late 1960s and 1970s were, according to Prof. Dick, "the
peak of scientific open-mindedness to the UFO phenomenon as
extraterrestrial or any other hypothesis." Anyone who knows more
about UFO history than Ed does will recognize the truth of this
statement. For specifics, go to my UFO Encyclopedia and follow
the story from there through the various bibliographical
citations.

>>He [Bullard] is also a regular contributor to IUR (which, as
>>some of you know, I edit) and the Journal of UFO Studies,
>>which CUFOS publishes. Among his papers are some powerful
>>debunkings of Ed's intellectual mentor Klass and CSICOP,

>A continuous weakness of ufological wisdom is the introduction
>of illogical fallacies into their arguments.

Ever heard of a non sequitur, Ed? Read my paragraph above and
yours following it for one especially amusing example.

Eddie Bullard, I might add, is a master at pointing out
"illogical fallacies" in the arguments of the debunkers whom Ed
keeps citing and criticism of whom drives him to ever greater
depths of vituperative polemic. Bullard also is critical of
unsupported pro-abduction and other pro-UFO claims -- in the
fashion of one of those ufologists who care about cleaning
house.

>It is not enough
>for Jerome Clark to state a truism (i.e. Bullard's papers
>include debunkings of CSICOP and Klass), but apparently he has
>found it necessary to create a dishonest construction that they
>are my intellectual mentors.

They aren't?. Then exactly, since you cite them as if pinnacles
of wisdom repeatedly and can't bear to hear any criticism of
them, just exactly what _is_ your quarrel with them? If you
think they are contributing nothing useful to UFO investigation,
then aren't they part of the problem? Or is it only one-sided
RRNC that applies here?

>Allegedly, this makes the statement
>somewhat stronger. I would have thought that the mention of the
>truism by itself would be the stronger statement to make. As
>anybody ever noticed how often Klass and CSICOP are attacked in
>Jerome Clark's commentary? Are they that powerful that their
>image needs to be tarnished continuously?

I think you mean "continually." And the answer to that question
is yes, as Ed would know if he read anything more than UFO
literature. Klass gets cited all over the place, in some of the
leading scientific and intellectual journals in the land, as the
guy who spoke the final word on the UFO heresy. See, for
example, Frederick Crews's citation of Klass's work in a
UFO-bashing New York Review of Books essay not long ago. (The
New York Review, Ed, is widely considered the leading
intellectual and cultural journal published in the United
States.) Klass's work is also cited approvingly in books by all
sorts of astronomers, not the least of them Carl Sagan. Yeah,
Klass and CSICOP are extremely powerful. One doesn't know
whether to be saddened or amused at Ed's naivete and
provincialism here.

>>I personally find it distressing that so much Klass polemic
>>seeks to demonize those who disagree with him (Klass even, in
>>one particularly notorious instance, tried to get James McDonald
>>into legal trouble), but I can understand why Ed has no problem
>>whatever with this approach.

>Another example above of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty
>and addiction to illogical fallacies.

Yes, my "intellectual dishonesty and addiction to illogical
fallacies" are widely mentioned by ... well ... let's see here,
ummm. ... Well, there's Demonologist Stewart, of course, and Bob
Todd has called me just about every nasty name you can imagine,
but beyond that ... gee ... I'm kind of at a loss here, guy.
Maybe you could cite some reviews of, say, The UFO Encyclopedia
where somebody besides you and Todd calls me those nasty names.
I await specifics, as opposed to more RRNC. Hey, let's take the
"maybe" out of it, dude. Let's call this a challenge, shall we?

Meantime, interested readers can turn to reviews in recent
issues of Fortean Times, Journal of Scientific Exploration, and
UFO Magazine to see what nondemonologists have to say about my
work.

>>It is hilarious, however, that
>>while Ed is accusing others of bad science, he is praising and
>>quoting Klass as a great authority.

>Further example of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty. How
>he gets the above from my statement that we sat together for
>five hours with Eddie Bullard, Richard Heiden, James Moseley and
>Robert Girard and enjoyed each others company is simply
>unbelieveable? Yet, Jerome Clark apparently feels compelled to
>make these absurd interpolations even though the archival record
>is showing them to be false. I keep bringing up these examples
>of his intellectual dishonesty up because Jerome Clark is
>allegedly a recognized UFO historian. Somebody who you would
>alledgedly trust to write books that would capture truth,
>resource books for future generations. If Jerome Clark can't
>keep his arguments close to the truth in an ongoing mailing list
>discussion, what chance is there that his encyclopedia books
>reflect true history?

The word is "allegedly," Ed. And stop the RRNR, if you can. It
may be too late.

>>For a treatment of the relationship of Hendry and Klass, see my
>>"Phil Klass vs. the `UFO Promoters'" (Fate, February 1981) and
>>The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp. 482-83 and 855. (Thanks for
>>giving me an excuse for another plug, Ed.)

>Why don't you explain to the readers why Hendry left the field
>of ufology in such total disgust? Never to come back


As usual, Ed's self-serving fantasy. For the real reasons, see
p. 483 of my Encyclopedia. In Ed's demon-haunted world, of
course, nobody ever moves on simply because he wants to pursue
other interests. Allan felt he had gone as far as he could in
ufology, and he also suffered a period of painful personal
problems of the sort many of us have gone through at one time or
another. His principal interest was always science, in any case,
and specifically science education, and later he developed an
interest in film and theater. We stayed on cordial terms for
years, finally falling out of contact around 1990. At no time
did Allan tell me that he was disgusted with ufology. In fact,
in our occasional conversations or correspondence, he'd ask me
what was happening in the field. (We last spent significant
personal time together in, if memory serves, 1988, when he
visited me, my then-fiance, and my children.) I'd tell him what
was going on, and he'd shake his head and say he wished he could
have figured out a way to make a further contribution.

When I saw Marge Christensen in Tucson in August 1997, I asked
her if she'd seen Allan. She said something to the effect that
she'd run into him once; he'd grown out his hair, she said, and
was hanging out with an artsy crowd. She said nothing about
Hendry's expressing utter disgust with ufology. In fact, I don't
recall her even saying they'd had a conversation of any sort.

The UFO Handbook is one of a number of excellent books in the
literature. Like the others, it has much to tell us but is not
the final word, and it is not perfect. (One great tragedy, of
course, is that McDonald did not live long enough to write his
own book.) The final word has yet to be written and likely won't
see print in a long time. In the meantime, demonological
approaches such as Stewart favors get us nowhere. The Sturrock
panel's conclusions show us what the best ufology, and the best
ufologists, can accomplish, and they give us some reason for
optimism about
future prospects.

>>. Now, take a couple of aspirins and lie down before you have a
>>coronary, my friend.

>Your sentiments are tacky at best. Everyone that knows me
>personally is aware that I suffered a major stroke last
>February.

I am genuinely sorry to hear that, Ed. I was referring to your
mental state, which appears in a state of constant agitation,
and not to your physical health, about which I knew nothing (as
you in effect concede, even while trying to make me look
indifferent or insensitive to it -- the Stewart practice of
always trying to have it both, or all, ways). As one who feels
compassion for his fellow human beings, however disagreeable
some may be, I wish you improved health and a long life. And,
may I add, the happier disposition that ordinarily comes with
improved health.

In the meantime, however: if you want to be treated with kid
gloves, don't box with the heavyweights.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:42:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>Mr Stuart, you can't possibly believe that the aforementioned
>>debunkers aren't relevant to your discussion

>It is not a question of belief. It is a question of whether
>ufology will ever be mature enough of a discipline to take
>responsibility for its own or not. As long as the prevalent
>attitude and state of mind within ufology is to find demons,
>dead or alive, to blame for their present status, ufology will
>never be able to grow into a mature discipline.

Uh, does that mean that you do support or don't support your own
statement that debunkers aren't part of the problem? You are
dancing around my question. Are you a politician? I gave you a
possible reason to account for at least PART of ufology's
troubles, which I daresay are not as extensive as you suggest. I
certainly did not imply that ufologists blame all their
difficulties on debunkers. You carry statements and ideas to
extremes to add emphasis to an otherwise weak point.

>I don't really know where the basis of your critique is coming
>from. On one hand Klass has been critisized for not even
>speaking to witnesses and Sagan for not investigating UFO cases.
>In Klass's Skeptics UFO Newsletter he seldoms address witnesses
>unless they have already reached public status usually by having
>written a book or having appeared and made statements in a mass
>media like a TV show. Critiquers like to have it both ways at
>their convenience, but it makes for faulty logic.

The basis of my critique comes from the dislike I suddenly
developed for Carl's attitude toward honest people seeking an
explanation for something unusual they've seen. Would you like
to be told that an amazing experience you've had was
"worthless"? Like you, he lumped every person on the planet with
an interest in UFOs into a single category, at least toward the
end of his life. Frankly, I found his assumptions disgusting and
most unbecoming of a scientist. As for the rest of your
paragraph, I do know that one probably shouldn't offer "one
hand" without offering the other somewhere in the thought train.
It leaves the reader mentally hanging. Also, is "critiquers" a
word? Shouldn't it be critics? Anyway, I'm not sure what point
you were trying to make. The above-mentioned complaints against
Phil and Carl are (and were) legitimate ones.

>>Case in point: Mr. Sagan (who by now probably believes
>>wholeheartedly in the Devil) loved to pontificate about the ever
>>present human need to believe in the supernatural, hence UFOs
>>are the modern day equivalent to goblins and leprechauns and the
>>like. He referred to all UFO sightings as "nonsense", most of
>>he time not even bothering to revert to the old "misidentified
>>natural phenomena" line.

>Your perception of Sagan is not based on fact. Sagan was
>critical that aliens where sharing time and space with us and
>that there was any linkage between UFOs and alien cruisers.

Of course it's based on fact. I'm quoting the guy! Are
radar-visual or ground-trace cases "absolutely worthless" too?
Those aren't just anecdotal stories. So, why didn't he want to
look? Science demands an answer, and even if (by scientific
analysis) the circular, charred area of grass turns out to have
been produced by rabbits mating at high speed, at least the
effort was made, and I and most here would be satisfied by the
results. Science still wins. But when scientists refuse even to
examine, because they have preconcieved notions of what they may
find, then are they still scientists? That's when science loses.
BTW, the sarcastic burnt-circle cause given above was intended
as humor. Guess I shouldn't give debunkers ideas though.

>>Besides stretching his obvious
>>distrust for his fellow man to an absurd and unreasonable level,
>>he provided more than enough incentive for many people _not_ to
>>join ufology who otherwise might have proved invaluable, and
>>thus the field has not progressed to it's potential.

>Again, your perception of Sagan is not based on fact. It is true
>that he was not involved with the UFO community or involved in
>investigations of actual cases, but he helped ufology in many
>ways.

Listen. I must have watched "Cosmos" billions and billions of
times. I loved Carl Sagan and respected his work. That is until
he became bitter and began lashing out at the UFO community at
large, without ever referring to the relevant evidence
(Stanton's phrase). I wouldn't have minded if he could explain
the sightings as easily as he dismissed them. It's much easier
to say "You saw Venus" than it is to say "I don't know what that
disc-shaped object with blue lights around the perimiter
was...let's find out!".

I really don't care what his earlier work toward UFOs was. He
did a lot of damage in his latter years. Didn't you see the guy
on TV? Perhaps you weren't privy to to interviews he gave. If
you weren't, then you may be forgiven for not being aware of his
arrogance. If you were, then you turned a blind eye to it.

>1) Sagan advocated declassification of relevant UFO
>information from decades ago (Demon-Haunted World, pp. 89).

I read the book. It was as insulting as his TV interviews.
Sorry, but people don't see UFOs because they need to believe in
something. They see them because they are BBQing, driving home
from work, or piloting an airplane. Carl had his cause and
effect mixed up.

>Given the way the subject is treated by Phil Klass and his ilk,
>is it any wonder ufology is still struggling?

>>If only Phil Klass and his ilk would stop criticising, ufology
>>would move forward. Yup, that is taking responsibility for
>>ufology's woes.

Nope....again, I offered it as one possible reason, and it's a
valid one.

You remind me of my boss. You see, we have squirrels that build
nests along the eaves of our building. They frequently find ways
into the building, much to my and my co-worker's amusement.
They're just curious, or perhaps searching for food. Well, one
day I decided to oblige one of them, and tossed him a few pieces
of my doughnut. Unfortunately, the boss walked in, and became
furious. I thought I'd catch heat for wasting company time (I
could have been doing more productive things with my time in the
four seconds it takes to toss a few doughnut pieces, you know!).
Instead, he said "THAT'S why we get squirrels in here! Do you
want to explain to our insurance company that the squirrels chew
up the insulation and ceiling panels because my employees are
feeding them doughnuts?"

Now for some reality. The squirrels build nests there because
that's what they've always done....many generations of them.
And, they will continue to do so until they are exterminated
(killed, for you non-pc folks)or the building is torn down. My
boss habitually grabs the first available explanation for
unwanted events, and applies it to all the examples of the
events that have ever occurred. This is as logical as the
arguments made by debunkers, and as logical as the way you
interpreted my statement about their effect on ufology.
Interpreted might be too strong a word. How about exaggerated?

Mr Stuart, I apologize for picking on a deceased person.
However, death does not free us from the legacy we leave behind,
good or bad. I will remember Carl Sagan in many good ways, but I
was severely disappointed in him in his final years. When the
debunkers stop altering details of sightings, humiliating and
insulting witnesses, attacking ufologists ad nauseam, and are
willing to sit down with them, examine the data they have
collected and just generally behave like big people, then I will
be first in line to shake their hands. What have they got to
lose? Science should prove that there's nothing to the stories,
right? They can prove ufologists wrong once and for all.

Or can they?

Greg






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    'IF' November Conference Rescheduled

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:10:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:56:38 -0400
Subject: 'IF' November Conference Rescheduled

Hi All,

The conference that was originally scheduled for November
14, 1998 in NY by the Intruders Foundation (featuring Budd,
Dave Jacobs, Jerry Clark -no e- and moderator Greg Sandow)
has been pushed back to early spring (March) of 1999!

We had booking problems with the auditorium and because
of the coinciding holiday season (then winter!) we thought
it best to simply reschedule the conference for spring.

Better in NY in the springtime anyway! As a very dear friend
has already commented, "Who wants to be in New York in the
winter!" I'll see you guys here next spring! Watch for further
information/details.

Thank you,

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                             Re: A Simple Quote

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:19:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:18:53 -0400
Subject: Re: A Simple Quote


Dear Serge:

>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Re: UFO UpDate: A Simple Quote
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:30:06 -0400

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>>Subject: A Simple Quote

>>Here is a quotation from none other that Bertrand Russel...

>>"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the
>>absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with
>>bad ones."
>
>>Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), British philosopher,
>>mathematician. Unpopular Essays, "An Outline of Intellectual
>>Rubbish" (1950).

>>I wish I had said that first!   -LH

>Larry,

>Please comment on the quote:

>Minimum length of work: 8 pages (typed), in which you will
>try to clarify what the renowned philosopher truly meant.  As
>usual, we are not interested in your opinion; you will thus
>support each and every assertion you will make with quotes from
>other renowned philosophers. Of course, pro and con opinions
>are essential to enlighten the matter.

>This counts for 60% of the session. Deadline: 16:00 on December
>the 20th.

><VBG>

>Serge

Dear Serge:

Can I put that off until after Easter Break? <BIGGER grin>

-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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                 DISPATCH # 106 -- the weekly newsletter of

From: ParaScope@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:53:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:15:37 -0400
Subject: DISPATCH # 106 -- the weekly newsletter of

S O M E T H I N G   S T R A N G E   I S   H A P P E N I N G

10/13/98

Quote of the Week

"I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the
edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center."

--Kurt Vonnegut

-----------------------

Rant of the Week: �Please treat the pleomorhised children well�

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, �Sam� covers a wide range of
topics which, surprisingly, lead to a military conspiracy aimed at bathing him
in "gas lights" to induce cancer. Enjoy.

"I was swimming and my father found a lady bug that had Pleomorphed into a new
color. It had gold on it's back. The government has a geosincrenus satalite
above me at all times and I am exposed to radiation at all times. They are
torturing me but I don't feel mucg of anything. Right now I am getting pink
eye in front of my monitor. They send out planes Write Patterson Airforce Base
and shine gas lights on me. The Nazis can make any gas from any substance.
People are being exposed to these gas lights on airplanes. They have went on
an all out war on me shining these gas lights on me. These lights produce more
then just visable light. Anyway the insects around here have been changing
with each generation. Mutation is harmful but Jehovah was given his creation
inteligent DNA that can modify it'self to adapt. The Right Wing Nazi's are
allied with New Age Socialism and plan to rule the world. The Freemasons have
always been on the side of the Nazi's and they brought many war criminals into
the USA after world war II. They are trying to start a New Age religion by
combining all religions together under the UN with a figure head called
Maitreya. www.maitreya.org . See the document called "Master Plan For Planet
Earth". The Jews learned from the Nazi's and are doing the same. Jews used to
worship Bale a Satan god. They used to sacrifice their little children to this
God in fire. www.maitreya.org used to have animated flame graphics of the
flames that leaped from Molech's belly. They would burn their little children
alive to this god which was Satan. All the big selectively breed Arians are
called the "Masters". Dr. Nasha a female doctor of Upper Vally Family Care in
New Carlisle is one of the so called "Masters". You can easily reconise the
"Masters as very healthy very big Arians". These people do not realise they
face destruction at the hand of Jehovah if they do not repent. Jehovah is
willing to forgive them for the things they have done. All they have to do is
pray to Jehovah and Jehovah will help them. Jehovah is a good God and is
willing to forgive no matter what. No sin is too great that they can not be
forgiven. Getting back to Gold. The Jewish Temple in Jeruelem was plated with
Gold. This was to protect the preist from the radiation from the sun. This is
why the Federal Government is hording Gold at Fort Naux . The government has
sent people from area 51 to Write Patterson Airforce base. Remember that
Jehovah has given his creation the ability to adapt and DNA is inteligent and
able to self modify. This is similar to how the body creates new antibodies or
immunoglobulins. You can make antibodies agenst drugs and other things. Anyway
the government has been forcing humans to pleomorhisise. That is what the
story "Mighty Morphing Power Rangers" is about. I am a "Mighty Morphing Power
Ranger" so to speak. These Nazi's have been stealing children for years for
scientific "research". They have been exposing them to radiation and breeding
them with each new generation. These people are the polidacteral mutant big
black eyed people that are confused with Aliens. The government has been
forcing these abducted children to have sex at a young age to reproduce after
many generations of being exposed to this stuff. These extreamly
pleomorphisised humans are what is confused as aliens. When you saw the "alien
atopsy" did you see the extreame fear on the face of this pleomorphisised
person. This was only a child. Many people on erinet.com are working with the
"Masters". I forced them to remove child pornagraphy. Channel 7 and Channel 2
news belonged to eri.net . Dr. Nash if you are reading this then I offer you
the chance to live in paradise forever if you like. All you have to do is pray
to Jehovah. I will get you some literature if you like as to what our
teachings are. We want all the "Masters" to be with us in paradise. The fruit
from these trees will make you strong. Those trees in florida are not the
trees of life. Jehovah will plant these. Would all you "Masters" like to join
us witnesses in the paradise? We love you and you can repent. Please be with
us. Stop the eugenics practices and join us. You have the opertunity to be
there. Please join us. Please treat the pleomorhised children well. Please. I
would like to see them so I can talk to them. There is much I would like to
say to them. I know there are no aliens. Only pleomorphisised humans and
perhaps gentic engineering as well. Please let me see these people. Anyway
Write Patterson Airforce base kept sending out planes to shine gas lights on
me but I am staying awake because cancer grows in your sleep. That is when
cell division takes place. Dr. Nash I will forget about you trying to make me
and a lot of people have strokes. Remember the time I looked like a black
"alien" with white eyes because of my tobagans? You told me that I have a
hormone that controlls the tempurature of my brain. Well I did not have the
stroke. I am doing good and am still waiting for Jehovah's righteous new
world. I am not afraid to die but would like to avoid death. I figure I amy
get to see Aramgedon with Jehovah's help. Please get on our side and join us
forever. Can you imagine the trees of life and what they will do for us? You
will get a perfect body. Your body Dr. Nash is not immortal. The Bible says
that "the soul that is sinnging, it it'self will die. Did Dr. Plumb cause his
daughter's cancer because she was weak? Are you going to quite sacrificing
your children. This started out as a report and ended up as a letter."

------

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:


The Grizzly Truth About the Yeti: Stalking the Abominable Snow-Bear

The elusive shaggy man-beast known as the Yeti has been pursued and sighted by
countless Himalayan mountain climbers over the years. And now Reinhold
Messner, a legendary figure in the world of mountain climbing who claims to
have encountered the Yeti twice, has written a book that reveals a startling
conclusion: the Yeti is not a giant gorilla or an unidentified humanoid
primate, but a large Tibetan bear that walks upright on its hind legs. Has the
mystery of the Yeti been laid bare at last?

-----------------------

Pulsar Newsletter:
Investigating the UK's "X-Files"

ParaScope is pleased to host the first issue of Pulsar, edited by James Eaton.
This new publication will provide the latest news and in-depth analysis of "X-
Files" in the UK, examining the scientific evidence that something unknown is
conceivably "out there." The premier issue of this hard-hitting newsletter
features the latest on the "Rendlesham Forest" affair; the notorious "Alien
Autopsy" footage; news from Area 51; the Japanese 'fugo' balloon coverup;
secret USAF spy balloon programs in Scotland; and lots more.

-----------------------

Conspiracy Newsline

Only the paranoid survive. Cincinnati cops sued for seizing cash in citizen
"shakedowns"; California prison guards charged with arranging "Booty Bandit"
prison rape; House approves "CDA2" Internet censorship legislation; lots more
news.

-----------------------

UFO Roundup

Get the latest UFOlogy news and sighting reports from around the globe,
courtesy of Joseph Trainor's UFO Roundup! France swept by UFO flap; giant
"bigfoot" tracks found in Saskatchewan; crop circles appear on Prince Edward
Island; sky booms heard in Pennsylvania; Galileo probe performs close flyby of
Europa; 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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:11:26 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:28:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:28:03 +0100
>From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald  Ledger)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:57:12 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Fred And King Island
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:42:16 +0200
>>>Subject: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>>>For copyright reasons list only!

>><snip>

>>Semi-"old timers" will know that we are fast coming up on the
>>20th anniversary of the disappearance of Frederich Valentich
>>who disappeared along with his small plane over the Bass Strait
>>while flying from Melbourne to King Island.

>>Date: Oct. 21, 1978, 7:12:28 pm local time, just after he said
>>"...is hovering and it's not an aircraft...."

>>Fred had described a strange object traveling back and
>>forth over his aicraft:"It's got a green light and a sort of
>>metallic light.  It's shiny on the outside."

>>Whym you may ask, dare I write quotes from a person who
>>disappeared (and hence was never "properly interviewed" about
>>his UFO sighting)?

>>Answer:   quote are abstracted from the AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
>>CENTER (Melbourne) audio tape of the incident.   Fred was in
>>communication with the radar, but, unfortunately, was below the
>>altitude at which the radar would detect him..... and the other
>>object.

>>Yes, the bones of many reside at the bottom of the ocean, but on
>>the other hand, there was no evidence of problems with
>>Valentich's plane and.... no residue, flotsam, jetsam, junk,
>>evidence of any kind was ever found, yet there should have been
>>had he "simply" crashed into the ocean.

>>Fred was gone.....

>>is gone......

>>RIP.

>>(A search of the Bass Strait was carried out for several days.
>>Nothing was ever found)

>Hello Bruce,

>If ever there was a case of the international UFO community
>falling down on the job, the Valentich case is it. Why the
>heavyweights of Ufology of the time didn't jump on this with
>both feet is beyond me.

>Don Ledger

Has anyone in recent years tried to use newer underwater
scanning techniques to do a new check for remains?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:33:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


Mark,

>Beyond that, I have to say that there has been plenty of
>criticism here and elsewhere over specific individuals or the
>handling of specific cases. Perhaps not as much of this surfaces
>in the popular journals (IUR and MUFONJ) but those journals have
>a tightrope to walk between presenting credible UFO related
>material in a positive light, and showing the appropriate
>internal critiques of theories and investigations. In general,
>they seem to be doing a good job. The various "UFO", "alien" and
>"paranormal" magazines also occasionally feature critical
>articles (UFO Magazine recently featured an article critical of
>the Face On Mars theorists, for instance). How much more can we
>expect under current conditions?

I can't speak for the MUFON Journal, but as editor of IUR since
1985, I can tell you that I and my fellow editors do not see
ourselves as walking a tightrope to please uncritical
enthusiasts.  I don't recall our ever playing down or not
publishing something for that reason.  I know that I have
accepted for publication any number of articles with whose
conclusions I disagree, sometimes emphatically. We turn down
manuscripts for various reasons, but never to keep hard-core
believers happy.  We have a let-the-chips- fall-where-they-may
policy.

When I was an editor at Fate under Curtis and Mary Fuller, we
published any number of critical articles critiquing false or
exaggerated claims regarding anomalies and the paranormal.
Marcello Truzzi published a bibliography of such articles
between 1975 and 1981, with some interesting commentary, in
Zetetic Scholar 8 (1981), pp. 76-77.


>>Anecdotal stories are absolutely worthless in the context of
>>scientific proof. They are important in the right context of
>>supporting evidence if ufology ever is able to show linkage
>>between allegedly supporting data points. A paper by a colleaque
>>of Sagan, Phillip Morrison in Sagan's and Page's UFOs: A
>>SCIENTIFIC DEBATE, "The Nature of Scientific Evidence: A
>>Summary" addresses this issue and outlines why ufological
>>evidence has always fallen short of the standard of scientific
>>proof, but on the positive side it outlines what ufology needs
>>to do to strenghten their contentions - but almost thirty years
>>later, ufology still hasn't listened.

>I have addressed the applicability of scientific methods to UFOs
>and to anecdotal evidence in a number of writings. The short
>summary is that it is not data which must be scientific, it is
>the method of dealing with that data which is or is not
>scientific. It is perfectly possible to deal with anecdotal data
>in a variety of contexts, to form and validate hypotheses on
>that data, and so forth - in other words, to treat it
>scientifically.

>Furthermore, there are a variety of valid sciences which operate
>outside the laboratory context, and there are also sciences
>which operate on transient or uncontrollable data (such as
>economics, sociology, and studies of wild animal behavior).
>There are other sciences where the actual subject of the science
>is not experimentally reproducable at will or even at all - such
>as cosmology, some areas of astronomy, and some areas of
>geology. The principles and methods derived from such sciences
>can certainly be applied with positve effect to ufology.

Thanks, Mark, for disposing of the hoary cliche about the
worthlessness of eyewitness testimony in all circumstances --
the sort of hyperbolic and dishonest special pleading in which
debunkers (and their apologists) engage in the absence of more
rational and compelling arguments.  This assertion
characteristically gets drawn only into discussions of which
UFOs and other unwanted phenomena are the subject, and nowhere
else.  In fact, elsewhere, when the subject is something
scientists are willing to think about, one encounters arguments
exactly like those ufologists use.

For example, in Scientific American the Australian plasma
physicist John Lowke, a world-class authority on ball lightning,
states his reasons for belief in the reality of this curious
natural phenomenon:

"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
that there is no question that ball lightning exists.  I have
talked to six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is
no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their
observations.  Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably
similar and have common features with the hundreds of
observations that appear in the literature."

Needless to say, not a word was raised in objection to Fowke's
conclusions, based on six -- I repeat: _six_ -- so- called
anecdotal reports of ball lightning.  Imagine,  however, what  a
scorching Lowke would have received if he had been talking about
UFOs.

Of course, if debunkers _really_ believed anecdotal testimony to
be worthless, they wouldn't pay so much attention to it.  Thus
any report, however superficially impressive, could be dismissed
out of hand if it came solely from eyewitness testimony.
Instead,

debunkers go to extraordinary lengths to disprove these cases,
on the implicit assumption that the testimony _is_ meaningful.
Typically, debunkers employ any argument immediately at hand,
even if their actions prove they don't believe it themselves for
a second.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                        Explanation For Crop Circle?

From: Jorma Kosonen <suomen.ufotutkijat@kolumbus.fi>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:29:47 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:39:02 -0400
Subject: Explanation For Crop Circle?


Suggested Explanation Of Crop Circle
Formation

1. Nature as an artist
**************************

Numerous theories on crop circle formation has been presented.

Perhaps the magnetic whirlpool theory might deserve more
interest. The theory suggests figures being ascribed to
electromagnetic waves. Hereto a vision of an intelligent control
has been adjoined.

This intelligent control might also be explained by intelligence
of the nature as it is. Let us think, say cell division or
growing of a plant from seed up to a full-sized plant with all
its diverse organs, not to mention ovulation of human
spermatozon with an ovum.

In context of crop circles, any explanatory theory is welcome
for natural reasons of human being trying to get his
surroundings, so as to feel safe. Modelling and constructing
one�s experience in a satisfying way is most natural. One feels
safe by means of explanatory visions, because any regularity
observed in itself is taken as a satisfying response of
thinking. This response is usually called as �solving the
problem� or �explanation of theory�.

Let us takean example: Imagine a being who is inspecting world
map. The being is unaware of our geography. It can notice
(strange)curves on the scheme. It thinks that the curves would
include some regular geometry, that is the �windingness� of
curves it observs. I.e. all curves seem to be winding. And
what�s more, the being will notice those curves operating in
certain areas (=continents), only. This leads to a conclusion of
two �intelligent� regularities:

1. windingness
2. restricted to continental areas

Hence it makes a deduction: �An exterior intelligence
accounts for my observations. Thence ....�

To us, all this is natural. We are aware of rivers being winding
and they �of course� are solely continental. If our being is
unaware of nature�s way of forming the river formates and
conditions, it is clear that the intent of having an explanation
has made its task.
 This leads us to see how nature itself is apt to create its own
formates and conditions. And this, expressly, without any
intelligent being operating as a formulating agent.

Let us now return to crop circles. -In an equal way of
reasoning we may come to decide circles, curves and splashes
being of intelligent origin. We easily are apt to regard them as
intelligent and formed with care.

However, when inspecting neutrally our way of thinking, might it
be possible to find a solution from an overall nature�s
intelligence, like calling it �an occasional naturality� ?

Friction between two rotating magnetic fields (phenomenon of
hydrodynamics, MHD --- known by plasma physicists), two magnetic
fields rotating, their magnetic wave fronts propagating,
inducing voltages of resulting field vectors, indicated by a
sensitive and reacting indicator...

High school lecture on magnet under paper sheet with overleaf
spreaded iron flour is transformed into night time damp stems of
crop.

Experimental research of phenomenon is hard. This is because
many problems rise due to unknown parameters of the incident.
Subscribing the phenomenon is impossible. We must be satisfied
with the incident observed.

Magnetic fields rolling obey their natural lanes of
formation, human being finding intelligence therein

2. Magnetic field friction
******************************

The concept of rotating magnetic fields is essentially based on
vicinity of radio and/or power transmission lines. Many cases
are reported from Finland (August, 1998) with this situation
observed.

Be it noted also that Espoo, Finland (Pelto commuter stop) case,
August 1996, is located less than 2 km from Helsinki area BC and
TV transmitter tower and transmission linking mirror antennas
(YLE, Finland) with electric commuter railway less than 100
meters apart, on the opposite side, the field in between them.
The Helsinki - Turku railway with its aerial contact wire goes
by the field figured. Light arc developed by a moving train
(light arc between aerial contact wire and trolley) continuously
transmits a wide band magnetic wave front that can be heard in a
short wave receiver on 3.5 -3.8 MHz band. It can be easily heard
as an unwanted wide band noise in vicinity of the railway, 2 km
-- even more apart. (This is not to say that all emission
originates from that band -- note possible high performance
noise blankers bulit in various types of short wave receivers
..?)

In case of two propagating and confronting wave fields (in this
case between radio&TV transmission and train aerial contact
wire/trolley) with evolved MHD -friction (=think of two magnetic
fields moving through each other, like two interpenetrating
galaxies with radio waves evolved) a magnetic field resulting in
their intersectional area might explain the circles / figures
with that displayed by �crop stem indicator�.

In case of a great deal of incidents world around with layout of
nearby transmission antennas and/or power
lines, would the theory be omitted?

3. Formation of crop circles
seems to take place unnoticed
**************************************

As radio communication, with its increasing electromagnetic wave
complexity surrounding us in earth magnetosphere and earth
surface, is obvious whilst the number of methods of radio
communication is getting higher, a complexification of crop
circle details is to be regarded.

Lack of eye-witnessed case is obvious, despite of several
enthusiasts. Instead, unnoticed popup seems normal. Popup-style
formation suggests an extremely rapid phenomenon with reference
to natural origin. Bleeding to zero potential ground always
seems to have been a straightforward and powerful phenomenon.

We will return to the last mentioned below.

Let us now check the aforementioned theme of intelligence of
nature as it is.

Modern radio transmission technology (differences of signal
manipulation when applying analog vs. digital transmission
techniques) may cleanly explain a more and more complex crop
circle layout. This may be as simple as partial moving from
analog to digital transmission technology. Hence, even minor
differences of magnetic fields when transmitting / broadcasting
would format gradients of transmitted signal (gradient=most
sharp course) in a way different from earlier ones with more
simple forms.

Development towards more complex figures seems to be a fact.
(However, there seems to be no two identical figures.)

Overall decrease of medium wave and long wave (AM) technology
applications for FM -technology may be explanatory. This is not
to be regarded as an all purpose clear out from the problem,
instead it is a refer ence to world wide technology development
among electromagnetic communication.

May we take another example: In the olden days, you enjoyed
�..sound and soft music..� from your radio. Nowadays digital
music may be �..sweet softness with all overtones therein..�

Our formerly thrown stones resulted in coarse waves at our lake
surface.. now we have style stones with fine ones.

Now it is finally time to return to the suggested sudden nature
of crop circle formation. The problem is complex for many
reasons, but we may have it solved:

It seems that many people think aliens being the explanation.
What is more, many seem to think that all this is �warning of
gods� or �warning of devil�.


As these phenomena seem to have been reported since ancient
times, I asked Colin Andrews (.. attendants at the conference
may remember..) at Hanasaari, Espoo, Finland, The 1st
Scandinavian Conference On Extraterrestial Intelligence And
Human Future, October 1996, about animals found dead under the
twisted stems of crop.

His answer was that he knows three cases found depressed and
dead under hay with their hairing or fur twisted equal to crop
stems and his post conference reply (e-mail Oct. 13.1998) was
as follows:

  _Porcupine Qty 2

  _Fly Qty 1

  _Male human Qty 1

Where ..on each of them ...?

  Canada
  England
  Australia

Has the number of such cases increased ?

  No

---
<crop crop>
---

4. Are you aware of bc/tv/nmt/gsm stations/power transfer
lines/electric commuter traffic, in vicinity of crop circles ?
Strikingly that way ?

  Yes _ Radio transmitters and electricity cables.

---
<crop crop>
---

End of respond -------------------------
*******************

They had no time to escape, if alive at incidence.
(Investigators, interwievers..This may rise fear or horror
among some people !)

It would seem that the phenomenon is an electromagnetic and
utmost rapid energy bleeding to zero ground from a magnetically
parametrized turbulence of a higher potential. Maybe ..magnetic
pulses ..HF...VHF...GSM...NMT.. confronting something...

�Such cases... �...Planetary surface electric flashes ..
here and there...�

Is the truth out there...?...

****

Jorma Kosonen

Vice member of board, UFO Research of Finland

E-mail: unicab@tietokone.fi
       oh2jk@sral.fi








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

               Australian UFO Reports And Experiences '98 - #8

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:01:11 +1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:46:45 -0400
Subject: Australian UFO Reports And Experiences '98 - #8

Hi all, here is the latest issue of the reports listing for your viewing
pleasure.

Thanks goes to all who sent in material for this issue.

Robert Frola


Australian Ufo Reports And Experiences
1998 Issue Eight
October

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



________________________________________________________________

UPDATE:
Angel=92s Hair Case Quirindi, nr Tamworth  NSW

Bryan Dickeson, Bill Chalker


The Investigation Todate:
Bill Chalker (UFOICNSW, Sydney) phones Moira McGhee for info on
Quirindi and sample and offers to use his scientific analysis
contacts for testing. Bryan agrees to have Bill organize the
analysis. Bill collects package across town from Moira (very
late 15th August, monsoon conditions!).

Bill spends Sunday 16 trying to stabilize container/sample -
unwraps package, which only seems to show a small speck of
'something' on the bottom, but does not actually open
container/remove plastic film cover. Bill also contacted Mrs.
Stansfield directly -- she said she had checked the
container/sample later on the 10th and noticed most of the
sample had evaporated. She had gone outside in the dark to
find/collect (difficult) some more material to add to the
container. There is now a possibility the 'sample' to hand may
not be the original 'angels hair', but cobweb.

However, Bill extracts a sample of the atmosphere from the
container for possible future testing, with some difficulty.
Complications: Bill tries to contact a colleague to arrange
further testing/viewing of sample (colleague not available for
several days; wife has just had a baby). All samples kept
cold/constant temperature. Bill had also hoped he might be able
to get an air sample (in a yogurt container) from Quirindi, as a
'standard' for any later tests, but delays/etc. suggest this
would not be worthwhile.

Bill contacts Moira and Bryan to update them with a detailed
progress report of what is happening. He indicates he may only
be able to get one or possibly two chances to test the remaining
sample, there's so little of it left and that could degrade.
Bryan to delay sending his report to Mrs. Stansfield, until
sample can be viewed/tested. (Bryan had asked that while the
equipment/expertise was available, would it be possible to
create and test the white, unstable 'ash' created by a Van De
Graaf generator, as a further 'control' sample for the Quirindi
material? Bill (rightly) indicates this would be difficult to
coordinate at this stage, and the emphasis should be on the
Quirindi material in hand.)

Some days later, Bill arranges a 'micro-endoscopic' (cf
'microscopic') inspection of the speck in the bottom of the
yogurt container (micro-endoscopy - the sample speck is put on a
glass slide and strongly illuminated; light from the sample is
collected by a bundle of glass fibles and magnified 5, 50, 5000
times; results shown on a TV 1. (Bryan Dickeson, 18.09.98)

Ross Dowe=92s Response:
Your recent report on UFO sightings around Australia is nothing
short of total bunk..

From the Australian National UFO Hotline's call to the public,
this service has received some 50 samples of the "flying web
type substance" not only from the public but from official
channels as well.

Our findings are that the odd aerial event was cause by cotton
farming activity some 300 klm west of Tamworth.

Sample of the flying cotton came in from a 300klm radius of
Tamwoth NSW.

These huge Cotton farming companies harvest large areas and the
light cotton fibbers get caught in the temperature thermals and
travels for 100s of kilometres. During that week the winds were
heading east. End of story. (Ross Dowe, 08.09.98)

(In response to Bryan Dickenson's Report - Editor)  THIS STORY
IS TOTAL RUBBISH and all the solaced facts are incorrect. (Ross
Dowe, 15.09.98)


Researcher=92s Response to Ross Dowe=92s Comments:

Bill Chalker
I'm not defending Ross Dowe's comments at all, but I think it is
premature to rule out anything at this stage.  Based on the
information Moira McGhee, Bryan Dickeson and myself separately
gleaned from the witnesses it is difficult to reconcile the
observations of the "dumbbell" shaped objects and the smaller
objects.  But we should not rush to judgement about certainty on
either dismissing the case as a "IFO" or a confirmed "UFO".
Currently it is a sighting - an interesting one at that, subject
to ongoing investigations.

Now as for the "angel hair".  The material I managed to extract
from the container provided by the witness was subjected to a
powerful video microscopic imaging, with spider=92s web from my
back yard as a control comparison.  There were many
similarities, and at this stage if I had to draw a conclusion I
would be suggesting the material is spidersweb, or something
very similar.  I will be showing the microscopic videoing
imaging during my presentation at the UFO conference at the
YWCA, Sydney, on Saturday, Sept.  12th. People can draw their
own conclusions.  Also I will point out that I took elaborate
precautions in the sample transfer to a more secure container,
in case we were dealing with a sample that sublimates, as it
appeared to do in my hands, in my own experience with possible
"angels hair" back in 1969 at Grafton.  I also extracted a gas
phase via an eppendorf syringe prior to opening the container,
just in case.  Now the sub-sample on the micro slide we
extracted from the sample remained stable throughout the imaging
session and seemed comparable to prosaic garden-variety web
samples on a separate slide.  Both slide samples after a week
are still stable and will be subject to further comparative
testing when time and other priorities permit.

It is possible that the sampling sequence carried out by the
witnesses may have inadvertently led to a combination of
sampling - "angel hair" and "spiders web".  That=92s a bit of a
long bow, but may be consistent with the statements made by the
witness to me on tape.

All this is preliminary observation but I thought it was
appropriate to comment to focus speculation on this event, which
seems to be quickly out stepping the facts so far gathered.

As for the "cotton" suggestion: the sample looks superficially
like "fine cotton", but better resembles (or is) "spiders web".

This affair is a very instructional and worthwhile exercise in
focusing speculation and debate on the issue of "angel hair".
It certainly has had me reviewing all the literature, my own
1969 experience and the literature on possible natural
explanations.

I will advise when I have further info to hand.  But at the
moment lets be led by the facts rather that the fancies.  I am
very interested in the truth, irrespective of where it led us.
(Bill Chalker, 10.09.98)

Bryan Dickeson
I had thought Ross Dowe's "cotton-picking" comments so awful and
unscientific as to not even warrant consideration (which is
pretty typical of much of what he does).

However:

1) You don't need to be an agronomist to know when the cotton is
fluffing up and raring to go; certainly not late winter (at best
them lil' old cottonseeds will still be tucked up in their lil'
old cotton beds, waiting to sprout in the spring!). Ask Ross to
check it for himself anyway, the Agriculture Department people
are just a phone call away and I believe he can run to that.

2) After a series of days of very high rainfall throughout the
district, it is very unlikely that any cotton bolls  that might
be around would be dry enough the first day of sunshine
afterwards to pop their boll en-masse.

3) Most of the fertile riverbed 'bottom lands' used to grow
cotton (which requires a lot of water and fertilizer to grow)
were flooded by those same rainfalls - result (at best) soggy
cotton, or cotton plantlets -- any that had been planted up to
the rains would probably have to be replanted once the floods
subside.

4) The Meteorological Department says there was no wind in the
area (just the thermals mentioned by the main witness) - suggest
Ross 'phone the Met folk to check this as well.

And there are other considerations.

Where does that guy get his info from? - certainly not the
Junior Woodchuck's Manual. I don't know why he wastes everyone's
time or even why we give him e-space. (Bryan Dickeson,
16.09.98). (Source Diane Harrison e-mail Error! Bookmark not
defined.)
________________________________________________________________



REPORTS:

07.01.96  Central East Northern Territory  2020hrs (CE1)

(Source: Brian Richards, e-mail: Error! Bookmark not defined.
Credit: Diane Harrison, e-mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au. The Keith
Basterfield Network 17.09.98)

Sunday 7th January 1996 8.20pm, Central East NT cattle station
hand has daylight sighting of battleship gray object 100ft wide
by 40ft height, box shape beneath 25ft wide, 6ft high. Altitude
130ft. Top of object spinning. Bottom half-unmoving and emitting
a vapour(?) and smell like steam off hot metal. A whirlwind or
vortex underneath near wild livestock. Station hand ex-marine
and UN force member took photos and reported the cattle and wild
horses 'transfixed by the object'. (UFORUM)


November 1996  Honeymoon Gap, nr Alice Springs, NT  (CE2)

(Source: Keith Douglass Credit: INUFOR Digest Vol.4 No.2 October
1998)

"Mary Adams" and a friend were driving from west to east =96
passing Honeymoon Gap (10 km west of Alice Springs) when they
noticed a bright blue "glow" in the trees at the base of the
mountain about 1/2km away. It was very low, and lit up the
ground, and Mary believes it had actually landed.

Suddenly the "light" rose up, and moved towards them. They could
see it was a solid object, about 40 metres in diameter, with a
flat base and a rounded top. It was huge =96 "the size of a
semi-trailer, with lines around the bottom". The blue light
formed a "halo" around the craft, and as it "floated" overhead
they could hear a "whirly noise". It was about 11.20pm and as
the object followed them "above the car" for a short time, they
felt they were being "watched". They were relieved when it flew
back over the hills towards Pine Gap.


28.02.98  Doncaster, VIC  2225hrs (CE1)

(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

An elliptical shaped object about 80% of the moon=92s size was
seen travelling south to southwest in a straight line. It took
four minutes to fly out of sight. (VUFORS)


26.03.98  Oakleigh, VIC  2015-2030hrs (CE1)
(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

An object, cream colour with lights, which looked like a saucer
upside down, flew from the south east to the northwest. (VUFORS)


30.03.98  Werribee, VIC  1720hrs (NL)

(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

Two bright round lights was seen travelling very slowly upwards
on a slight angle. These two object appeared to have long tails.
The tails then got shorter until they disappeared and another
round, bright star-like object appeared following the first two,
only smaller. It stayed for about two seconds then it
disappeared. The original one then dimmed slowly like it was
moving away at a great speed, until it also disappeared.
(VUFORS)



06.06.98  Ayres Rock, NT  2200hrs (NL)

( Source: Keith Douglass Credit: INUFOR Digest Vol.4 No.2
October 1998)

Two astronomers at Ayers Rock were viewing the skies at about
10pm when they noticed one bright "pulsating" star was moving
erratically in the sky. Suddenly it changed direction and flew
exceptionally fast from west to southwest and out of sight.


13.06.98  nr Riddells Creek (on Riddells Creek Road), VIC
1745hrs (CE1)

(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

An object about twice the size of a four-wheel drive, passed
about 20 metres from the driver. It was a gray object, with blue
beams on top and orange beams on the bottom half. The speed was
estimated at about 100kms. It was in sight for only 10 seconds
before it disappeared from view. (VUFORS)


12.07.98  Katherine, NT  late afternoon (DO)

(Source: Keith Douglass Credit: INUFOR Digest Vol.4 No.2 October
1998)

Several prominent citizens saw a most unusual a large round
black object, about the size of the moon, above the western
horizon. The upper edge seemed to be "rimmed with fire", but the
witnesses felt this may have been a reflection of the setting
sun. It moved slowly to the west and out of sight. Tindall Air
Force Base had not received any reports, and there were no known
craft in the area. The object was too large and slow for a
plane, and no records of any high atmospheric balloons being
released.


15.07.98  Hastings, VIC  (possibly identified)
(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

An object with a red and blue light base and white on top, was
observed moving northwest slowly. It them reversed direction.
Two lights were seen falling from the object. Possibly a
balloon, with Cyalume light-stick falling away. (VUFORS)


24.07.98  Robertsons Beach, VIC  0600hrs (DO)
(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

Two witnesses reported seeing two objects, one a bright light,
the other orange. They were flying from SE to SW. The second was
about half the size of the first, about the size of a 5-cent
piece held at arms length. Both objects disappeared suddenly.
(VUFORS)


02.08.98  Victoria  0223hrs (NL) (U/I)
(Source: The Australian UFO Bulletin September 1998 Issue)

Observer was taking her dog outside when she saw an object
larger than the moon (followed by smaller lights) below the
clouds. They first traveled slowly, then disappeared suddenly.
(VUFORS)


11.08.98  Alice Springs, NT  1630hrs (NL)
(Source: Keith Douglass Credit: INUFOR Digest Vol.4 No.2 October
1998)

It was 6.30pm when Alice Springs tracker Fred Kilah arrived
home. As he went down the side of the house he noticed two
bright white fluorescent lights high in the northern sky. They
were most unusual =96 one long "cigar" shaped followed by a small
"ball". The lights moved slowly north across the sky in a
straight line, until they were lost from view over the rooftops.

18.08.98  Forest Hill, VIC  1915hrs (NL) (Source: UFO Roundup
Credit: Diane Harrison, e-mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au. The Keith
Basterfield Network 26.08.98)

On Tuesday, August 18, 1998, at 7:15 p.m., K.K. was "walking
towards my car after finishing with work when I saw a golden
colour object high up in the sky."  His sighting took place at
the intersection of the Burwood Highway and Springvale Road in
Forest Hill, Victoria.

"Unlike a star, it was gleaming golden - bigger than a
star--perhaps half the size of the moon and also spherical in
shape," K.K. reported. "Just after I looked, the object
accelerated straight into the clouds and disappeared. I didn't
have time to call security or someone else to witness this
object. Hopefully, I will have enough time the next time around.
The object was moving very slowly, then shot off to the north at
a very high speed, but not in a straight line, more of a curvy
line. Half the sky was cloudy, the other half clear. The object
traveled from the clear half to the cloudy half. It was high
above the clouds." (Email Interview).


30.08.98  Alice Springs, NT  2200hrs (NL) (Source: Keith
Douglass Credit: Diane Harrison, e-mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au. The
Keith Basterfield Network 26.09.98) Baptist Church Group out
camping just north of Alice Springs.

The group split up into 3 groups of 8 children, so to settle for
a night of camp. Each group camped around 100 meters apart.
When one group noticed a bright silver ball of white light
flickering and moving up and around it was bigger than the stars
around it so it stood out, then they saw more white lights
moving in the same direction. The children all grouped together
to watch the dancing lights, they watched them for around 2
minutes then the lights grouped and moved away at fast speed.

13.09.98  Gold Coast, QLD (Identified as Venus) 0520hrs (Source:
Personal Files) A bright light was observed in clear sky, with
no other stars present and a half moon visible. The sun was
rising.  The light was seen in the NW over mountains (not sure
of range) on the Gold Coast.. Observed the object for
approximately 30mins. It was moving slowly away from its initial
observation point. Speed indeterminable. Observed through
binoculars by three witnesses. Two separate lights was seen by
two of the witnesses. Definitely not an aircraft as no flight
lights was seen. The Sun was to the witnesses backs whilst
watching the object. One of the witnesses saw the same object
the following  morning in roughly the same area. (Robert Frola)

16.09.98 Redcliffe, QLD  2320-2345hrs (NL) (Source:  Diane
Harrison, e-mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au. The Keith Basterfield
Network 16.09.98) Mr. D anonymous, said that he went out side
11.20pm and just happened to look up at the sky, where he saw a
bright lights colour was Red, Blue, Green, it  was moving and
was followed by approx. 7 smaller lights which looked like
stars. Mr. D went back in side and rang a friend 11.25pm and
asked her to go out side to see if she could see them from her
place.  Mrs. Clark went out side at 11.30pm and saw the same
thing she thought, that=92s strange why are the stars moving. She
then saw the lights start to do a number of formations. 1.
straight line then of into a V joined 2. a circle with a tail.
3. a wide V 4. a V with a line through the middle. she said she
watched this for around 15 to 20 minutes then they  disappeared.
(UFOICQ)

28.09.98 Brisbane, QLD  (Redland Bay) 1830hrs (Source:  Diane
Harrison, e-mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au. The Keith Basterfield
Network 29.09.98)

Miss K, 24yrs was on her way to work when see saw what she
thought to be 2 very bright lights in the sky they where bigger
than the stars around them and  a plane passed by them, she said
she  stopped her car to get a better look.

The 2 bright lights stayed stationary, then to her surprise,
another 1 appeared and joined the 2.  She watched them for a few
minutes then the 3 lights formed a circle and put on the best
light display, she said, it was like Christmas lights. But the
strangest thing happened, she thought she heard beautiful music
in her heard, she said it was amazing to watch, then they
suddenly disappeared. (UFOICQ)


The Terara Sightings

Investigators: Brad Mildern Report written by: witness

I hope the following is of use to you. Until the first Sunday in
January 1970 I was a non-believer in UFOs.

Although I grew up in a family who were not open minded as to
things of an extraterrestrial nature I still managed to follow
the progress of the US and Russian space programs, believing
that their achievements were milestones in mankind's quest for a
better understanding of the universe. Now these events seem
primitive compared to the craft I witnessed at Terara and
Culburra.

My parent s and I moved to Terara from St George's Basin in mid
1969 after selling our eight-acre farm on Island Point Road. My
father bought a five-acre property near the intersection of
Milbank Road and the main Terara Road. While we were building
our house we lived in a corrugated iron shed which would
eventually be a workshop and provide storage for the tractor and
farm implements. Our shed was probably 40 feet long by 15 feet
wide. I mention these measurements because they are relevant to
the first sighting.

On the morning of the first sighting I was unable to sleep as it
had been a hot night and inside the shed it was like an oven.
Mum and Dad were sleeping so I put the earphone in the radio and
tried to take my mind off the heat. I had just settled down when
there was a weird whistling and crackling sound followed by
nothing. At this stage I should like to mention that I have a
keen interest in electronics and anything mechanical. So with
this in mind you can understand my curiosity as to what was
happening with the radio. I moved the radio around to place the
aerial in a better position but that didn't work so I wiggled
the earphone plug, still nothing. At first I thought the local
oscillator had drifted off frequency or it may have been as
simple as an audio stage failure. There was nothing just a low
hiss, which seemed normal for a cheap transistor radio when
there is no signal to drive the audio stages.

While I was fussing with the radio I noticed it was getting
close to dawn so I decided to go outside and cool off. As I
usually do I scanned the sky to see what kind of a day it was
going to be. As I did I noticed a bright star over towards the
Shoalhaven River (northwards) which runs almost parallel to
Terara Road. I remember how bright it looked. I had never seen
such a bright blue star in that portion of the sky before.

Just as I was trying to get my eyes better focused on it, it
disappeared. I remember my thoughts being that stars surely
don't just appear to go out, like a light being switched off.
After some searching it appeared over our shed, only extremely
high, too high to even guess its height. Just as before it
vanished from view.

The next time I caught sight of it I almost fell to my knees. It
was not very high up, perhaps only one or two thousand feet. It
appeared to be flying at the height that single engine aircraft
fly over towns etc. Now it was very clear what it was. It was
shaped like a huge disk and from the size of our shed I would
put its diameter at about 45 feet across. In the centre of the
underside there was a beautiful blue glow. This was coming from
a smaller circle of about 12 feet. As it descended it was
wobbling from side to side and I remember feeling very numb and
wondering whether to run or not. I ran to hide behind a post in
the fence that separated the house paddock from the rest of the
farm.

By now the craft was only a few feet from the ground. It
appeared as though it was about 10 feet thick at the centre and
tapered to about two or perhaps three feet at the rim. Around
the outer edge of the rim I could just make out black
rectangular shapes. These were darker than the actual surface of
the craft, so I took them to be windows or portholes of some
kind. There was no light coming from any of them.

By now the sun was just coming up and as the craft neared the
ground it cast an oval shadow on the ground. As it descended
even closer to the ground the beautiful blue glow from
underneath was illuminating the grass, making it flatten out as
though some invisible weight was being placed upon it. There was
a low humming sound, something like that you hear when close to
the huge transformers at a substation. The air was full of the
odour of hot electrical parts. When the craft was about 5 or 6
feet from the ground a sound like a power drill could be heard
and then four shiny legs extended at an angle from the
underside, each about the thickness of a person's arm. On the
end of each leg there was a flat plate on which the craft rested
when it landed.

I sat huddled even closer behind my post in the hope that I
should not be seen. After a while the electrical smell drifted
away and the hum ceased along with the blue glow which just
faded away. The craft was a beautiful sight, it certainly was
not of this world. There were no seams or rivet marks, just a
beautifully polished metallic surface somewhat like gunmetal. It
was absolutely stunning to look at, even in those confused
moments I wondered what kind of technical skills would be needed
to create such a perfect machine as this certainly was. In the
morning sun the whole thing glittered as though it was made of
gold, even the gunmetal surface seemed to sparkle. The top
gently sloped up until it was about 12 or 18 inches thick. At
the apex it rose another foot or so where a beautiful golden
ball was attached to the shaft. The underside of the craft was
only slightly curved; perhaps it could have rested upon the
ground even without the landing supports. While all this was
happening I was no more than 100 feet away. I decided to get
just a bit closer. To do this I would have to crawl through the
fence wires. I grabbed the lowest strand of barbed wire and
received a hell of an electric shock, which threw me heavily to
the ground. (AT THE TIME OF THE SIGHTING THERE WERE NO ELECTRIC
FENCES ON OUR PROPERTY). After being flattened by the fence wire
whoever or whatever was at the controls must have realized I was
close by, because the hum started and the blue glow once more
reflected on the grass and the craft began to gently rise. When
it had reached a couple of hundred feet it slipped sideways and
shot off at tremendous speed towards the river. When it had
departed all I was left with was a swish of hot air which once
again smelled like burnt electrical components. That wonderful
machine was now just a blue dot high over the river, within
seconds it had disappeared completely.


After that day I went back to doing nothing for the next few
days over the Christmas holiday, but I could not settle down.
The whole thing haunted me. I could only ponder the question
"Why me?"

The Second Sighting: On the second Sunday in January I was
invited out to stay with a friend of mine at Culburra Beach. I
woke early on that Sunday having arranged to go down to the
beach at the end of Ocean Street by myself to watch the sunrise.

After my paddle I decided to go back up to the steps and find a
nice dry place on the sand and eat my sandwiches and drink.
While I was scanning the horizon I noticed a blue blob in the
darker portion of the sky over towards the headland which was
off to my left. Then just as before it disappeared. I remember
thinking at the time that I must be going crazy. "It couldn't
happen twice, or could it?" Within a few moments I could see a
dark flat looking object coming towards me. It was just above
the horizon and growing larger by the minute. As it passed the
confines of the headland I could see that the centre looked
round while the edges looked thin. I raced back up towards the
steps, but something told me not to run that it was all OK and
that I would not be harmed. It was an overwhelming feeling of
peace and tranquillity. It was as though someone was talking to
me, yet I heard no one speak, just that warm feeling of someone
being close by. Someone you were sure would not harm you. That's
the only way in which I can describe the sensation I experienced
as I ran. When I turned around the same craft I saw at Terara
was landing on the hard sand just above the breakers. The same
events took place on the water's edge as at Terara. The blue
glow and the hum slowly died away and all that was left was this
beautiful craft sitting majestically on the hard sand. "Why me
and how could they know my every move? This and dozens of other
questions were running through my mind. I felt that I had been
chosen for some very important reason. It certainly was beyond
my understanding and as many times as I have pondered the whole
thing I am at a loss to understand the significance of both
sightings. While all these thoughts were running through my mind
I noticed a panel on the side of the craft begin to slide back.
It was above the rim and sloping back towards the curvature of
the dome. A milky white light filtered out which was so bright
it made my eyes water when I tried to look at it. Just as I was
trying to come to terms with the opening of the hatch a tall
slender figure appeared. It looked black against the white light
but for a moment it stepped backwards and I could make out a few
details. It was wearing a tight fitting suit that ran from the
wrists down to the ankles. In the milky white light the suit
looked as though it was dark gray in colour. The head seemed out
of proportion to the rest of the body. The hands long and
slender hung at its side, the eyes slanted and the facial
features flat, there being no signs of emotion =96 smiles etc. It
held out the right hand as though it wanted me to come. I turned
away and started crawling back towards the steps, afraid to get
up and run.

From that moment on I have no memory of what happened next, but
I sure wished I did. My next conscious moment was waking up a
couple of miles away on the grass at the end of the headland. My
head was pounding with a terrible headache and I had blurred
vision. When I looked at my watch it was almost midday, yet it
was around 5am by the time I got to the beach. I couldn't work
out how I ended up around at the headland. Surely I didn't walk
there in an unconscious state, so it seems highly probable that
I must have been abducted.

From my studies of UFO cases it seems more than likely that I
was chosen at random. However, there are people who seem to have
been in contact with these entities all their lives. To this day
I have had numerous strange experiences yet I would not relate
them in any way to my contact in 1970.

Investigator=92s Notes: Abbreviated from a witness statement taken
from a Mrs. T.C. Witness was 18 at the time of the sighting.
Both sightings occurred just after dawn and within 50 metres of
the witness. Anyone wanting further info should contact me
direct by email or ph 02 44235463. I have a hand drawn diagram
of the UFO (disk shape with a spire and golden ball on top).


Sources for this issue:

The Keith Basterfield E-mail Network,  tkbnetw@fan.net.au
Keith Douglass, Alice Springs, NT
INUFOR, PO Box 783, Kogarah, NSW 2217
Brad Mildern, bradm@shoal.net.au
Mike Farrell, PO Box 2526, Port Macquarie, NSW 2444
UFOIC, PO Box W42, West Pennant Hills, NSW 2125
UFOICQ, PO Box 805, Springwood, QLD 4127
UFORNSW, PO Box Q95, Queen Vic Bldg, Sydney, NSW 2000
UFORUM, PO Box 626, Applecross, WA 6153

________________________________________________________________






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                   Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:33:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:29:14 -0400
Subject: Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?


Source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-10/14/013r-101498-idx.html


Off the Air and Into the Ether? The Strange Case Of Art Bell

By Frank Ahrens and Joel Achenbach Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 14, 1998; Page C01

Consider it a real-life "X-Files" on radio.

**Bell quit on Oct. 13. "10-13 Productions" is (coincidentally?)
the name of the company that produces the Fox television show
"The X-Files."

The nation's conspiracy theorists got a seismic shock in
yesterday's early morning hours when spooky overnight talk host
Art Bell -- one of the nation's most popular radio broadcasters
and a touchstone for ufologists, paranormalists and the
thought-tormented -- abruptly, mysteriously signed off the air.

"You may recall about a year ago . . . I told you that there was
an event, a threatening, terrible event, occurred to my family,
which I could not tell you about," Bell told his listeners at
2:55 a.m. Nevada time, at the end of an otherwise "normal" show.
"Because of that event, and a succession of other events, what
you're listening to right now is my final broadcast on the air."

Bell, 52, broadcast his show, "Coast to Coast," via satellite to
more than 400 stations nationwide. His home was his studio: a
large trailer surrounded by satellite dishes in the Nevada
desert about 80 miles east of Las Vegas. Locally, it was heard
on WWRC (570 AM) from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. during the week and from
midnight to 6 a.m. on weekends. Talkers, a radio industry trade
magazine, estimates Bell's audience at about 6.5 million,
ranking the show as America's fourth most listened to, following
Rush Limbaugh, Laura Schlessinger and Howard Stern.

Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates the show, released a
statement yesterday saying it was "surprised" by Bell's
announcement, adding that it had been in contact with Bell and
hoped that he could return to broadcasting. For the remainder of
the week, Premiere said, it would run "best of" Bell shows.

Adding to Bell's mystique was his geographical proximity to Area
51, the supersecret military facility north of Las Vegas that is
the ultimate destination for alien hunters, many of whom believe
it houses the remains of aliens killed in crash landings of
flying saucers. Further, noted one listener, Bell quit on Oct.
13. "10-13 Productions" is (coincidentally?) the name of the
company that produces the Fox television show "The X-Files,"
which deals with paranormal and extraterrestrial activity.

Adding to the mystery, Bell's home telephone has been
disconnected.

Bell's true followers believed that he trod dangerous ground in
his attempts to expose government coverups about aliens and dark
conspiracies. It was only a matter of time, they believed, until
some government black-op crept into Bell's desert bunker and
pulled his plug, literally and figuratively.

His many listeners, however, can take solace in the fact that
Bell is fine, reports Nye County Sheriff Wade Lieseke Jr. "He is
not in danger," Lieseke said. "This is a personal event with him
that occurred a year ago. It is not an immediate law-enforcement
issue."

Bell told the sheriff what the "threatening terrible event" was,
but Lieseke said he is not at liberty to disclose it. The
sheriff did say, however, that the event was the cause of
Tuesday's sign-off.

The theories on Bell's disappearance ranged from the prosaic to
the fantastical. Steve Chaconas, program director at WWRC, said
he spoke yesterday with officials at Chancellor Broadcasting,
which owns the station, who said that Bell was "totally
exhausted" and "just needed some time off."

Other speculation was more colorful. Was a deranged listener
stalking him? Was it a stunt? Or has Bell been muted by a
coverup-minded government?

"I cannot believe this is trivial. I cannot believe it's a hoax
or hype. I think it's something very serious," said Richard
Hoagland, a frequent guest on Bell's show who has specialized in
research on the "Face on Mars," the notorious mesa on the
Martian surface that some people think resembles a human face (a
resemblance that has not born up well with sharper images from
the latest NASA spacecraft).

Hoagland said that he suspected that Bell faced some kind of
pressure to quit because of the subjects he put on the air --
UFO sightings, government coverups and time travel among them.

Millions of people "are depending on him to be at the helm of a
ship that's going somewhere," Hoagland said.

"I'm inclined to think it's some nutty person who's maybe
jealous of him," said Frances Barwood, a candidate for Arizona
secretary of state who has pushed for further government
investigation of what she believes may have been a giant UFO
about 1.5 miles in diameter that flew over the state last year.

Steve Bassett, a lobbyist for UFO groups who has been a guest on
the show, said he had spoken with Bell about what he saw as the
mysterious deaths and illnesses of people associated with the
extraterrestrial issue. "There's a lot of people in this field
who seem to have a very short life expectancy. There's a lot of
people who are coming down with cancer. We're concerned about
it, we're tracking it," Bassett said.

The creepiness of Bell's announcement seemed a bit too perfect
to some observers.

"It's some exquisite timing in that it's right on the eve of the
National Association of Broadcasters convention," said Jim
Bohannon, whose nighttime talk show is heard on about 400
stations. The annual convention begins today in Seattle and runs
through Saturday. "This will be Topic One for the whole next
week."

"To the best of my knowledge, this is not a publicity stunt,"
said Amir Henrickson, Premiere spokeswoman.

Regardless of the explanation, worried listeners began sending
e-mails to Bell's Web site at www.artbell.com minutes after his
show went silent.

"I am in disbelief!!," wrote Kentucky listener Johnda Webb. "I
can only ponder the MANY scenarios and possibilities. . . .
Doesn't this make one think, 'how
safe and free are we?' "

=A9 Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company

-------------------------------------------------------------
UFOSEEK's ongoing Y2K poll: "How serious is the Y2K problem?"
See what many people think and will be doing. Vote!
http://members.aol.com/y2kpoll/
-------------------------------------------------------------

**Bell quit on Oct. 13. "10-13 Productions" is (coincidentally?)
the name of the company that produces the Fox television show
"The X-Files."

I keep thinking about what Deepthroat said
in an earlier (X-files) episode:

 "the best lie is hidden between two truths."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Keep up with the latest UFO and alternative News:
Visit UFOSEEK and find the source...
http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/
-------------------------------------------------------------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:57:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:25:15 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:28:21 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

<snip>

>Early on the RPIT members took flak from the likes of Stan
>Friedman and Kevin Randle that the government had done such a
>thorough investigative job on the Ramey office photos there
>could be nothing else left to discover. Now just look at what
>has been uncovered by the RPIT that the Air Force somehow
>"overlooked": a series of finely machined bas relief symbols
>emblazoned on the metal-looking beams (just as described by
>several of the original Roswell crash witnesses), "balsa wood"
>struts  that are hollow and have none of the characteristics of
>wood (again as described by original Roswell witnesses) and
>several other anomalous objects which cannot be found in the Air
>Force's latest "explanation" -- A Mogul balloon train. And now
>phrases like "four victims" and "SW of Magdalena, N. Mex." and
>"Site Two" and "Fort Worth, Tex." being rather easily read in
>the Ramey Message with its official looking heading and logo.
>But NONE of these findings were reported in the Air Force
>official reports in 1994 or 1995. Sure seems strange to me that
>the Air Force just never seems to be able to get it right!


>James Bond Johnson


J.B. Johnson & List,

I wonder if The Air Force - or it's representative(s) - has
"overlooked" something more, as well?

I may refer to this research report (which was also previously
referred to on this List):

http://home.clara.net/ufo-net/air_force.html


Especially, check the following text, cut from this report:

"Most interestingly, as this report was being written, Pflock
published his own report of this matter under the auspices of
FUFOR, entitled "Roswell in Perspective" (1994). Pflock
concluded from his research that the Brazel Ranch debris
originally reported as a "flying disc" was probably debris from
a Mogul balloon; however, there was a simultaneous incident that
occurred not far away, that caused an alien craft to crash and
that the AAF subsequently recovered three alien bodies
therefrom. Air Force research did not locate any information to
corroborate that this incredible coincidence occurred, however."

Regarding the cited 'simultaneous incident', Nick Pope is - in
his following book:

http://forums.msn.com/ufo/openskies.htm ,

on page 17, mentioning two names regarding this crash incident,
namely:

-    Barney Barnett; a civil engineer, and,
-    Glenn Dennis; the local undertaker in Roswell

In addition, a group of archaeologists from the Univ. of
Pennsylvania were _possibly_ at the 'crash site'.

He's also mentioning 'four (4) child-sized' coffins'. (Do I also
remember the character '4' from the present interpretation of
the Ramey message - in connection with 'victims'?)

I haven't read any books on the Roswell incident, so I don't
know if this is well known info.

Anything of interest here - any potential clues?


Regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:00:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:28:40 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>Hello List,

<snip>

>A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
>_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
>nearly identical signature. They need to be fairly close to the
>same date for this to be a valid explanation. Perhaps someone
>can fill me in on that.

>As time permits Bob and Ryan are interested in examining many
>other Truman signatures of the appropriate time period in case a
>third or fourth or even fifth of the same identical appearance
>can be found. And in case two or more identical Truman
>signatures different from this other one can be found, that
>would at least indicate that he had used the multi-pen apparatus
>while in office.

>  Jim Deardorff

Jim and list-

One of the points that is often overlooked is that it is not
impossible for someone to write their signature in exactly the
same way twice.  While improbable on a consistant basis, the
more often one writes their signature, the greater the chance
that they've duplicated an earlier effort.  This would
expecially be true for someone who is required to sign their
name over and over again, which makes it a far more mechanical
action.

Of course, this only means that one argument against the
validity of the MJ-12 documents is somewhat less convincing.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38

From: Edoardo Russo <edoardo.russo@torino.alpcom.it>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:25:55 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:27:16 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38


Hello!

>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:09:00 +0100
>Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38

>>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 13:05:02 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 38

>>NEW ALIEN SIGHTING NEAR
>>PERUGIA IN ITALY

>This story seems to be an interesting one!

>Any of you got more info. on this incident?

A field investigation was performed by CISU member Massimo
Valloscuro. We are now awaiting his report.

>Hopefully, photo(s) are available -

If you mean photos of the object, the answe is: no.

>since there were many witnesses?

How can you say "many"? There were just _two_ witnesses.

>Cylinder- or cigar-shaped objects seem to appear
>in many sightings nowadays. Is this a new trend?

They have always been described. The new trend is the triangle
shape, instead.

Best regards,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 12:45:18 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:37:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:32:53 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

>>Incidentally, Eddie (a fellow CUFOS board member whom I look
>>forward to seeing at our meeting late this month) contributes
>>several excellent papers to my encyclopedia: "Abduction
>>Phenomenon," "Anomalous Aerial Phenomena Before 1800," and
>>"Waves." I urge anybody who's looking for the best our subject
>>has to offer to go to your local library (don't buy the book
>>unless you're rich; it's damned expensive) and read Eddie's
>>extraordinary treatments of these subjects.

>Jerry -

>No, no, don't send them to the library. Have them buy a copy of
>your 'The UFO Book' and they get Swords' paper and the excellent
>and balanced analysis of abductions by Bullard.

>Only $20, so not prohibitively expensive, and much more worth
>the price than most of the other tomes to hit the bookshelves
>lately.

>Yes, I just bought a copy, and am already halfway through it.

>ISBN 1-57859-029-9

Mark,

Thank you for the kind words about The UFO Book. Coming from
someone like you, I am especially flattered.

The Swords entry in that book is the same as the one in The UFO
Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., but Eddie Bullard's piece in the
paperback is a rewritten, compressed version of the original,
which is 26 pages long including bibliography in the hardcover.
The former, of course, is still pretty damn good, typical of the
first-rate work and analysis with which Bullard has blessed all
of us these past two decades.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                     Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:21:07 -0400
Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


Hello List,

As a good example of how the media may misinterpret information
on UFO sightings - misinterpreted either on purpose, or as a
result of pure (technical) misunderstanding - I will use the
well-known UFO sightings by Kenneth Arnold, observed in his
plane in the vicinity of Mount Baker/Rainier/Adams, on June 24,
1947.

The first URL I will refer to is:

http://davisref.samford.edu/ufos/chap1.htm

(From: The Coming of the Saucers: A Documentary Report on Sky
Objects That Have Mystified the World by Kenneth Arnold and Ray
Palmer. Boise, ID; Amherst, WI: Privately published by the
authors, 1952).

In this report he's referring to the following (regarding the
sighting of the objects):

-    "...a plane I saw was a DC-4 far to my left..."

-    "...all the time I was thinking to myself that I
     was observing a whole formation of jets..."

-    "...I could not find any tails on them. I felt sure
     that, being jets, they had tails..."

-    "As I described them at the time, their flight was
     like speed boats on rough water or...

-    "As I put it to newsmen in Pendleton, Oregon, they
     _flew like saucer would_ if you skipped it across
     water."

-    "Another characteristic of these craft that made a
     tremendous impression to me was how they fluttered
     and sailed, tipping their _wings_ alternately..."

-    "...extremely highly polshed surface of their
     _wings_."

-    "I felt sure this formation of strange craft was
     travelling in excess of a thousand miles per hour."

-    "The high point of my enthusiasm got its top knocked
     off when one of the helicopter pilots said, 'Ah, it's
     just a flight of those guided missiles from Moses
     Lake."

-    "...we still had a speed of over thirteen hundred
     and fifty miles per hour. To me, that evening, that
     was that. They were guided missiles, robotly
     controlled."

-    "I knew that speeds of this velocity the human body
     simply could not stand, particularly considering
     the flipping, erratic movements of these strange
     craft."

-    "After talking to the editor of the East Oregonian
     newspaper, I was fairly convinced that it was some
     new government invention along the line of guided
     missiles."

-    "...when Dave Johnson called on me. Dave Johnson is
     _aviation editor of The Idaho Statesman newspaper_, ...
     When I caught _the look in his eye and the tone of his
     words_, _flying saucers_ suddenly took on a different
     and a serious significance. The doubt he displayed of
     the authenticity of my story told me, and _I am sure he
     was in the right position to know_, that it was not a
     new military guided missile and if what I had seen was
     true it did not belong to the good old USA. It was then
     I began to wonder."

-    It is guessed that by the expression 'flying saucer',
     Arnold - and possibly also the editor - actually meant
     the objects were flying like a saucer would, being
     skipped across water, and thus describing the objects'
     way of behaviour or movements in the air. I guess
     this was the earliest, general impretations of this
     expression.

(Note: All underlines by me; AWS)


The conclusion which can be drawn from this report is that:

-    The objects' _movements in the air_ were similar to
     a saucer being skipped across water.

-    The _shape of the objects_ were not similar to
     that of a saucer; rather - they had _wings_.

-    The suggestion was that it could be guided missiles;
     robotly controlled, from Moses Lake.

-    They didn't have tails.

-    They looked like jets, _possibly_ indicating that they
     had typical - more or less visible - jet trails.
     (The propulsion system could e.g. be based on a jet
     engine with liquid fuel, or a solid propellant motor,
     thus creating more or less trailing flames.)

-    They were highly likely not manned (...at least not
     with humans).

-    After speaking with the aviation editor of The Idaho
     Statesman newspaper, Arnold somewhat changed his
     opinion and was suddenly mentioning a 'flying
     saucer'(??)....(Was he hypnothized by the editor?)
     However, as mentioned above, this is likely to
     describing the movements of the object.

The second URL I would like to refer to is:

http://forums.msn.com/UFO/arnold.htm

(Excerpts of Kenneth Arnold�s correspondence with the U.S. Air
Force, after his alleged sighting of 9 "disc-shaped" craft in
the vicinity of Mount Rainier, Washington, on June 24, 1947.
Note: This is not the original document, but a transcription of
a letter sent by Kenneth Arnold, in July of 1947, to the
Commandingv General of Wright Field (now Wright- Patterson AFB)
in Ohio.)

In this report Arnold's referring to the following:

-    "These objects were holding an almost constant
     elevation; they did not seem to be going up or
     coming down, such as would be the case of
     rockets or artillery shells. I am convinced in my
     own mind that they were some type of airplane,
     even though they didn�t conform with the many
     pects of the conventional type of planes that I know."

-    "In fact I compared a Zeus fastener or cowling tool
     I had in my pocket with them, holding it up on them
     and holding it up on the DC-4 that I could observe
     at quite a distance to my left, and they seemed
     _smaller than the DC-4_; but, I should judge their
     span would have been _as wide as the furtherest
     engines on each side of the fuselage of the
     DC-4_."

-    "Capt. [name withheld], copilot Stevens of United
     Airlines and myself have compared our observations
     in as much detail as possible and agreed we had
     observed the same type of aircraft as to size shape
     and form."

-    "They were approaching Mt. Rainier very rapidly,
     and I merely assumed they were jet planes. Anyhow,
     I discovered that this was where the reflection had
     come from, as two or three of them every few seconds
     would _dip or change their course slightly_..."

-    "...swerved in and out of the high mountain peaks.
     Their speed at that time _did not impress me
     particularly_, because I knew that our army and air
     forces had planes that went very fast."


-    "As I was flying in the direction of this
     particular ridge, I measured it and found it to
     be approximately five miles so I could safely assume
     that the chain of these _saucer-like_ objects was at
     least five miles long."


The conclusion which can be drawn from this report is that:


-    The objects' size were comparable to a DC-4 engine.

-    Arnold has adopted the expression _saucer-like_ from
     the meeting with the editor of The Idaho
     Statesman newspaper(!). The expression could thus
     (in those days) - apparently - also be used when
     describing the objects' movements in the air.


Further, some URLs showing the newspapers' writing are:

http://www.abqjournal.com/roswell/rjpage1.htm


http://davisref.samford.edu/ufos/nytj47.htm


http://davisref.samford.edu/ufos/facts.htm


http://davisref.samford.edu/ufos/pie.htm


http://davisref.samford.edu/ufos/modern.htm


Thus, some of the newspaper writing and expressions include:

-    "A newsman dubbed them 'flying saucers'."

-    "The Air Force called them 'Unidentified Flying
     Objects', or UFOs."

-    "Arnold saw nine, fast-moving, _crescent-shaped_,
     tailless objects..."

     (Note that the _crescent-shape_ (!) appears on an
     'artist's impression' drawing of the objects;
     being kept by Arnold in this URL:
     http://forums.msn.com/UFO/arnold.htm )

-    "Arnold clocked thair speed at nearly 1,300 mph,
     faster than any known jet plane."

-    "Strange 'flying disks' have been whizzing at
     1,200 miles an hour..."

-    "...nine mysterious objects - big as airplanes -
     racing over..."

-    "...'saucer-shaped' missiles..."

-    "...nine bright, saucer-like objects flying at
     'incredible' speed...."

-    "Mystery disks hurtling in sky"

-    "He (i.e., Arnold) described the objects as each
     big as a DC-4 passenger plane, 'flat like a
     pie pan'....." (!!!????)

-    "Baffling 'flying saucers'"

-    "...'disc derby'...."

-    "...fleets of flying saucers....."

-    "...the discs....."


Needless to say anything more....

For those of you who are interested, here's
something more on guided missiles, among other things:

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/avchr6.htm
(Searh for 'Guided Missile' here.)

http://forums.msn.com/ufo/bt-003.htm
(which includes a Swedish incident, very similar to
Arnold's sightings.)


Now, what did a so-called guided missile look like in
those days?

Here's a couple of examples:

http://www.wa3key.com/regulus.html


http://www.afa.org/magazine/gallery/aim-4.html



Could it be a "flying saucer" of this type Arnold
observed? The readers of The List must judge for
themselves.

(I think I must mention that I have participated in
the development of certain types of guided missiles
myself, i.e., at

http://www.raufossas.no/tech_index.html.)


(In addition, this was a much too long mail!)


Best regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:37:01 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:06:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:59:45 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Triangle Sighted in Pennsylvania

<snip>

>Stig, please keep me posted as this is investigated. Especially
>if there are more witnesses. These triangles with red and blue
>lights seem to be getting more pervasive.

>I don't know Pennsylvania. How far was this from Stan Gordon's
>turf around Kecksburg?

Dear List Members:

Spartanburg, Pennsylvania is southeast of Erie and a good 109
miles or so north of the Pittsburgh area.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                      New UFO Book - 'Cosmic Test Tube'

From: Don Altman <don@moonlakebooks.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:53:57 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:58:44 -0400
Subject: New UFO Book - 'Cosmic Test Tube'


Information about this book is available online at:

www.moonlakebooks.com/cttmain.html

Just published - 'Cosmic Test Tube' by Randall Fitzgerald is an
important new 395 page all-in-one reference source on alien
visitation theories, UFO phenomena, evidence of abduction and
contact, and the scientific search for other life (SETI).

'Cosmic Test Tube' explores the ideas of Sitchin, Strieber, von
Daniken, Sagan, Vallee, and dozens more, plus all the major UFO
literature of the 20th century.

'Cosmic Test Tube' has received excellent reviews as a complete
reference source and guide that covers UFO phenomena, alien
contact, and related conspiracies accurately and in great
detail.

Here are two brief reviews of Fitzgerald's book:


"This is a very useful reference book...This volume provides a
surprising complete review of UFO history as well as UFO
literature."

--Glenn Campbell, UFOmind Website

The complete review is at:

http://www.ufomind.com/catalog/isbn/9639161/2/

(Note** Campbell also writes that 'Cosmic Test Tube' would make
an ideal companion to Jermome Clark's book, the UFO
Encyclopedia.)


"Highly recommended...This selective guide to books on UFOs and
related phenomena will help interested readers sort out a very
complex topic."

--Library Journal Magazine ('Highly Recommended' is LJ�s highest
rating)


'Cosmic Test Tube' is an essential addition to the serious
ufologist's library. It provides detailed summaries
(chronologically) of the most significant works in the fields of
contact and abductions, UFOs, ancient astronauts, SETI, and even
ideas of the skeptics. 'Cosmic Test Tube' lets readers discover
for themselves which theories evolved first, who contributed to
the research, and what evidence is the most compelling. Woven
throughout are the insightful perspectives of investigative
reporter Randall Fitzgerald--currently a contributing editor to
'Reader'S Digest'.

I hope you and/or your organization find this information
useful.

'Cosmic Test Tube' is on the WEB at:

www.moonlakebooks.com/cttmain.html

ISBN: 0-9639161-2-2

Sincerely,

Don
(for) Moon Lake 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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                                  Art Bell

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:01:10 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:10:27 -0400
Subject: Art Bell

I waited until this afternoon before calling Linda Howe to see if
she knew what was up with Art Bell. I knew her phone would be
ringing off the hook.

Simple truth, she doesn't know.

Someone called the sheriff's office in Pahrump (spelling?) Nevada
and asked them to check on Art. Deputies went out to his place
and found him and his wife safe and sound, and the phone off the
hook. He told them it was a private family matter, and so they
left.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:55:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:08:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>>Beyond that, I have to say that there has been plenty of
>>criticism here and elsewhere over specific individuals or the
>>handling of specific cases. Perhaps not as much of this surfaces
>>in the popular journals (IUR and MUFONJ) but those journals have
>>a tightrope to walk between presenting credible UFO related
>>material in a positive light, and showing the appropriate
>>internal critiques of theories and investigations. In general,
>>they seem to be doing a good job. The various "UFO", "alien" and
>>"paranormal" magazines also occasionally feature critical
>>articles (UFO Magazine recently featured an article critical of
>>the Face On Mars theorists, for instance). How much more can we
>>expect under current conditions?

>I can't speak for the MUFON Journal, but as editor of IUR since
>1985, I can tell you that I and my fellow editors do not see
>ourselves as walking a tightrope to please uncritical
>enthusiasts...


Jerry -

"Tightrope" was perhaps a poorly chosen word. My meaning was
simply that both journals have a limited amount of space, which
they must trade off between positive and self-critical articles
as a normal part of the editorial decision making process.

You'll note I added that I believed the overall result was "a
good job".

I think it is undesirable for our journals to be focused more
than they are on the self-critical aspects of ufology, given the
limited bandwidth they have available. Lists such as this offer
more potential for informal or exploratory criticism that needs
to be performed but would not be an efficient use of journal
space.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:23:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:49:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>Date: 13 Oct 1998 17:48:55 -0500
>From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements
>To: Errol Bruce-Knapp <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Roswell Statements

><snippity doo da>

>>It certainly wasn't a disinformation campaign
>>for the government, as the content of their interviews was just
>>what the USAF does not want the people to beleive regarding
>>Roswell.

>But they _do_ want us to believe!

>I am sure this has been addressed by the List before but, given
>that we know UFOs have been used as cover stories for other
>activities by our (and other) government agencies (military and
>intelligence) before, is it not possible that Roswell WAS
>disinformation? Would it not be in the military's best interest
>to convince the world that WE, the mighty US of A, had flying
>saucer technology? Was the OSI (or whichever intelligence
>agencies existed then) ignorant of this possibility for
>exploitation of information and belief after having dealt with
>Foo Fighters and Ghost Rockets.

Good Lord, man... are you asserting that the Army Air Force was
prescient? They had to be in order to create such an elaborate
hoax. First they (AAF) claim by press release that a flying disk
was "captured," then they claim that it was a mistake. Now,
which lie, if indeed either or both stories were untrue, are we
supposed to believe? Any assertion of "planning" a Roswell hoax
by our "Storm Trooper" mentality military is oxymoronic.

Planning + Military = oxymoron

First we say we do, and then we don't!
So whaddya gonna do?
Cha, cha, cha!

>The standard assertions that the
>ALLIES thought these were the AXIS' and the AXIS thought they
>were the ALLIES' supports the contention that we FEARED the
>other side might have much more advanced flying devices.

>Considering the many connections among early era ufo researchers
>and saucer groups to psychological warfare this seems like an
>idea which would have been considered. It is in a military's
>best interest to convince its enemies that you have more
>powerful technology at your disposal than they do.

The many connections between UFO researchers and psych warfare
groups! I didn't know they were connected. It would be a lot
like the blind leading the blind leading the deaf, dumb and
blind, wouldn't it?

Just what connections are you referring to anyway?

>Does anyone know whether or not the principles involved in
>Roswell had backgrounds in psychological warfare?
>
>For an imaginative speculation on this idea I suggest you read
>Jacques Vallee's fictional 'Fast Walker' and his non-fiction
>'Messenger's of Deception'.

Vallee is portrayed in the movie, "Close Encounters" as being
connected with the military and our government. Can you see that
connection as being a reality as well?

There exists today, such a mistrust of government by society,
our society, that people tend to see things only a paranoid
schizophrenic stage three syphilitic would see. That says more
about us than U.S.

As Colonel Potter would have said (MASH), "HORSE HOCKEY!"

Sorry I yelled,

Jim






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:19:34 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:51:35 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>Hello List,

>At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
>his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
>the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
>the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine." It consisted of 4 pens
>driven by a fifth master pen which the signer held, all attached
>to a long board of some sort upon which his secretary would have
>papers to sign all laid out. The 4 slave pens were linked
>through a mechanism (like a series of parallelograms I suppose)
>so that they'd reproduce the motions of the lowermost master
>pen. Each pen was separated horizontally from the others by
>several inches, to allow space for the different letters and
>memos. Thus, except for minor slop in the mechanical linkages,
>the other four signatures would be identical to the master
>signature except perhaps also in intensity of the ink trace.

>They learned that this multi-pen apparatus had followed Truman
>to the White House. So it's not at all implausible that during
>hectic periods of his presidency, Truman decided to save a few
>minutes of time by using the multi-pen. In fact, I think this is
>more plausible than that a clever hoaxster in everything else
>wouldn't know enough to be aware that no two signatures are
>supposed to be identical.

>A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
>_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
>nearly identical signature. They need to be fairly close to the
>same date for this to be a valid explanation. Perhaps someone
>can fill me in on that.

>As time permits Bob and Ryan are interested in examining many
>other Truman signatures of the appropriate time period in case a
>third or fourth or even fifth of the same identical appearance
>can be found. And in case two or more identical Truman
>signatures different from this other one can be found, that
>would at least indicate that he had used the multi-pen apparatus
>while in
>office.

>  Jim Deardorff


Jim,

If you take the tour of Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's house
near Charlottesville, Virginia, you will see one of those
gadgets owned by Jefferson and they will tell you that he
invented it.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Alice Springs 1999 UFO, Red Centre Outback Camping

From: Diane Harrison" <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:19:18 +1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:36:35 -0400
Subject: Alice Springs 1999 UFO, Red Centre Outback Camping


Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au

*******************************************

Hi Everyone

http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/alice.htm

Alice Springs 1999 UFO
Discovering Australia's
Red Centre
Outback Camping Tour

The webpage will take a little while to load

Visit: Ayres Rock, The McDonnell Ranges, Devils Marbles.

Spend 14 days Camping, travelling through Australia's most
beautiful wilderness.

Stopping at the Beautiful Carnarvon Gorge
swimming & camping facilities, great mountain views
=A0
Itinerary for the trip to Alice Springs

********************************************

If your're interested Book Early

Leaving Brisbane Saturday 27th February 1999 Time 8.00am.
Cost $760: All inclusive, meals accommodation for 2 weeks


Travelling in a Britz, Regent Motor Home

For more information about the CamperVan
Camper details on the home page

Meeting place to be advised:

Day 1. Sat:
Brisbane to Longreach
Stopover: Longreach?
Visiting: Stockman's Hall of Fame

Day 2. Sun:
Longreach to Boulia
Stopover: Boulia
Visiting: Ruins of the Min Min Hotel

Day 3. Mon:=A0
Boulia to Gregory=A0
Stopover: Camooweal Caves NP
Visiting: Camooweal Caves National Park

Day 4. Tues:
Gregory to Tennant Creek
Stopover: Wycliffe Well
Visiting: Devils Marbles, Wycliffe Well UFO Roadhouse

Day 5. Wed:
Alice Springs
Staying for 3 days
Visiting: Ayres Rock, sight seeing with Keith Douglass
Return trip home

Day 8. Sun: =A0 Alice To Tennant Creek
Stopover: Renner Springs
Visiting: Renner Springs

Day 9. Mon:
Tennant Creek To Mount Isa
Stopover: Mount Isa
Visit: Mines, Talk To The Locals

Day 10. Tues:
Mount Isa To Cloncurry, Winton
Stopover: Winton
Visit: Bladenburg National Park

Day 11. Wed:
Winton To Alpha Or Emerald?
Stopover: Emerald
Visit: Fairbairn Dam, Queenslands Largest Orange Plantation, Go
Opal Mining.

Day 12. Thur:
Emerald To Carnarvon Gorge
2 Day Stopover
Visit: Carnarvon Gorge National Park

Day 13. Fri:
Carnarvon To Bunya Mountains
Stopover: Bunya Mt
Visit: The Bunya Mt National Park

Day 14: Saturday Home To Brisbane


For more details contact: Diane Harrison

Tel 07- 55 477 9 33 or e-mail tkbnetw@fan.net.au

Regards,

Diane - Your Tour Guide :>)

Happy Posting








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 14

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:19:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:26:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>Of course, if debunkers _really_ believed anecdotal testimony to
>be worthless, they wouldn't pay so much attention to it.  Thus
>any report, however superficially impressive, could be dismissed
>out of hand if it came solely from eyewitness testimony.
>Instead, debunkers go to extraordinary lengths to disprove these
>cases, on the implicit assumption that the testimony _is_ meaningful.
>Typically, debunkers employ any argument immediately at hand,
>even if their actions prove they don't believe it themselves for
>a second.

As is pointed out somewhere, probably in "The UFO Book",
debunkers continually use the anecdotal accounts in their
attempts at explanations - and when either debunkers or the
honestly skeptical / honest ufologist succeed in identifying a
mundane cause it is due to the accuracy of the testimony. But
when equally or more complete testimony leads to an
unidentifiable case, with the potential to provide scientific
information on the phenomenon, the debunker has no room for the
observations of the witness.

It's obviously wise to understand the cognitive and perceptual
limitations of human observation. Yet researchers, based on my
reading of the literature, seem quite aware of this, and take it
into account when drawing conclusions on observations. Haines'
"Observing UFOs" is obviously the standard reference in the
field. It is a reference of a quality far higher than the best
debunker side positions on witness perception and cognition,
which are usually speculative, sometimes fantastic, and usually
not based on anything from cognition or perception research.

Furthermore, there is instrumental evidence suggesting that the
reports of eyewitnesses are reasonably accurate. For instance,
UFO performance as reported in radar observation is
similar to estimates which can be derived from witness
observations and timings. The same is true of UFO behavior.

It becomes much more difficult to dispute the probability of
either specific observations or the body of observations as a
whole when there is such a congruence of pattern across such
different observation channels, just as a multiple radar case
witnessed by radars of different frequencies is inherently more
powerful than a single radar / single frequency observation.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:30:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:33:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

Josh Goldstein:

Your very sincere concerns re the "Roswell Statements" by the
general officers deserve a reply. Let me make the following
comments:

>I don't want to open up the can of worms of Roswell debates, but
>aside from the witnesses who have been discredited I have not
>seen any credible evidence that would make me want to put higher
>ranking officer statements (Gen.Exon and Gen. Dubose, two among
>many) into question.

>I have a tape of Kevin Randle's interview with General Exon
>where he does describe flying over the Brazel crashsite and then
>over a second site where he saw the crashed craft with several
>little bodies laid out on the ground. Later, when he was the
>commander of Wright Patterson AFB he was not involved with the
>remains there but recited things reported to him from other
>officers directly involved. He stated that the bodies were no
>longer at his base but were sent off to a military mortuary.
>Unfortunately, he is now deceased and can't be questioned
>further.

The reports of the demise of General Exon are greatly
exaggerated! He is alive and well at the Air Force West
retirement community adjacent to March Air Force Base in
Riverside, CA. When I read your report of his death I attempted
to phone him and there was no answer at his home. I then learned
that he was attending a meeting of the executive committee of
the home association in which he is very active!

I share your beliefs that there is no reason for these general
officers to lie about the events of Roswell. Some time ago I sat
opposite General Exon at lunch at the Air Force West club where
for a couple of hours I could look him in the eye as he quite
openly and candidly discussed the events of his part in the
Roswell Event. We were flanked by two of his former pastors at a
church in Redondo Beach, CA, where he was head usher. I have
absolutely NO reason to believe that he spoke anything but the
truth. He repeated what generally has been attributed to him by
Kevin Randle and Stan Friedman when interviewed after I had
informed them about General Exon's coincidental roles in the
Roswell Mystery. As has been reported in the past, the general
was quite upset with Randle for "going beyond" what he had said
to him. (I assured him that had been my experience with Randle
also!) Perhaps you can ask the general about his earlier
statements and any other questions you might have.

>General Dubose was present at Carswell. He was in a position to
>know the truth shared with General Ramey. I would like to know
>what motive the above named officers along with many other
>officers would have to concoct a fantasy between themselves. It
>seems extremely dubious that they each seperately decided to
>spin yarns. They would not want to trash their reputations in
>that manner. Can any Roswell debunkers prove that they were not
>being truthful? It certainly wasn't a disinformation campaign
>for the government, as the content of their interviews was just
>what the USAF does not want the people to beleive regarding
>Roswell.

I have no reason to believe that General Ramey was telling me
anything but the absolute truth when he said he didn't know what
the Roswell debris was as I was photographing him in his office
on July 8, 1947. I believe now that he was seeing and examining
the debris for the first time as I was shooting him, along with
then Colonel Dubose, his chief of staff, and Major Marcel. As
has been widely reported, Marcel on orders directly from Ramey
had just arrived within the hour from Roswell with the debris
that he had collected at the Foster Ranch the evening before.

The officially reported "captured flying saucer" was only partly
unpacked when I entered Ramey's office. (There are unopened
packages seen in all the Ramey office photos -- including the
shot of Warrant Officer Newton.) I tried to pose decent pictures
out of the shattered pieces but was discouraged because of the
condition of the wreckage. I now believe that General Ramey was
handed the official message -- his "marching orders" re how to
handle the developing Roswell story -- as he entered his office
and that he had not had an opportunity to read it before I
photographed him examining the debris. It is logical to deduce
that since he kept fiddling with the paper -- it is held
differently in each of the four shots I took of him -- he was
eager to read it but didn't want to keep the press photographer
waiting. I also am convinced that if he had read the message he
NEVER would have allowed me to examine or photograph the debris.
It is a matter of record that after I took those six shots of
the three officers -- and after Warrant Officer Newton also was
photographed with the same debris a short time later (probably
by an AAF photographer) -- this mysterious, smelly junk
apparently has NOT been seen or photographed by anyone since
that time. We are indeed hopeful that with the current revisit
to the Ramey office photos by RPIT (Roswell Photo Interpretation
Team) and all the dramatic new revelations produced by them --
including the reading of some key phrases in the Ramey Message,
which entirely supports the scenario described above-- that this
will compel the US government to finally permit further
examination of the Roswell debris.

>Now Lt.Col.Corso's case was strange. For over two years we have
>speculated what his motives might have been. Disinformation
>could have been one motive as his story was full of mistakes, an
>account so  ludicrous that people would have a hard time
>accepting it unless they were very naive. Or maybe Corso just
>did not care and needed more money for his family. Whatever his
>motives he certainly destroyed his reputation. Rather strange,
>isn't it?

Bill Birnes, who actually wrote the final draft of the Corso
book, is quoted as saying that it was never intended that the
Roswell discussion was to be taken as a definitive account of
the Roswell Event but only as general background information for
those who might not have been familiar with the details of the
Roswell crash.

>So, People who say Roswell could not have happened as being a
>crashed UFO, how can you discount the higher ranked officers
>statements? I dare you to do so as long as you stay rational
>about it. Ranters, please don't bother.

>Perhaps the telegram in Ramey's hand can be further decoded and
>prove also to be a deciding factor. J. Bond Johnson, you were
>there in Ramey's office for a short time to photograph.
>According to Dubose's statements there may be a lot that you
>were not priviledged to know. Those people who who published
>enhanced photos of the wreckage on the floor, the latest
>generation enhancement showed me nothing that I could identify
>in any way.

I have no reason to question the statements of General Dubose
shortly before his death confirming General Ramey's statements
that they didn't know what they had at the time of the photo
session. And also that General Ramey then was ordered by AAF HQ
to "shut down" the Roswell story to permit them time to
investigate and react. So Ramey ordered his weather officer,
Newton, to identify the debris as a "weather device" and then
Ramey went to a Fort Worth radio station and announced this to
the world. Having served in the military -- active and reserve
-- from age 17 to retirement at age 60 (including in the AAF
during World War II) all the actions of the generals under the
dramatic circumstances of Roswell make only good sense!

Yes, the RPIT is busy at work trying to complete the reading of
the Ramey Message. This is being touted as the "smoking gun"
which will finally -- after 51 years! -- unlock the Mystery of
Roswell! Incidentally, Josh, you can get your own copy of the
Ramey Message from the University of Texas at Arlington and join
in the quest for the truth!

>Finally, my heart goes out to all fellow combat veterans on UFO
>Updates. I just watched "Vietnam: A Soldiers Story - The Tet
>Offensive". I was in combat then and the show brought up a lot
>of feelings. While I recompose myself and finish my post I just
>want to say thanks to all who have bravely fought. It took me
>years to come to terms with my memories and feelings from there.
>It took a lot of hard work and help to get me out of active
>PTSD. Thanks to the Veterans Administration I receive 100%
>Service Connected disability for the parts of my body I lost,
>the physical pain I still have from injuries, and the emotional
>traumas.

I am very sorry that you had to pay such a personal high price
in the service of your country, Josh. I certainly hope that we
have learned how to solve international disputes without
resorting to warfare!

James Bond 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 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                         Art Bell - 'Explainations'?

From: Jeff Rense <eotl@west.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:13:34 -0400
Subject: Art Bell - 'Explainations'?


Hi Errol,

I just posted a message _allegedly_ written by Art explaining, as
much as he says he can, what was behind his sudden departure. It
is a rather fittingly esoteric explanation, indeed. He also says
he expects (as I predicted) to be back on the air "in a few
weeks."

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/bellexplains.htm

Also, note the "20 Years Ago..." story just beneath it.

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/bellquits2.htm

It is not possible to authenticate this post either, but, if
true, it points to an interesting possible scenario: that
something decades old might be being used to threaten Art and his
family.  If that were the case, the "explanation" as allegedly
posted by Art would be a fitting cover spin to lay on something
involving possible threats of blackmail, etc., etc.  At any rate,
we shall continue to watch the story develop.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:18:57 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:01:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>For example, in Scientific American the Australian plasma
>physicist John Lowke, a world-class authority on ball lightning,
>states his reasons for belief in the reality of this curious
>natural phenomenon:
>
>"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
>that there is no question that ball lightning exists.  I have
>talked to six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is
>no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their
>observations.  Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably
>similar and have common features with the hundreds of
>observations that appear in the literature."
>
>Needless to say, not a word was raised in objection to Fowke's
>conclusions, based on six -- I repeat: _six_ -- so- called
>anecdotal reports of ball lightning.  Imagine,  however, what  a
>scorching Lowke would have received if he had been talking about
>UFOs.
>

Jerry,

Your characterization here isn't completely correct. For one
thing, Fowke's conclusions obviously aren't based solely on six
anecdotal accounts; included is a familiarity with the existing
literature (which he mentions). And no doubt his conclusions are
at least partly based on his own working knowledge and
experience as a plasma physicist. In which case he would most
likely be aware that a Japanese physicist, Ohtsuki (someone
correct my spelling if it's wrong), and perhaps others (dating
back to Tesla), has claimed to have generated ball lightning in
the laboratory.

For a plasma physicist, in other words, anecdotal accounts (plus
a few indeterminate photographs in the literature) don't
necessarily violate his every notion of what is possible where
plasma phenomena are concerned. (There is even a virtual
'textbook' on the subject, Ball Lightning and Bead Lightning, by
James Dale Barry, published almost 20 years ago.) If a sizeable
proportion of all ball lightning cases involved episodes of
missing time and fetuses, mysterious scars, little greys, giant
space ships and anecdotal accounts of hybrid babies, however,
then I suspect Fowke might have drawn a significantly different
conclusion about ball lightning, however weird its other
reported properties.

Of course this raises the interesting issue: if ball lightning
is agreed upon by both ufologists and plasma physicists, what
percentage of UFO reports, especially nocturnal lights (the
largest category), can be attributed to ball lightning seen at a
distance? Has any prominent nuts and bolts enthusiast drawn any
conclusions about that prospect lately? Has any ufologist argued
for a deeper, in-depth study of ball lightning within the field,
possibly thereby risking his ET stature? Is there an entry on
ball lightning in your encyclopedia? No, there isn't, although
several references are made to same throughout the work. Still,
wasn't it worth an entry, as a possible instigator of numerous
UFO reports, if nothing else? To think: you could have quoted
Fowke, too.

Moreover, six anecdotal accounts of ball lightning don't
necessarily vary that much, one from the other, whereas six
sequential UFO accounts can literally be all over the map,
abductions included.

Anecdotal testimony per se can't be separated from its content
as cleanly as you would like to think. Mark Cashman (to whom you
were responding) has already posted to this list, eloquently I
might add, as to the scientific uselessness of much anecdotal
testimony concerning the size, speed, and distance of reported
UFOs. To say that much of it has to be taken with the proverbial
grain of salt is to overstate the obvious, which is one of the
points Hendry himself emphasized.

If I say I saw a snake 35 feet long while floating down the Amazon, some
biologist specializing in Anacondas is at least going to give me the time of
day, even while seriously questioning my expertise at estimating the length
of a distant snake. If I say my snake was 100 feet long, however, the
chances are equally good that he won't, prima facie.

Could said scientist be wrong, whereas I'm absolutely right on
the money? Of course. At the same time, would I expect him to
abandon his present research position and apply for a grant to
visit the Amazon in search of anecdotal 100-foot long snakes?
Not if he had a mortgage and a family to raise.

>Of course, if debunkers _really_ believed anecdotal testimony to
>be worthless, they wouldn't pay so much attention to it.  Thus
>any report, however superficially impressive, could be dismissed
>out of hand if it came solely from eyewitness testimony.
>Instead,

>debunkers go to extraordinary lengths to disprove these cases,
>on the implicit assumption that the testimony _is_ meaningful.
>Typically, debunkers employ any argument immediately at hand,
>even if their actions prove they don't believe it themselves for
>a second.

>Cordially,

>Jerry Clark

Who are these many monstrous debunkers, anyway? Menzel is long
dead, Sagan is recently deceasad, Klass is alive but aging,
Oberg rarely addresses the subject anymore, and Sheaffer only on
occasion. To whom are you referring in the collective sense,
then, as if there were an army of demon debunkers massed out
there on ufology's angelic, overwhelmingly evidential front, the
latter backed by a mountain of convincing physical (as opposed
to largely anecdotal) evidence?

I would like to see the UFO subject more highly regarded and
studied, too. But as a poker player, I also know the difference
between a pair of threes and a flush. Give me a straight flush
and I'll bet it.

Dennis






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                                Odd Rumblings

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:43:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:59:49 -0400
Subject: Odd Rumblings


Dear list,

Tonight (Wed, 14th) at approximately 7:30, I stepped out onto my
front porch to see if the rain had stopped. As I stepped out, I
heard what sounded like the end of a roll of thunder. It had the
typical random changes of pitch and volume, and faded away
quickly. This came as no surprise, as the possibility of
occasional thunder had been forcast for today. I waited for
another seven or eight minutes to see if I could catch a flash
of lightning or two, but none were forthcoming. As I turned to
go back in, two very low frequency rumbles, each of identical
pitch and duration stopped me in my tracks. The pitch of each
was perfectly steady, unlike the wandering pitch of a roll of
thunder, and the two rumbles were spaced about three seconds
apart, without overlapping.

This was not thunder. Stormchasing happens to be a hobby of
mine, and this was different. I once experienced a tremor here
in NH. It happened to be very quiet at the time, and I actually
HEARD the tremor before I felt it. This sound was closer to that
than thunder, so my best guess would have to be a tremor,
although I felt no ground movement. The sound appeared to
eminate from northwest of my position in Londonderry NH, but I
could not hazard a guess as to it's distance.

For what it's worth.

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                       Re: Art Bell - 'Explainations'?

From: Jeff Rense <eotl@west.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:05:53 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:02:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Art Bell - 'Explainations'?


>From: Jeff Rense <eotl@west.net>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Art Bell post on alt.fan.art-bell newsgroup

>I just posted a message _allegedly_ written by Art explaining, as
>much as he says he can, what was behind his sudden departure. It
>is a rather fittingly esoteric explanation, indeed. He also says
>he expects (as I predicted) to be back on the air "in a few
>weeks."

>http://www.sightings.com/ufo/bellexplains.htm

>Also, note the "20 Years Ago..." story just beneath it.

>http://www.sightings.com/ufo/bellquits2.htm

<snip>

Hi Errol,

We have decided the evidence now points to the Bell "Explanation"
statement as being a HOAX and have so labeled it in headlines.

Thanks,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                 Patented Subcutaneous Programmable Implant

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@ccsi.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:12:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:55:39 -0400
Subject: Patented Subcutaneous Programmable Implant

At the below url is an implant patent from 1997

http://patents.uspto.gov/cgi-bin/ifetch4?INDEX+PATBIB-ALL+0+21927+0+5+51095+OF+1
+1+1+PN%2f5638832

United States Patent


                                                   5,638,832

Singer, et. al.
Jun. 17, 199

Programmable subcutaneous visible implant

Abstract

A subcutaneous implant for displaying various re-programmable
information or decorative patterns beneath the surface of the
skin of a person or an animal. A biologically inert subcutaneous
implant is constructed of a flexible material so as to conform
to the skin's surface. The subcutaneous implant includes a
battery for providing power to the implant. The subcutaneous
implant also includes a receiver for receiving programming
information from a user, and a display for displaying the
programming information through the skin.

   Inventors:
Singer; Andrew J. (Palo Alto, CA); White; Sean (San Francisco, CA).
   Assignee:
Interval Research Corporation (Palo Alto, CA).
   Appl. No.:
477,096
   Filed:
Jun. 7, 1995

   Intl. Cl. :
A61B 19/00
   Current U.S. Cl.:
128/899
   Field of Search:
128/897-899, 654

References Cited | [Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
                 4,233,964
Nov., 1980
Jefferts et al.
128/899
                 5,041,826
Aug., 1991
Milheiser
                 5,074,318
Dec., 1991
Campbell et al.
                 5,205,286
Apr., 1993
Soukup et al.
128/899
                 5,322,034
Jun., 1994
Willham et al.
                 5,324,940
Jun., 1994
Ekstrom
                 5,482,008
Jan., 1996
Stafford et al.
128/899

Primary Examiner: Cohen; Lee S.
Assistant Examiner: Lacyk; John P.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Brooks & Kushman

19 Claims, 4 Drawing Figures

smiles





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                           Debunking The Debunker?

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:57:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:54:11 -0400
Subject: Debunking The Debunker?


The time has come when we should praise people such as Klass,
not criticize them, at least in the opinion of this writer. Phil
(I hope you don't mind my using that appellation). I mean "Phil"
sounds better to my ear than does Phil Klass or "Mr. Klass."
"Phil" seems to fit his aura so much better. I digress.

Actually, Phil is doing us a favor. By his theories, he gives
Credence to Ufology. His reasoning is so questionable, so
foolish, as to convey a perceived image of integrity to that
which he debunks, at least to those who have some semblance of
an intellect. I hope I am not the only one who sees this for
what it is. He insults not just the believer, but himself.
Sagan, on the other hand, merely insults us. One cannot question
his integrity, at least I cannot.

Having said that, can it be possible that this man really
BELIEVES his own drivel? I think not. So what possible motive
can the man have for making a complete fool of himself? Aha!

On the assumption that he is not that stupid, not culpably
ignorant and really does NOT believe his own drivel, then the
only possible motives are...

1) He is being paid to do this to himself.
2) He is doing it for fun.

If (1) above is true, then who can be paying him SO much, that
the man actually says this stuff out his mouth? Perhaps it is
the aliens, paying him in negotiable Lewinsky script?

Or maybe Uncle Sam? They've got plenty of dough. Could be he is
doing this out of fear for his very life. Maybe some uniformed
suit came to visit him and told him to do this or else!

Actually, very few of these appear to have any possible validity
except the money part. Somehow, I just don't think he's got
enough class for Monica.

Must be the bucks. Yup. I vote for money. It's the only motive
for a red blooded American Patriot like Klass to have for making
such a damned fool of himself while trying to make damned fools
out of the rest of us, eh?

So I say, let's let the guy have all the press he can get. Let's
get him on the Jeff Rense Show. I would have asked Art Bell to
volunteer as well, but he appears to be otherwise occupied at
the moment. Whaddya say Jeff? Give him a full three hours and
have people call in!! Come on Jeff, you are, after all, the host
I know of to be able to handle Klass without losing it!

In truth I did make this suggestion to Jeff previously. I never
got an answer though. Could it be that even the great Rense
can't handle Klass?

Nah.

Jim





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <104744.2543@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:12:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:09:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> .

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>I've pretty much stayed out of this, since much of it has been
>no higher than mudslinging. But now that we're getting to some
>meaty issues, I think it's worth stepping in. <

Great commentary by Mark Cashman.

I have been reviewing the Sturrock Panel report with an intent
to  write a paper rebutting the implication that all radar and
radar -  visual sightings amount to nothing (probably just
atmpospheric refraction effects, according to Von Eschleman,
Appendix 4). I was once again struck by their endorsement of
Condon's conclusion that nothing had been learned after 21 years
of study.... now updated to 51 years by the review panel.

What has really stymied research has been the "self-coverup" by
scientists of reputation who have been unwilling to admit
"defeat" when it comes to explaining some sightings. In ths
particular case of radar visual.... which has many examples
going back nearly 50 years......the two sightings described
briefly in the Sturrock report simply cannot be explained by
atmospheric refractions unless the atmosphere can do things far
beyond anything ever recorded or imagines (e.g.,bend light many,
many degrees instead of a fraction of a degree). If the
atmosphere were "that bad" astronomy never would have gotten off
the ground and people would have trouble distinguishing anything
in the real world, including trees and tall buildings.  from a
distorted mirage.

The bottom line is that there are sightings which are so far
beyond the capability of conventional physics to explain that
they have to be either hoaxes of "the real thing" by which I
mean a guaranteed unexplainable phenomenon. Exactly what that
phenomenon might be is still open for speculation (and several
phenomena mght be involved in some sightings) but that does not
deny its "inexplicableness" (!!).

I recently mentioned in a message that we are coming up on 20
years since Valentich disappeared, and, in December, on the New
Zealand sghtings that involved multiple witnesses, ground and
airborne radar detections and 16 mm color movie film. No doubt
about it..... there were unexplained phenomena in the air that
night.  And Phil Klass, that "paragon:" (or is it parrot gone?)
of scientific virtue and accuracy "explained:" one of the
unknowjn lights that was filmed (in his book, 'UFOs, The Public
Deceived'... in which he deceived the public) as a rotating
beacon on TOP of the aircraft , filmed from inside the
cockpit..... by reflection* off a propellor..... (give me a
break!)  even though I had provided him with conclusive
optical/photographic proof that the white film images could
_not_ have been made by filming the red rotating beacon by any
means, including reflection off a propellor.

Oh , well, sic transit gloria skeptica (??) **





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:58:15 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

In a message dated 10/14/98 7:12:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
updates@globalserve.net writes:

>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>Hello List,

>At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
>his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
>the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
>the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine." It consisted of 4 pens
>driven by a fifth master pen which the signer held, all attached
>to a long board of some sort upon which his secretary would have
>papers to sign all laid out. The 4 slave pens were linked
>through a mechanism (like a series of parallelograms I suppose)
>so that they'd reproduce the motions of the lowermost master
>pen. Each pen was separated horizontally from the others by
>several inches, to allow space for the different letters and
>memos. Thus, except for minor slop in the mechanical linkages,
>the other four signatures would be identical to the master
>signature except perhaps also in intensity of the ink trace.

>They learned that this multi-pen apparatus had followed Truman
>to the White House. So it's not at all implausible that during
>hectic periods of his presidency, Truman decided to save a few
>minutes of time by using the multi-pen. In fact, I think this is
>more plausible than that a clever hoaxster in everything else
>wouldn't know enough to be aware that no two signatures are
>supposed to be identical.

>A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
>_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
>nearly identical signature. They need to be fairly close to the
>same date for this to be a valid explanation. Perhaps someone
>can fill me in on that.

>As time permits Bob and Ryan are interested in examining many
>other Truman signatures of the appropriate time period in case a
>third or fourth or even fifth of the same identical appearance
>can be found. And in case two or more identical Truman
>signatures different from this other one can be found, that
>would at least indicate that he had used the multi-pen apparatus
>while in
>office.

>  Jim Deardorff>>

Hello all -

The dates on the documents in question, if I remember correctly
is September 23, 1947, and October 1, 1947, which means, that it
is unlikely that both documents were signed at the same time so
that the signatures would match. Both are letters or
correspondence that was of a perishable nature. They would have
been signed and then sent on, so that you wouldn't have had the
September 23 memo setting around for five or six weeks.

Second point is, again if I remember correctly, that when the
October 1 document was found, the MJ-12 proponents suggested
that it proved the authenticity because it was an exact match.
When they learned that no two signatures from the same hand
should match exactly, Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera went to a
great deal of trouble to prove that they weren't an exact match.
That should rule out the multiple pens trick.

Finally, a questioned document expert in New York City suggested
that the October 1 "donor" signature had been slightly modified
so that it would fit onto the memo. The stroke on the T in
Truman had been shortened. Truman also signed his documents so
that the T extended into the body of the text but on the MJ-12
document, it was uncharacteristically low. Both of these things
suggested that the signature had been lifted from an authentic
document and applied to the memo. That meant the memo was a
fake.

It is too bad that we are now being again subjected to the
Truman memo as an authentic document because Truman might have
used the multiple pen to sign a number of documents at once.
That overlooks the fact that no one knows where these documents
originated, no one can use a FOIA request to obtain copies of
them, and they are filled with technical and historical errors.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #276

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:21:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:13:58 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #276


Apology to MW #276 (For October 15, 1998)


John has _stones_ to beat the drum, his plaintive entr=E9e's
weighed in _all_ of your indifference, and all that you shall
pay! Your silence costs you _dearly_, and the tally quickly
mounts when you _failed_ to be counted, and the terror sneered
and pounced!! He even SPEAKS and is ignored as he cries out,
stabbed and gored, for the succor of his fellows -- and I laugh!
These the same, assumed NO blame, as Jews and Moslem bore their
shame as _victims_ burned to genocidal ash!

He lost it all (they stole it all!) they aced him for a final
fall, and likely _lied_ and _cheated_ to that end. Justice may
be rancid, Johnny's low on grace and chances, and the vultures
circle low and close on in! His house is gone, he stands alone;
he's waiting for that first cast stone, the grinning Suffolk
shysters bunch their muscles. Jurisprudence and fair play will
go to hell and lose their say as it's likely Johnny loses in
this tussle.

And YOU! You'll let him slide, and take a ride there's no return
from. You'll _let_ him fade away and fall from view. Just
_remember_ you said nothing when the storm is _closer_ building,
as they set you in their sites and come for you! And rest
assured they're coming, friend, your history books are filled!
You're helping with his burning, while it's you who's being
grilled! The tears will fall from sorry eyes, and stars blink
out in darkened skies as justice is perverted for their way. You
_could_ have made the difference, kid! You could have mattered
-- made your bid, but chose to give him up, and glance away.

And WHY when it's so obvious this trumped up piece of
foolishness contrives to bring the LAWFUL to their heel!  Why,
when it is ludicrous! Impossible!! Incredulous!!! You know that
Suffolk county _must_ conspire to cheat and steal! You _know_
the charge is bogus; you can sense that it shan't float! Their
case won't float a paperclip! HE WAS SET UP! It's a joke! A joke
except that John awaits the pleasure of the beast! And where is
his protector? Where's his fan club, at the least! Johnny Ford
was only lawful when he _pissed_ the man's post toasties . . .
it's just not fair he end up spitted, slowly turning -- roasted.

You gonna let them do it? I'll shame you if I can! I'll slap you
with a brick bat -- I'll rip your lips off, Stan! I'll fester in
your kill file. I'll rot your disk with shame. I'll teach you
your complicity! I'll wrap you in your blame! I'll show _you_
sullen disrespect! I'll chasten _you_ with spite! I'll use a
verbal onslaught. I'll _show_ you it's not right!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm gonna send a hundred bucks -- money _I_ could use, but
shucks, at least I counted -- I shall dream when bully boys
around ME, team. I tried to stop them, I'll think back (the
bullies circle, slack jaws slack) -- I gave a hand to Johnny
_Ford_ when storms colluded like dark lords to sully what we all
hold dear -- some _truth_ that we might wrest from fear!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So you consider what I've said -- remember that you earned it,
Fred! Johnny Ford has my regard! He stood up _tall_ -- asked
questions, Pard! He got so far up *noses* they felt knee bones
on their septums; they were pissed off homicidal -- took a SWAT
team to his residence! They've amassed the mighty energies of
the craven Suffolk BEAST. Let's send the honest dollar -- GIVE
JOHN A _CHANCE_ AT LEAST!!!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

I am shocked, appalled, and disgusted at the silence and
indifference of the ufological community regarding the plight of
John Ford.

OK, you don't agree, you thought he was a crackpot, or you nurse
some pathetic high school thing regarding his appearance,
demeanor, or politics -- these _distract_ from the issue!

The issue? That in a LAWFUL pursuit of goals we all pay lip
service to, John Ford has fallen afoul of an obfuscating and
prevaricating machine perhaps near the root of a teasing,
ubiquitous, and _obvious_ conspiracy! John Ford is unfairly
wiped out -- stripped of any armor, and at the mercy of that
which has worked _passionately_ to amass a _steaming pile_ of
patently ridiculous and specious *proofs* to the affect that
John Ford is capable of serial murder!

Stuff and nonsense!

As soon as Elaine M. Douglass sends a clean address (via this
list) where the donations can go, my Hundred Bucks are _off_! I
so pledge! The check will be made out to John Ford, and I don't
CARE how he spends the money. Hookers and cheeseburgers would be
FINE! You send something, too!

As you value your _own_ hide, _you_ send something too!

Restore John Ford!

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                                     Re:

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:39:35 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:59:27 -0400
Subject: Re:

There has been an article circulating on the Internet for the past
couple of weeks which quotes Ed Dames as discussing some key
Scientology concepts/terms on one of his training tapes.  It's a
well-known fact that some of the early researchers into remote viewing
were one-time Scientologists.  But this article goes into conspiracy
hyper-drive in connecting WAY too many dots.

The article speculates that these early researchers were very
highly-placed Scientologists. I haven't seen any evidence of that and
given the emotional tone of the article from the Veritas group and
their behavior toward me when I tried to clarify a few things, I
wouldn't accept any of the content there as gospel.  I haven't seen
the Dames tape in question, I believe it's tape #2 in his series, but
I'm not sure.  I will take their word for the fact that Ed actually
said these things (although perhaps that's too large an assumption).

The article is quite lengthy, but someone on one of the mailing lists
described the bottom line like so,

> Why Does Scientology's Church of Spiritual Technology own copyrights ot
> technologies used by the CIA and PSI-Tech's Major Ed Dames? And why did Ed
> Dames deny it on a popular National Radio Show?

To which I responded:

They DON'T!  I tried to clear this up with the Veritas people -- the
ones who originally posted this article -- a couple of weeks ago.
They were quite uninterested in discovering the truth of the matter
and accused me of being a disinformation agent!  Harrumph!

I have been trained through the Advanced level of "CRV" or "Controlled
Remote Viewing," which is one form of remote viewing taught and used
at the Ft Meade unit.   The person who taught me, who is one of the
ex-military remote viewers (NOT Ed Dames, who wasn't a viewer in any
case), is teaching the exact same remote viewing that they used in the
unit. And I can tell you, without hesitation -- and if you don't
believe me there are about 200 other trained CRVers you can ask --
NONE of the Scientology terminology or concepts themselves referred to
in this article are part of CRV.  None.  Nada. Zip.

I don't know if Ed Dames is or was a Scientologist.  I choose to
ignore him for a multitude of reasons, the least of which is this
possible connection.

It should be evident to ANYONE with the sort of interests that would
lead them to subscribe to a list like this that Ed Dames is a
renegade! The other Ft Meade remote viewers have made that fairly
(although politely) clear on Art Bell and other venues.  And they
certainly aren't promoting the kind of apocalytic BS that Ed peddles
on Art Bell every other week.  (Well...I guess he'll have to find
another venue for awhile.)

The inclusion of Scientology concepts on Ed Dames' training tapes
isn't the only deviation from traditional CRV, there are several at
least -- none of which are an improvement and to a trained CRVer
several don't even make sense.  (Not just my opinion, my
well-circulated critique of Ed's first tape was met with many
compliments from some of the ex-military RVers, so I guess they
concur.)

Ed Dames is a strange dude. Originally he claimed he'd "improved" on
Controlled Remote Viewing, but used the old xeroxes of the original
military manual as his own training manual, not even bothering to
change the cover page to reflect his new "TRV" nomenclature.  Later he
comes out with the training tapes and THEN he decides to deviate from
the more traditional form.  And perhaps he thought a few Scientology
concepts would enhance something...I wouldn't know.

It might make for good conspiracy reading to link the CIA and
Scientology and SRI and the Army and so on, and so on.  But it's not
reality.

HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR?



--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                 Re: Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:42:21 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:09:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?


>From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:33:40 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net,
>Subject: Off the Air and Into the Ether? The Strange Case Of Art Bell

>Bell, 52, broadcast his show, "Coast to Coast," via satellite to
>more than 400 stations nationwide. His home was his studio: a
>large trailer surrounded by satellite dishes in the Nevada
>desert about 80 miles east of Las Vegas. Locally, it was heard
>on WWRC (570 AM) from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. during the week and from
>midnight to 6 a.m. on weekends. Talkers, a radio industry trade
>magazine, estimates Bell's audience at about 6.5 million,
>ranking the show as America's fourth most listened to, following
>Rush Limbaugh, Laura Schlessinger and Howard Stern.


Typically accurate reporting.  Look at a map, guys!  80 miles
east of Las Vegas is in Arizona!

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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:02:13 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:19:34 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>>Hello List,

>>At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
>>his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
>>the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
>>the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
>>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine." It consisted of 4 pens
>>driven by a fifth master pen which the signer held, ....

>Jim,

>If you take the tour of Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's house
>near Charlottesville, Virginia, you will see one of those
>gadgets owned by Jefferson and they will tell you that he
>invented it.

Bob,

Interesting that it dates back that far. I wouldn't have thought
that they'd have so much paperwork back around 1800 to need one.
But a president's secretary has to have all the letters all
lined up properly in advance on the device if it's going to save
the president any time.

But it does seem to be a more plauible solution to the
duplicate-signature problem than that it occurred by chance,
though the latter may not be totally out of the question, as a
previous list member pointed out.

   Jim







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                                  Ed Dames

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:39:35 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:00:02 -0400
Subject: Ed Dames


There has been an article circulating on the Internet for the
past couple of weeks which quotes Ed Dames as discussing some
key Scientology concepts/terms on one of his training tapes.
It's a well-known fact that some of the early researchers into
remote viewing were one-time Scientologists.  But this article
goes into conspiracy hyper-drive in connecting WAY too many
dots.

The article speculates that these early researchers were very
highly-placed Scientologists. I haven't seen any evidence of
that and given the emotional tone of the article from the
Veritas group and their behavior toward me when I tried to
clarify a few things, I wouldn't accept any of the content there
as gospel.  I haven't seen the Dames tape in question, I believe
it's tape #2 in his series, but I'm not sure.  I will take their
word for the fact that Ed actually said these things (although
perhaps that's too large an assumption).

The article is quite lengthy, but someone on one of the mailing
lists
described the bottom line like so,

> Why Does Scientology's Church of Spiritual Technology own copyrights ot
> technologies used by the CIA and PSI-Tech's Major Ed Dames? And why did Ed
> Dames deny it on a popular National Radio Show?

To which I responded:

They DON'T!  I tried to clear this up with the Veritas people --
the ones who originally posted this article -- a couple of weeks
ago. They were quite uninterested in discovering the truth of
the matter and accused me of being a disinformation agent!
Harrumph!

I have been trained through the Advanced level of "CRV" or
"Controlled Remote Viewing," which is one form of remote viewing
taught and used at the Ft Meade unit.   The person who taught
me, who is one of the ex-military remote viewers (NOT Ed Dames,
who wasn't a viewer in any case), is teaching the exact same
remote viewing that they used in the unit. And I can tell you,
without hesitation -- and if you don't believe me there are
about 200 other trained CRVers you can ask -- NONE of the
Scientology terminology or concepts themselves referred to in
this article are part of CRV.  None.  Nada. Zip.

I don't know if Ed Dames is or was a Scientologist.  I choose to
ignore him for a multitude of reasons, the least of which is
this possible connection.

It should be evident to ANYONE with the sort of interests that
would lead them to subscribe to a list like this that Ed Dames
is a renegade! The other Ft Meade remote viewers have made that
fairly (although politely) clear on Art Bell and other venues.
And they certainly aren't promoting the kind of apocalytic BS
that Ed peddles on Art Bell every other week.  (Well...I guess
he'll have to find another venue for awhile.)

The inclusion of Scientology concepts on Ed Dames' training
tapes isn't the only deviation from traditional CRV, there are
several at least -- none of which are an improvement and to a
trained CRVer several don't even make sense.  (Not just my
opinion, my well-circulated critique of Ed's first tape was met
with many compliments from some of the ex-military RVers, so I
guess they concur.)

Ed Dames is a strange dude. Originally he claimed he'd
"improved" on Controlled Remote Viewing, but used the old
xeroxes of the original military manual as his own training
manual, not even bothering to change the cover page to reflect
his new "TRV" nomenclature.  Later he comes out with the
training tapes and THEN he decides to deviate from the more
traditional form.  And perhaps he thought a few Scientology
concepts would enhance something...I wouldn't know.

It might make for good conspiracy reading to link the CIA and
Scientology and SRI and the Army and so on, and so on.  But it's
not
reality.

HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR?

[THANK YOU! --ebk]


--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:05:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 20:32:55 PDT

>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

For the record, new readers can pick up the thread from the
archives in UFOMIND by clicking either on my name or Jerome
Clark's name and the entire archived thread from the inception
will become available.

Jerome Clark's ufological wisdom portrays the following
clap-trap:

>The Sturrock
>panel's conclusions show us what the best ufology, and the best
>ufologists, can accomplish, and they give us some reason for
>optimism about future prospects.

After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these
are some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the
Summary Report of the Scientific Review Panel:


        "On the other hand, the review panel was not convinced that
any of the evidence involved currently unknown physical
processes or pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial
intelligence."

        "It appears that most current UFO investigations are
carried out at a level of rigor that is not consistent with
prevailing standards of scientific research."

        "The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
causes of the reports."


In other words, the evidence presented was unconvincing that it
involved anything unknown to science, that the evidence
presented was unscientific and that further analysis of the
evidence presented would not be productive. Let me put it in
other terms: Where is the beef? Where is the Science? No, we
don't want to look at it again!

It went further on extenting the conclusion of Dr. Edward U.
Condon of the Colorado Study that:

        "nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21
years [add another 29 years now to it] that has added to
scientific knowledge."

Yet, the Sturrock panel is being sold to us as if it validates
ufology? I suspect the entire UFO community needs to assume a
wait and see
attitude inspite of Jerome Clark's ufological wisdom.

No where does it imply any validation of ufology contrary to
what some people would like everybody to believe.

Not only that, but there is already one voice of dissent on the
public record from the participating group of scientists in the
panel, Dr. H.J. Melosh, a meteorologist who was interviewed for
BBC. Dr. Melosh is reputed to have said that the panel wasn't
independent because they had connections with the UFO community
and it was allegedly clear to him that the panel was not clean.
Dr. Melosh went on allegedly to say that the so-called evidence
was not convincing and it was un-scientific with no hard
evidence available. He went on to say that he for one was not
going to spent any more time on the subject of UFOs.

>In the meantime, however: if you want to be treated with kid
>gloves, don't box with the heavyweights.

Say Muhammad Clark, I am over here, not over there.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:08:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Uh, does that mean that you do support or don't support your own
>statement that debunkers aren't part of the problem?

Ufology's problem is internal to itself. Debunking only works on
bunk.

>>I don't really know where the basis of your critique is coming
>>from. On one hand Klass has been critisized for not even
>>speaking to witnesses and Sagan for not investigating UFO cases.
>>In Klass's Skeptics UFO Newsletter he seldoms address witnesses
>>unless they have already reached public status usually by having
>>written a book or having appeared and made statements in a mass
>>media like a TV show. Critiquers like to have it both ways at
>>their convenience, but it makes for faulty logic.

>The basis of my critique comes from the dislike I suddenly
>developed for Carl's attitude toward honest people seeking an
>explanation for something unusual they've seen. Would you like
>to be told that an amazing experience you've had was
>"worthless"?

If you have nothing to independently verify your experience, I
am afraid it is worthless as proof of anything.  That is the
real world. Accept it and learn to live with it.

>Like you, he lumped every person on the planet with
>an interest in UFOs into a single category, at least toward the
>end of his life.

I have an interest in UFOs.  I don't feel like he ever lumped me
into any category.  I know for a fact he also had an interest.
And what is your basis for saying that? If you want to be like
Jerome Clark and construct personnas and build motivations for
these assumed personnas around what you believe to be the case,
you are at the same level he is.  He won't like that. There is
not enough room for someone else at his level.

>Frankly, I found his assumptions disgusting and
>most unbecoming of a scientist.

Most of the world feels differently about Carl Sagan.  I for one
admire the man for what he did bringing a compelling
appreciation of science into my home.  And his popularization of
extraterretrial intelligence made me think twice about the real
possibility that other life forms exist outside our planet. I
don't share your view of Carl Sagan as an enemy of ufology.  I
think in the long term run, he will turn out to be more of a
friend to ufology then folks that you may now idolize.

>The above-mentioned complaints against
>Phil and Carl are (and were) legitimate ones.

The point is that legitimacy in this case is totally irrelevant.
Ufology is not advanced one yota by pointing fingers, justified
or not, outside of the field.  It has become a cop-out in
ufology to attack skeptics, debunkers, the scientific community,
government and anyone that raises a dissenting opinion against
the temple.  It hasn't advanced ufology in fifty years and it
won't advance it in the future.  Most of the finger pointing
against skeptics and debunkers (debunking only works on bunk) is
to ellicit support from the gallery, i.e. an illogical fallacy.
Ufology needs to clean itself up. Nobody will do it for ufology.
If you wish to vent out against Carl Sagan or Phil Klass, go
right ahead. But, you are not advancing ufology one yota.

>Are
>radar-visual or ground-trace cases "absolutely worthless" too?

Most are worthless. If they weren't, we would not have this
discussion. What is missing in all these cases, every last one
of them is complete linkage of the data from the initial premise
to the conclusion.  If there is no linkage, the case is
worthless as proof of any given hypothesis.  Ufology has no case
in its vast files that links the premise to its final
conclusion.

>Those aren't just anecdotal stories. So, why didn't he want to
>look? Science demands an answer, and even if (by scientific
>analysis) the circular, charred area of grass turns out to have
>been produced by rabbits mating at high speed, at least the
>effort was made, and I and most here would be satisfied by the
>results. Science still wins. But when scientists refuse even to
>examine, because they have preconcieved notions of what they may
>find, then are they still scientists? That's when science loses.

First of all, nobody has any obligation to invest their time and
their resources on your ideas. Period!  It is up to you to prove
your contentions and provide compelling evidence for your
claims.  If you believe you have something extraordinary, it is
up to you to provide the extraordinary evidence.  It is not up
to science to come running just because you called.  That is the
real world. Accept it and learn to live with it. Nobody is
stopping you from producing compelling evidence of an alien
cruiser or ET, but don't expect somebody else to go get one and
if they don't you demonize them.

>BTW, the sarcastic burnt-circle cause given above was intended
>as humor. Guess I shouldn't give debunkers ideas though.

>Listen. I must have watched "Cosmos" billions and billions of
>times. I loved Carl Sagan and respected his work.

Your love for him  is simply overwhelming your commentary.

>That is until
>he became bitter and began lashing out at the UFO community at
>large, without ever referring to the relevant evidence
>(Stanton's phrase).

Carl Sagan was not bitter towards ufology. As far as Stanton's
'relevant evidence', read the Sturrock panel's report.  There is
no relevant evidence according to them. As a matter of fact,
they suggested that the evidence presented should be packed up
and not reviewed again, because ufologists would never get
anywhere with the unscientific data they presented.  As far as
Stanton, he is an excellent speaker and it is his job to excite
the crowd.  He is good at it.  He is a card-carrying member of
the guild.

>I wouldn't have minded if he could explain
>the sightings as easily as he dismissed them. It's much easier
>to say "You saw Venus" than it is to say "I don't know what that
>disc-shaped object with blue lights around the perimiter
>was...let's find out!".

There is nothing stopping you from doing that. Go for it!

>I really don't care what his earlier work toward UFOs was. He
>did a lot of damage in his latter years. Didn't you see the guy
>on TV? Perhaps you weren't privy to to interviews he gave. If
>you weren't, then you may be forgiven for not being aware of his
>arrogance. If you were, then you turned a blind eye to it.

Carl Sagan is irrelevant to ufology's woes.  If you are unable
to see that, then continue lashing out and blaming the world for
ufology's lack of credibility. When you finish, you can start
over again from the beginning because nothing you would have
said would have helped ufology get up from its pit.

>Sorry, but people don't see UFOs because they need to believe in
>something. They see them because they are BBQing, driving home
>from work, or piloting an airplane. Carl had his cause and
>effect mixed up.

Why don't you lambast ufologists for not doing there job right
and getting the compelling evidence?  They seem to spend most of
their time attacking people like Phil Klass and Carl Sagan
instead of doing something that may produce paydirt.

>You remind me of my boss. You see, we have squirrels that build
>nests along the eaves of our building. They frequently find ways
>into the building, much to my and my co-worker's amusement.
>They're just curious, or perhaps searching for food. Well, one
>day I decided to oblige one of them, and tossed him a few pieces
>of my doughnut. Unfortunately, the boss walked in, and became
>furious.

Do you have a job as a donut taster?

>I thought I'd catch heat for wasting company time (I
>could have been doing more productive things with my time in the
>four seconds it takes to toss a few doughnut pieces, you know!).
>Instead, he said "THAT'S why we get squirrels in here! Do you
>want to explain to our insurance company that the squirrels chew
>up the insulation and ceiling panels because my employees are
>feeding them doughnuts?"

>Now for some reality. The squirrels build nests there because
>that's what they've always done....many generations of them.

They learned to like donuts or is it a hereditary acquired
taste?

>And, they will continue to do so until they are exterminated
>(killed, for you non-pc folks)or the building is torn down. My
>boss habitually grabs the first available explanation for
>unwanted events, and applies it to all the examples of the
>events that have ever occurred. This is as logical as the
>arguments made by debunkers, and as logical as the way you
>interpreted my statement about their effect on ufology.

Your boss is the boss.  I recommend you follow his lead and stop
wasting your valuable time with the squirrels.  With the money
you save from the extra donuts not wasted on the squirrels, you
can buy your boss one of Jerome Clark's books on ufological
wisdom and everybody comes out winners.  The boss sees your real
interest in life is not squirly. You gain a companion in your
boss where you can share your thoughts on ufological wisdom with
him. Clark gets to sell one of his books and make enough money
to buy the squirrels a donut. The squirrels get to move over to
Clark's house and keep the heavyweight squirrel some much needed
company - a win-win situation for all!

>Mr Stuart, I apologize for picking on a deceased person.

You don't owe me any apology.

>However, death does not free us from the legacy we leave behind,
>good or bad. I will remember Carl Sagan in many good ways, but I
>was severely disappointed in him in his final years. When the
>debunkers stop altering details of sightings, humiliating and
>insulting witnesses, attacking ufologists ad nauseam, and are
>willing to sit down with them, examine the data they have
>collected and just generally behave like big people, then I will
>be first in line to shake their hands. What have they got to
>lose? Science should prove that there's nothing to the stories,
>right?

Wrong! It is not up to science or anybody else to prove that
there's nothing to the stories. It is up to whoever makes the
claim, not science, not Carl Sagan, not Phil Klass, not Laura
Schellinger.

>They can prove ufologists wrong once and for all.
>Or can they?

Have you ever entertained the concept that they don't care one
way or the other?  No one is ever going to lift a hand to help
out ufology. Ufology will have to clean up its own act.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:27:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:49:40 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:19:34 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

GENTS/LIST--

>If you take the tour of Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's house
>near Charlottesville, Virginia, you will see one of those
>gadgets owned by Jefferson and they will tell you that he
>invented it.

Bob,

Interesting that it dates back that far. I wouldn't have thought
that they'd have so much paperwork back around 1800 to need one.
But a president's secretary has to have all the letters all
lined up properly in advance on the device if it's going to save
the president any time.

The gadget at Monticello indeed was of Mr. Jefferson's own
invention and design, created long before he became president,
and he used it personally. He created it because he had so many
letters and other documents of which he needed multiple copies.
Paperwork has been the bane of humankind since before paper was
invented (see ancient Ur).

As for Harry's signature, see Kevin Randle's post.

-- 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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:32:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:46:48 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

Responding to Bob, Jim wrote-

>Bob,

>Interesting that it dates back that far. I wouldn't have thought
>that they'd have so much paperwork back around 1800 to need one.
>But a president's secretary has to have all the letters all
>lined up properly in advance on the device if it's going to save
>the president any time.

>But it does seem to be a more plauible solution to the
>duplicate-signature problem than that it occurred by chance,
>though the latter may not be totally out of the question, as a
>previous list member pointed out.

>   Jim

If you are refering to my post, "previous list member" sounds a
little like I've left the group. . . . <g>

What I think we're describing here is a pantograph, or an
extension of it. You can find a simple explanation of that
device at:

http://www.edc.org/LTT/ConnGeo/pant.html

While this could be designed to generate multiple signatures
that all look the same, it isn't very effecient and wouldn't
serve too useful a purpose for Government officials.  The
problem is that the signer has to be there to sign his name, so
the other pens can mimic his signature on multiple documents.
That would require a lot of organization and effort, and I'm not
sure that would be the case very often (especially with
Government as we know it today, but I'm not going to go there. .
. . <g>)

The autopen, to my knowledge, was used extensively by President
Kennedy, and I don't know if its use at the White House goes
back further than that. The Autopen was also a large mechanical
device that recorded the pen strokes, and could be duplicated by
anyone who then had access to it. Kennedy had more than 20
different autopen signatures that were used through the years,
and there is at least one book on the market that provides
examples of all those signatures.  I have several documents with
President Carter's signature, and I can hold them up to the
light and see that the autographs are exact duplicates.

As an aside, I would note that they were also popular among some
Members of the House and Senate, but that has now given way to a
computer graphic signature that is used on many Congressional
responses.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: "Donnie W. Shevlin" <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:08:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:43:05 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment



>From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:39:37 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

><snip>

>Why is this so important, anyway? That piece of footage could be
>real or, it could have been selected just for that "look" to
>which you refer, (or is it reefer?).

><snip>

> Jim

Can you name for me just one piece of footage that has been
declared 'clear cut or real'? Why over look something that could
be evidence? We should quickly dismiss all of what we see because
we can prove this portion to be fake. :)

It's most likely Russian training film at the end of the show.
Everyone has been focus on that for weeks now. But people here
are willing, with out knowing any sources, to throw the entire
show out over that small piece of film.

Donnie






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:37:43 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:52:46 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

Hello, list,

Recently, Jim Deardorff offered:

>>In the Truman Library they
>>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine."

<snip>

>>Thus, except for minor slop in the mechanical linkages,
>>the other four signatures would be identical to the master
>>signature except perhaps also in intensity of the ink trace.

<snip>

Kevin Randle's response was:

>The dates on the documents in question, if I remember correctly
>is September 23, 1947, and October 1, 1947, which means, that it
>is unlikely that both documents were signed at the same time so
>that the signatures would match. Both are letters or
>correspondence that was of a perishable nature. They would have
>been signed and then sent on, so that you wouldn't have had the
>September 23 memo setting around for five or six weeks.


My gut reaction is that the MJ12 document isn't real. However,
Mr. Deardorff brings up an interesting notion. As far as the
dates are concerned, the difference between September 23, 1947
and October 1 1947 is only 7 days, not five or six weeks. Having
worked in a corporate environment, I can tell you that it is not
unusual for an executive to dictate a week's worth of letters
and sign them all at once at the end of the week, with different
dates atop each. In a rapidly changing political environment, it
is also not uncommon to dictate memos and hold them until
feedback on certain issues is obtained. Then, if necesary, the
memos could be modified to fit the needs of that memo's
particular goal. This would be especially true if Truman were
traveling a lot and generated correspondence on the road,
without benefit of his close advisers. I would be interested to
see what his travel agenda was for
the week in question. Just a thought....

Moving on, Kevin opined:

>Second point is, again if I remember correctly, that when the
>October 1 document was found, the MJ-12 proponents suggested
>that it proved the authenticity because it was an exact match.
>When they learned that no two signatures from the same hand
>should match exactly, Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera went to a
>great deal of trouble to prove that they weren't an exact match.
>That should rule out the multiple pens trick.

Hmmm.

Maybe, maybe not. Having played with one of the darned things,
I can tell you they don't work as well as you might expect. One
of the things that must be realized is that, since no two
signatures are expected to be identical, then the device wasn't
required to produce that exact a replication. What makes a
signature official is WHO signed it, not the actual details of
the signature itself. For example, auto giant Henry Ford was
totally illiterate his whole life and signed everything with an
"X" in front of witnesses. When a repeating device like the one
mentioned above was used with Truman, there was always a witness
present to testify to the signature process, for obvious
reasons!

>Finally, a questioned document expert in New York City suggested
>that the October 1 "donor" signature had been slightly modified
>so that it would fit onto the memo. The stroke on the T in
>Truman had been shortened. Truman also signed his documents so
>that the T extended into the body of the text but on the MJ-12
>document, it was uncharacteristically low. Both of these things
>suggested that the signature had been lifted from an authentic
>document and applied to the memo. That meant the memo was a
>fake.

<snip>

I don't know. Do we dispute the signature because it's too
identical or not identical enough?

I think that, even in consideration of the "repeating device"
mentioned above, Steven Kaeser hit closer to the truth when he
pointed out in a previous posting that it is totally possible to
write two signatures exactly the same. After reading his
posting, I went through my files and found at least three of my
own signatures that were, for all practical purposes, exact
matches to one another when held to the light.

Truthfully, I would have bet a lot of money against it, but I
can't deny what I see with my own eyes!

If Truman did sign a stack of documents all at the same time,
then that would increase the likelihood of a "duplicate"
signature, whether a 'repeater' device was used or not.

Later, all...

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:48:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:33:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:30:29 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net, clearlt@pacbell.net
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

<snip>

>I share your beliefs that there is no reason for these general
>officers to lie about the events of Roswell. Some time ago I sat
>opposite General Exon at lunch at the Air Force West club where
>for a couple of hours I could look him in the eye as he quite
>openly and candidly discussed the events of his part in the
>Roswell Event. We were flanked by two of his former pastors at a
>church in Redondo Beach, CA, where he was head usher. I have
>absolutely NO reason to believe that he spoke anything but the
>truth. He repeated what generally has been attributed to him by
>Kevin Randle and Stan Friedman when interviewed after I had
>informed them about General Exon's coincidental roles in the
>Roswell Mystery. As has been reported in the past, the general
>was quite upset with Randle for "going beyond" what he had said
>to him. (I assured him that had been my experience with Randle
>also!) Perhaps you can ask the general about his earlier
>statements and any other questions you might have.

Well, here we go again. J. Bond Johnson slinging allegations
that are not in evidence. Everything that I reported about
General Exon's statements are backed up by audio taped
interviews with him. The only exception is the lunch I had with
him at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base officer's club and
there was nothing in that interview that hadn't been said
earlier on tape. By the way, General Exon paid for the lunch.

When it was suggested that I had somehow misrepresented what
General Exon said, I sent him a copy of the book and a copy of
the tape and asked to which statements did he disagree. It all
revolved around his flying over the dual crash sites some time
after the events. I had thought that a word might have been left
out that give a wrong impression but when the tape was compared
with what the General had said, it was word for word. In a
letter sent in response to my questions about this, Exon said
that the quotes were accurate. He said that I had given his
words more weight than they deserved because he said that he
didn't know anything first hand. That's a debate that can be
held at another time. The real point is that General Exon agreed
that what I had written was accurate and he had said the things
that I reported he said. In fact, in his letter, General Exon
apologized to me. On November 24, 1991, he wrote, "I'm sorry
that a portion of my interview has given you trouble... I did
enjoy your and Donald's (Schmitt) efforts in digging into who
knows what! I'm returning the copy of your book. I'll be glad to
pay for it but would appreciate it being autographed." Does this
sound as if General Exon is upset with what I had written in the
book? He even wanted an autographed copy. (And no, I didn't
charge him for it.)

>I have no reason to believe that General Ramey was telling me
>anything but the absolute truth when he said he didn't know what
>the Roswell debris was as I was photographing him in his office
>on July 8, 1947. I believe now that he was seeing and examining
>the debris for the first time as I was shooting him, along with
>then Colonel Dubose, his chief of staff, and Major Marcel. As
>has been widely reported, Marcel on orders directly from Ramey
>had just arrived within the hour from Roswell with the debris
>that he had collected at the Foster Ranch the evening before.

I don't doubt that General Ramey was telling Johnson the truth
(or at the very least as much of it as he wanted Johnson to
hear) as Johnson was photographing him in his office. The
problem stems from Johnson's insistence that Ramey said he
didn't know what it was at the time when Johnson is on the
record, on tape, saying that Ramey told him that it was nothing
more than a weather balloon from the very beginning.

As a single example of this, one that Johnson has heard by now,
he, Johnson 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."

Months later he became convinced that General Ramey hadn't known
what the debris was and had told Johnson that during the
photographic session. Johnson's disagreement with me stems from
what he told me originally, several different times about Ramey
telling him it was balloon debris and then his radical changing
of his story.

In fact that is where all these problems began. Johnson
graciously granted me a number of interviews, and allowed me to
record them. I reported accurately what he said, and those who
have heard the tapes know that Johnson said exactly what I wrote
that he said. He somehow got it in his mind, some time later,
that General Ramey hadn't told him these things and it was only
later that he learned it was a weather balloon. This is not
borne out by the record.

Johnson told me that he had written the article that accompanied
his photograph in the newspaper. When I pointed out the last
paragraph indicated that Ramey had the balloon explanation all
along, Johnson disavowed his authorship of the article.

He also seems to have forgotten that General DuBose also said
that the cover story of  a weather balloon was in place before
any of the press arrived.

So, once again we go over the same ground with Johnson slinging
his allegations. The record is quite clear on these points.
Johnson told me that he was told by Ramey during the
photographic session that what had been found was a weather
balloon. And, General Exon told me the things that Johnson now
suggests that General Exon is upset that I reported.
The facts do not bear Johnson's allegations.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 15

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:49:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:00:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Uh, does that mean that you do support or don't support your own
>>statement that debunkers aren't part of the problem?

>Ufology's problem is internal to itself. Debunking only works on
>bunk.

My two cents used to buy a seltzer and a pretzel. That was about
the same time I became interested in UFOlogy and astronomy. The
statement above (debunking only works on bunk) is revealing. The
culpably ignorant (debunkers as a rule) have not been successful
at being credible. Not to this writer anyway. Most of the
criticism I've heard, most of the explanations I've heard from
debunkers has had less credibility than the events which they
attempt to debunk.

I do, however, agree that much of UfoLogy's problems stem from
it's inability to agree one with the other, internally. But
properly handled, and it appears to be so in this venue, this
can be healthy.

>>>I don't really know where the basis of your critique is coming
>>>from. On one hand Klass has been critisized for not even
>>>speaking to witnesses and Sagan for not investigating UFO cases.

<snip>

>If you have nothing to independently verify your experience, I
>am afraid it is worthless as proof of anything. That is the
>real world. Accept it and learn to live with it.

People who have had experiences involving abduction or sighting
of unconventional craft will tell you that you appear to be full
of yourself for telling it in just that way. You should know by
now, after a half century and more of anecdotal evidence, that
there is nothing so rare as hard evidence. "Rare" is ill-used.
Perhaps the word should be "nonexistent." What is worthless, is
the statement above. For neither acceptance nor rejection of the
phenomenon is demonstrable. Having said this, the experiencers
know what they've experienced, the believers know they know what
they've experienced and the rest are debunkers. "When you aint
got no faith, then you got unbelief" (Dylan).

Accept it and learn to live with it.

>>Like you, he lumped every person on the planet with
>>an interest in UFOs into a single category, at least toward the
>>end of his life.

>I have an interest in UFOs. I don't feel like he ever lumped me
>into any category. I know for a fact he also had an interest.
>And what is your basis for saying that? If you want to be like
>Jerome Clark and construct personnas and build motivations for
>these assumed personnas around what you believe to be the case,
>you are at the same level he is. He won't like that. There is
>not enough room for someone else at his level.

I too, have an interest in UFO's. And I've had that interest for
more than half a century. But I try to maintain an open mind.
Trained as an engineer and brought up in the Aerospace industry
when the "Grand Tour" math was being worked out on paper without
the aid of a computer, I can tell you that your mind, in my
opinion, is closed. Open it up. You'll feel better.

>>Frankly, I found his assumptions disgusting and
>>most unbecoming of a scientist.

>Most of the world feels differently about Carl Sagan. I for one
>admire the man for what he did bringing a compelling
>appreciation of science into my home. And his popularization of
>extraterretrial intelligence made me think twice about the real
>possibility that other life forms exist outside our planet. I
>don't share your view of Carl Sagan as an enemy of ufology. I
>think in the long term run, he will turn out to be more of a
>friend to ufology then folks that you may now idolize.

"I was a friend of Sagan (sic-Jamis)." I agree that he did much
to promote the sciences of astronomy and cosmology. But you
cannot possibly have read his last book to have written above.

>>The above-mentioned complaints against
>>Phil and Carl are (and were) legitimate ones.

>The point is that legitimacy in this case is totally irrelevant.
>Ufology is not advanced one yota by pointing fingers, justified
>or not, outside of the field. It has become a cop-out in
>ufology to attack skeptics, debunkers, the scientific community,
>government and anyone that raises a dissenting opinion against
>the temple. It hasn't advanced ufology in fifty years and it
>won't advance it in the future. Most of the finger pointing
>against skeptics and debunkers (debunking only works on bunk) is
>to ellicit support from the gallery, i.e. an illogical fallacy.
>Ufology needs to clean itself up. Nobody will do it for ufology.
>If you wish to vent out against Carl Sagan or Phil Klass, go
>right ahead. But, you are not advancing ufology one yota.

But it feels so good!

>>Are
>>radar-visual or ground-trace cases "absolutely worthless" too?

>Most are worthless. If they weren't, we would not have this
>discussion. What is missing in all these cases, every last one
>of them is complete linkage of the data from the initial premise
>to the conclusion. If there is no linkage, the case is
>worthless as proof of any given hypothesis. Ufology has no case
>in its vast files that links the premise to its final
>conclusion.

Uh huh. So what? This subject is not as yet a science. DUH! It
will become a science when there are little pasty gray dudes
flying in from Mongo asking to take them to our leader. Geeze!
What the hell are we gonna do if this happens _Today_!??? Who we
gonna call, Ed? Slick, Phil, you????? _Who_?


>>Those aren't just anecdotal stories. So, why didn't he want to
>>look? Science demands an answer, and even if (by scientific
>>analysis) the circular, charred area of grass turns out to have

<snip>

> It is not up
>to science to come running just because you called. That is the
>real world. Accept it and learn to live with it. Nobody is
>stopping you from producing compelling evidence of an alien
>cruiser or ET, but don't expect somebody else to go get one and
>if they don't you demonize them.

Please _do_ expect us (those of us who are experiencers or
believers) to come running to science asking for help just
because you said science would not come running to us merely
because we called.

I mean, why in heaven's gate, I mean 'name' should we be asking
science to investigate phenomena which has been allegedly going
on for at least a half century and for which ufology has been
BEGGING for answers for more longer? Why? I ask why not! This
appears to me at least, a very likely candidate for scientific
investigation. Merely because there are no answers? Nah. Not a
good enough reason.

DUH!

Learn to live with it!

<snip>

>Your love for him is simply overwhelming your commentary.

<snip>

>they (STURROCK) suggested that the evidence presented should be packed up
>and not reviewed again, because ufologists would never get
>anywhere with the unscientific data they presented.

<snip>

Listen pal, the very statement demands that scientists look at
this issue and do so quickly, before they begin looking like
dimbulbs. If indeed, this has not already occurred.

<snip>

>Carl Sagan is irrelevant to ufology's woes. If you are unable
>to see that, then continue lashing out and blaming the world for
>ufology's lack of credibility. When you finish, you can start
>over again from the beginning because nothing you would have
>said would have helped ufology get up from its pit.

OK, we'll show you our pit if you show us yours.

>>Sorry, but people don't see UFOs because they need to believe in
>>something. They see them because they are BBQing, driving home
>>from work, or piloting an airplane. Carl had his cause and
>>effect mixed up.

>Why don't you lambast ufologists for not doing there job right
>and getting the compelling evidence? They seem to spend most of
>their time attacking people like Phil Klass and Carl Sagan
>instead of doing something that may produce paydirt.

No. The ufologist is being lambasted by people who have not the
vision nor the intellect to realize that "compelling evidence"
does _not_ exist and will not likely exist until _science_ shows
up with help _or_ aliens show up. If the latter, then science
will indeed look as foolish as the debunkers' reasons for the
phenomenon. I realize where the term "Swamp Gas) came from,
however I use it freely in order to explain with impunity, the
demeaning nature of the debunkers strategy.

<snip>

>>Mr Stuart, I apologize for picking on a deceased person.

>You don't owe me any apology.

Actually, I think you owe yourself one, for the sin of culpable
ignorance.

>>However, death does not free us from the legacy we leave
>>behind, good or bad.

<snip>

>>What have they got to
>>lose? Science should prove that there's nothing to the stories,
>>right?

>Wrong! It is not up to science or anybody else to prove that
>there's nothing to the stories. It is up to whoever makes the
>claim, not science, not Carl Sagan, not Phil Klass, not Laura
>Schellinger.

Wrong! It is up to science, in fact it is the responsibility of
science, to research phenomena which has presented _information_
which appears to counter the accepted body of scientific
knowledge. Should science investigate the body of evidence
provided, no matter how meager, on the subject of UFOlogy, they
(science) will be doing _exactly_ what science is supposed to be
doing... Think on how a 1940's man would view today's
technology. Just the possibility that such technology might be
out there is reason enough to spend research time rather than
debunking time on this subject..... and if for no other reason
than to prove us wrong and get us the hell out of their hair so
they can do some REAL research.

>>They can prove ufologists wrong once and for all.
>>Or can they?

>Have you ever entertained the concept that they don't care one
>way or the other?

DUH? (with finger approaching an opening into the nasal
cavity)

>No one is ever going to lift a hand to help
>out ufology. Ufology will have to clean up its own act.

>Ed Stewart

"The moral of this story, the moral of this song, is that one
should never be, where one does not belong." (Dylan said that)

"Accept it and live with it." (Ed Stewart said that)

Jim (I said that)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:09:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:26:33 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>>At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
>>his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
>>the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
>>the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
>>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine."

The use of autopens is common in the autograph collector world,
such as astronaut autographs on philatelic space event covers.
As such, much of the market is corrupt with autopens and not
genuine autographs and they command a lesser price among
reputable dealers. Autopens are distinctly recognizable from
real autographs among autograph experts.

>>In fact, I think this is
>>more plausible than that a clever hoaxster in everything else
>>wouldn't know enough to be aware that no two signatures are
>>supposed to be identical.

>>A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
>>_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
>>nearly identical signature.

Also a point you apparently missed is Dr. Willy Smith's critique
in JUST CAUSE, #27, March, 1991, which I am retyping the
abstract and conclusion below. When I spoke with Dr. Willy
Smith, he said that not one of the MJ-12 proponents ever
rebuttled his analysis. To his knowledge no one ever addressed
it. Barry Greenwood has also confirmed to me that no one ever
wrote back to JUST CAUSE on Dr. Willy Smith's commentary.
Stanton Friedman ignored the below critique in its entirety in
his "Top Secret/Majic". He went as far as stating in his book
the following on page 85 after discusssion of the Truman
signature:


        "This carries the analysis of the MJ-12 documents
themselves about as far as it can go. Surprisingly, nothing that
we had found or that others had alleged indicated that the
documents were anything than legitimate."


This example of Stanton Friedman's intellectual dishonesty among
others in his sales pitch of the MJ-12 saga was discussed at
lenght in late 1996/early 1997 on this very same mailing list
and most of it is still archived and available for reading if
anyone is interested. When reminded of Dr. Willy Smith's
commentary, Stanton Friedman did not respond and ignored it as
he did in his book. Dr. Maccabee was not on the list at the time
of the debate. I personally did ask him about it a MUFON
convention. He turned around without responding and moved over
to another apparently more pleasant conversation. I can't say I
blame him.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
                        A CRITICAL COMMENTARY

Abstract

This critique addresses only the POSTCRIPTUM that appears under
the by-line of Dr. Bruce Maccabee in a recent analytical report
by Moore et al. (Ref. 1, p. 72), and does not imply any intent
to evaluate the report as a whole.

Dr. Maccabee's contribution is no more than another example of
his recently acquired propensity to fall for the Cartesian
fallacy, i.e., confusing a clear argument with a correct
argument. The reasoning is based on faulty premises, and the
conclusion that "the data do not support the claim that the
signatures are identical" is unwarranted. On the contrary, a
more careful analysis seems to indicate that -- to use Osborn's
terminology -- the signatures are suspiciously similar.

[Discussion]

Conclusion

As shown in the abaove table, the ratios of any two vertical or
horizontal segments are essentially the same for both specimens,
thus indicating a common ancestry. Since specimen H is known to
be authentic, i.e. a direct copy of a verified original, it
follows that specimen G is also a copy of the same original.

In addition, comparison by superposition of both specimens on a
light table, verifies that the two signatures are similar, but
not identical. This is to be expected, if we consider the above
results as valid and specimen G was obtained from H by tracing
or more sophisticated methods. The thicker lines of specimen G,
which are apparent in the reproductions, help to mask tracing
irregularities and/or defects. Moore et al. devote some space
(Ref. 1, p. 57) to discuss discrepancies existing between the
two specimens, but all of them could be ascribed to the
procedure used to lift the signature from the original document.
The differences are, at any rate, minor and do not invalidate
the argument presented in this paper which is based on the
published numerical values of the measurements. Admittedly, the
analysis could be refined if better drawings of the specimens
with more precise definition of the end points of the segments
were to become available.

                                        Dr. Willy Smith
UNICAT Project Jan. 1, 1991

                        REFERENCES

1. Moore, W.L. and Shandera, J.H.; The MJ-12 Documents, An
Analytical Report; The Fair Witness Project, 1990.

----------------------------------------------------------------


It appears that the masking effects described preclude the use
of an autopen for the document in question. Yet, the argument
presented clearly demonstrates that the two specimens were
derived from a common ancestor which makes the Truman Memorandum
a fake.

>It is too bad that we are now being again subjected to the
>Truman memo as an authentic document because Truman might have
>used the multiple pen to sign a number of documents at once.
>That overlooks the fact that no one knows where these documents
>originated, no one can use a FOIA request to obtain copies of
>them, and they are filled with technical and historical errors.

It is almost an impossibility for ufology to clear its desk top
of bunk.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:28:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:19:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:18:57 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>(There is even a virtual
>'textbook' on the subject, Ball Lightning and Bead Lightning, by
>James Dale Barry, published almost 20 years ago.)

Also by the same publisher, Plenum Press, New York-London, is
Stanley Singer's "The Nature Of Ball Lightning" published in
1971. Both include hundreds of direct references to the
scientific literature in its extensive bibliographies. There are
about 600 references in Singer's and I estimate close to 2,000
references to the scientific literature in Barry's excellent
book published in 1980.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                       Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:53:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:30:37 -0400
Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

[Apologies for the tardy posting of this message
 to the List - operator error in 'Filters' at this
 end --ebk]

Regarding...

>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:28:21 EDT
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

James wrote:

>Thanks to Asgeir's sharp eye, we now know that the Air Force as part
>of its exhaustive 1994 investigation sent the Roswell crash photos
>to a "national level" organization for digitizing and subsequent
>photo interpretation and analysis...


James,

To confirm, from the July 1994, USAF report:

"Additionally, the researchers obtained from the Archives of the
University of Texas Arlington (UTA), a set of original (i.e.
first generation) prints of the photographs taken at the time by
the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, that depicted Ramey and Marcel
with the wreckage. A close review of these photos (and a set of
first generation negatives also subsequently obtained from UTA)
revealed several interesting observations. First, although in
some of the literature cited above, Marcel allegedly stated that
he had his photo taken with the "real" UFO wreckage and then it
was subsequently removed and the weather balloon wreckage
substituted for it, a comparison shows that the same wreckage
appeared in the photos of Marcel and Ramey. The photos also
depicted that this material was lying on what appeared to be
some sort of wrapping paper (consistent with affidavit excerpt
of crew chief Porter, above). It was also noted that in the two
photos of Ramey he had a piece of paper in his hand. In one, it
was folded over so nothing could be seen. In the second,
however, there appears to be text printed on the paper. In an
attempt to read this text to determine if it could shed any
further light on locating documents relating to this matter, the
photo was sent to a national level organization for digitizing
and subsequent photo interpretation and analysis. This
organization was also asked to scrutinize the digitized photos
for any indication of the flowered tape (or "hieroglyphics,
depending on the point of view) that were reputed to be visible
to some of the persons who observed the wreckage prior to it
getting to Fort Worth. This organization reported on July 20,
1994, that even after digitizing, the photos were of
insufficient quality to visualize
either of the details sought for analysis".


>Now just look at what has been uncovered by the RPIT [Roswell Photo
>Interpretation Team] that the Air Force somehow "overlooked": a
>series of finely machined bas relief symbols emblazoned on the
>metal-looking beams (just as described by several of the original
>Roswell crash witnesses), "balsa wood" struts that are hollow and
>have none of the characteristics of wood (again as described by
>original Roswell witnesses)...

A "series of finely machined bas relief symbols emblazoned on
the metal-looking beams", does seem to remain a somewhat
subjective interpretation.

How many people agree with your conclusion, as opposed to those
who find there are merely anomalous splodges of light and shade.


>...just as described by several of the original Roswell crash
>witnesses...

Bearing in mind that Maj. Marcel stated the beams, "did not look
metallic", and were "something like balsa wood", who are the
witnesses you refer to?

Dr Marcel is the only one who comes to mind, however, he has
lately stated that the 'symbols' he recalled, "were not raised
above the
level of the beams".


>And now phrases like "four victims" and "SW of Magdalena, N. Mex."
>and "Site Two" and "Fort Worth, Tex." being rather easily read in the
>Ramey Message with its official looking heading and logo.

I can't see one word in the message which is indisputable.

Even at the simplest analysis, there are words which appear to
comprise of only two letters, the first being an 'O'. Do those
words say 'OF', can we be certain it isn't 'OR', 'ON'...

One segment which seems to offer interpretation is "FORT WORTH,
TEX.", from the section which is most prominently lit.

Where you believe the word 'VICTIMS' can be read, my best guess
at that passage would be, "AND THE REMAINS OF THE ? WAS
FORWARDED TO THE
? AT FORT WORTH, TEX."

Where you see 'VICTIMS', I would guess 'REMAINS' and not necessarily
of ET bodies.


On Neil Morris's web site, part of the message is interpreted as:

1) ---------------------------***ARY WERE --------------------- AS THE
2) --------------fxs 4 rsev1 VICTIMS OF The WRecK and CONVAY ON TO THE
3) -------------*** at FORT WORTH. Txe.
4) ------------***S** smiThs *ELSE* ***** unus-d**e T&E A3ea96
L*******

5) -------------SOught CRASHEs pOw*** *** N***** SITEOne IS reMotely
*****

6) -----------------***D** bAsE ToLd ***a* for we**ous BY STORY are
*****

7) -----------------lly thry even PUT FOR BY WEATHER BALLOONS n*d**
were

8) --------------------**** *** la** l***denver *****
9)
10)                                                   Temple


Isn't the fact that such a combination of upper and lower case letters
would obviously never occur, illustrative of the RPIT's subjective
analysis and evidence the text can't be reconciled?

One point which looks to be evident from the scanned image is that the
type is entirely in capital letters. Another is that the spacing
between words is distinct. As such, the phrase 'CONVAY ON' [presumably
'CONVEY'] may not consist of two words, only one, which would be
'FORWARDED', in my above suggestion.

Although the initiative to make some sense of this text is absolutely
commendable, wouldn't it be fair to say it's simply impossible?


Incidentally, why would the message be signed 'Temple'?

Was this an omen that 'Roswell' would some 50 years later have become
a demonic religion to so many?


GET THEE BEHIND ME, STAN...



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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:04:58 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

>In a message dated 10/14/98 7:12:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
>updates@globalserve.net writes:

>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: MJ-12 and Truman's signature

>>Hello List,

>>At John White's recent UFO-Experience conference, Bob Wood and
>>his son Ryan brought out a little known fact that could explain
>>the pair of near-identical signatures of Truman which bear on
>>the genuineness of the MJ-12 papers. In the Truman Library they
>>located a photo of Truman in an earlier year, 1927, showing him
>>using an "autopen" or "multiple machine." ....

>>A point I missed, and also because I've not read Stanton's book
>>_Top Secret/Majic_, is the date of the two documents bearing the
>>nearly identical signature. They need to be fairly close to the
>>same date for this to be a valid explanation. Perhaps someone
>>can fill me in on that. ...

>Hello all -

>The dates on the documents in question, if I remember correctly
>is September 23, 1947, and October 1, 1947, which means, that it
>is unlikely that both documents were signed at the same time so
>that the signatures would match. Both are letters or
>correspondence that was of a perishable nature. They would have
>been signed and then sent on, so that you wouldn't have had the
>September 23 memo setting around for five or six weeks.

Kevin,

Did you not mean 8 days here instead of 5 or 6 weeks (38 days)?
An 8-day delay in sending the letter of Sept. 23rd seems well
within the realm of possibility.

Thanks for your other comments. I've forwarded them to Bob Wood,
who may be interested in mulling them over.

Jim Deardorff
Corvallis, Oregon
E-mail: deardorj@proaxis.com
Home page: http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276

From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:43:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:17:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:21:14 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #276

>Apology to MW #276 (For October 15, 1998)

>John has _stones_ to beat the drum, his plaintive entr=E9e's
>weighed in _all_ of your indifference, and all that you shall
>pay! Your silence costs you _dearly_, and the tally quickly
>mounts when you _failed_ to be counted, and the terror sneered
>and pounced!! He even SPEAKS and is ignored as he cries out,
>stabbed and gored, for the succor of his fellows -- and I laugh!
>These the same, assumed NO blame, as Jews and Moslem bore their
>shame as _victims_ burned to genocidal ash!

>He lost it all (they stole it all!) they aced him for a final
>fall, and likely _lied_ and _cheated_ to that end. Justice may
>be rancid, Johnny's low on grace and chances, and the vultures
>circle low and close on in! His house is gone, he stands alone;
>he's waiting for that first cast stone, the grinning Suffolk
>shysters bunch their muscles. Jurisprudence and fair play will
>go to hell and lose their say as it's likely Johnny loses in
>this tussle.

>And YOU! You'll let him slide, and take a ride there's no return
>from. You'll _let_ him fade away and fall from view. Just
>_remember_ you said nothing when the storm is _closer_ building,
>as they set you in their sites and come for you! And rest
>assured they're coming, friend, your history books are filled!
>You're helping with his burning, while it's you who's being
>grilled! The tears will fall from sorry eyes, and stars blink
>out in darkened skies as justice is perverted for their way. You
>_could_ have made the difference, kid! You could have mattered
>-- made your bid, but chose to give him up, and glance away.

>And WHY when it's so obvious this trumped up piece of
>foolishness contrives to bring the LAWFUL to their heel!  Why,
>when it is ludicrous! Impossible!! Incredulous!!! You know that
>Suffolk county _must_ conspire to cheat and steal! You _know_
>the charge is bogus; you can sense that it shan't float! Their
>case won't float a paperclip! HE WAS SET UP! It's a joke! A joke
>except that John awaits the pleasure of the beast! And where is
>his protector? Where's his fan club, at the least! Johnny Ford
>was only lawful when he _pissed_ the man's post toasties . . .
>it's just not fair he end up spitted, slowly turning -- roasted.

>You gonna let them do it? I'll shame you if I can! I'll slap you
>with a brick bat -- I'll rip your lips off, Stan! I'll fester in
>your kill file. I'll rot your disk with shame. I'll teach you
>your complicity! I'll wrap you in your blame! I'll show _you_
>sullen disrespect! I'll chasten _you_ with spite! I'll use a
>verbal onslaught. I'll _show_ you it's not right!

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>I'm gonna send a hundred bucks -- money _I_ could use, but
>shucks, at least I counted -- I shall dream when bully boys
>around ME, team. I tried to stop them, I'll think back (the
>bullies circle, slack jaws slack) -- I gave a hand to Johnny
>_Ford_ when storms colluded like dark lords to sully what we all
>hold dear -- some _truth_ that we might wrest from fear!

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>So you consider what I've said -- remember that you earned it,
>Fred! Johnny Ford has my regard! He stood up _tall_ -- asked
>questions, Pard! He got so far up *noses* they felt knee bones
>on their septums; they were pissed off homicidal -- took a SWAT
>team to his residence! They've amassed the mighty energies of
>the craven Suffolk BEAST. Let's send the honest dollar -- GIVE
>JOHN A _CHANCE_ AT LEAST!!!

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>I am shocked, appalled, and disgusted at the silence and
>indifference of the ufological community regarding the plight of
>John Ford.

>OK, you don't agree, you thought he was a crackpot, or you nurse
>some pathetic high school thing regarding his appearance,
>demeanor, or politics -- these _distract_ from the issue!

>The issue? That in a LAWFUL pursuit of goals we all pay lip
>service to, John Ford has fallen afoul of an obfuscating and
>prevaricating machine perhaps near the root of a teasing,
>ubiquitous, and _obvious_ conspiracy! John Ford is unfairly
>wiped out -- stripped of any armor, and at the mercy of that
>which has worked _passionately_ to amass a _steaming pile_ of
>patently ridiculous and specious *proofs* to the affect that
>John Ford is capable of serial murder!

>Stuff and nonsense!

>As soon as Elaine M. Douglass sends a clean address (via this
>list) where the donations can go, my Hundred Bucks are _off_! I
>so pledge! The check will be made out to John Ford, and I don't
>CARE how he spends the money. Hookers and cheeseburgers would be
>FINE! You send something, too!

>As you value your _own_ hide, _you_ send something too!

>Restore John Ford!

>--
>Explore the Alien View!
>Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

>http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

><Updated 12 September>

>"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.

Dear Alfred,

Thank you for your 'Odd Ode' on John Ford. It is _very_
powerful.

You asked for his address. It's in a separate email, Subject:
John Ford Current Status, which I am forwarding to you.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:08:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo


Regarding...

>From: Karl T. Pflock Ktperehwon@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 15:35:54 EDT
>Subject: Re: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo

Karl wrote:

>>Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 23:03:32 -0400
>>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>Greetings James And Fellow List Slaves --

>I'd vowed not to get into this, but...

>Setting aside the issue of whether or not the use of the terms
>"flying disc/disk" and "flying saucer" was a "complete misnomer"
>based exclusively on Arnold's descriptions (it wasn't),* I offer this
>in re Frank Kaufmann's description of the shape of the relatively
>intact whatever:  Originally, as an unnamed former intelligence type
>at Roswell AAF and then as "Joseph Osborne," Kaufmann described and
>sketched a classic, disk-shaped flying saucer with a small dome
>"about 30 feet in diameter" at a crash site "away from the debris
>field, at a separate site where bodies were located."  See Randle and
>Schmitt's 'UFO Crash At Roswell', ' CUFOS' The Roswell Report: A
>Historical Perspective' (including Don Schmitt's drawings based upon
>Kaufmann's descriptions and sketch), and my 'Roswell In Perspective'.

>Unsurprisingly, the dramatic shape shift in Kaufmann's tales has
>never been addressed satisfactorily by either himself or his
>champions.


Karl,

This is obviously fundamental and needs to be confronted by
proponents of Kaufmann's story.

The further anomalies I had highlighted re Kaufmann's claims
remain documented at:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/jun/m07-030.shtml


>* Kudos to James and Bruce Maccabee for pointing out that, in 1947
>(and, in fact, for years after) these terms were used generically by
>the press to cover anything weird reported in the skies.

It's essential to take a step back and look at it 'in
perspective', as I'm sure you'll agree.

Arnold's reported sighting and the Roswell 'flying disc' story
are inextricably connected, the brief Roswell furore being one
of many 'flying disc' [or 'disk'] stories enthralling the public
at that time.

As we know, if Kenneth Arnold hadn't mentioned, 'they flew like
a saucer would if you skipped it across the water', his
description of the flight characteristics would never have been
misconstrued to be the actual shape of those enigmatic 'objects'
he reported.

'Flying saucers', consequently interchangeable with 'flying
discs', were indelibly imprinted as the popular perception of
anything unidentified in the skies, a historical aspect I had
set out in more detail and on-line at:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/roswell.txt


Even though only two weeks in existence, the 'flying disc' mania
culminated in the Roswell AAF's press release:

"The many rumours regarding the flying disc became a reality
yesterday when the intelligence office of the 509th Bomb Group
of the Eighth Air Force, Roswell Army Air Field, was fortunate
enough to gain possession of a disc through the co-operation of
one of the local ranchers and the sheriff's office of Chaves
County".

The statement continues:

"The flying object landed on a ranch near Roswell some time last
week. Not having phone facilities, the rancher stored the disc
until such time as he was able to contact the sheriff's office,
who in turn notified Major Jesse A. Marcel of the 509th Bomb
Group Intelligence Office".


This is unequivocal; the "flying object landed on a ranch" and a
"rancher stored the disc" for a week, perhaps more, until he was
able to speak with someone in authority.

One fact all viewpoints on 'Roswell' can presumably agree on is
that we have established these claims were mistaken.

Consequently, the press release was grossly misleading and if
intended to be accurate, it was undeniably incompetent.


We know the facts should have resulted in an official statement
something along the lines of:

"The many rumours regarding the flying disc may have become a
reality yesterday when the intelligence office of the 509th Bomb
Group of the Eighth Air Force, Roswell Army Air Field, was
fortunate enough to gain possession of some unidentified debris
through the co-operation of one of the local ranchers and the
sheriff's office of Chaves County".

"The debris was found on a ranch near Roswell some time last
week. Not having phone facilities, the rancher was only later
able to notify the local weather bureau, who suggested he
contact the sheriff's office, who in turn notified Major Jesse
A. Marcel of the 509th Bomb Group Intelligence Office".


Fair enough?


If so, it's unlikely to have prompted the infamous headlines,
'RAAF Captures Flying Saucer on Ranch in Roswell Region',
although allowing for journalistic license, that's possibly
debatable!

It should however have been reported as 'RAAF May Have Found
Wreckage of Flying Saucer in Roswell Region', or similar.


Having noted the patently obvious, yet seemingly often
overlooked, fact that the press release is now realised to have
been so erroneous, arguably a blunder, much of the gloss is
taken off the popularised mystique.


So why would the 'intelligence office of the 509th Bomb Group',
believe the debris was equivalent to gaining "possession of a
disc", or as stated a 'flying disc', ergo 'flying saucer'?

Perhaps this can at least be partly attributed to Maj. Marcel's
reported belief in same.

I've mentioned the following before, as I thought it was an
important insight. In an interview he gave during June 1994 and
which I obtained permission to publish , Dr Marcel, recollected:

Q: I've read that when you were little your dad came and showed
you some stuff, could you tell me that story?

Dr. M: Oh certainly. You know this was in Roswell, New Mexico,
my dad was stationed at the airforce base, and, he was on the
aircraft accident investigation team as an intelligence officer.
He was called because the sheriff got a hold of the base
commander saying they thought there was an aircraft that had
been downed somewhere on a ranch northwest of Roswell. He and
several people went out to investigate to see if it was a
military aircraft or what--see if there was any survivors,
anything at all, but when they got out there--according to the
story I got from him--there was a large debris field of rather
nondescript pieces of wreckage, they didn't know what it was--it
wasn't an airplane, but they didn't know what it was; something
crashed--hit pretty hard out there.

He was at the debris field with a CIC agent by the name of
Cavitt. The CIC is now the CIA. These guys are into
investigating very unusual events. Now they pick up the debris,
portions of it, they realize this is not an aircraft or anything
that could be recognized as such. In 1947 that's when the term
flying saucer first became popular, because there's a man Mr.
Arnold, I think, who was flying in Mt. Rainier Washington state;
saw what looked this thing was, the remnants of a crashed flying
saucer. So, they brought the debris in, and, as our house
happened to be between where they were coming from and the
airbase, so my dad swung by the house to show my mother and
myself what this looked like, and he said "this is a flying
saucer, at least portions of it"

Q: So he actually said that to you?

Dr. M: Yeah, this was about one or two o'clock in the morning,
it was kind of a late night that day.

Q: Did he have to wake you up?

Dr. M: Yeah, oh yeah. I was asleep, and I looked at these
materials, very strange indeed, and, something very different,
definitely not an airplane.

Q: What was your first impression when you saw it?

Dr. M: Well actually, I had never heard of a flying saucer
before, I didn't know what it was, but he said this is a flying
saucer and well, what is that?  and he said something that came
from other places other than the earth here, no it wasn't built
by any civilization that we have here.

Q: So he had that in his mind right then?

Dr. M: Yeah, that was the thought that was planted in my mind,
and when I saw that I could believe it very well because this
was a very strange material, very exotic. [End]


If this was Maj. Marcel's belief, it's understandable that
unidentified debris which, significantly must have come from an
airborne source, was against the background of the then 'flying
saucer' hysteria, concluded to be from 'another planet'.

Nonetheless, Maj. Marcel, accepting his stated familiarity with
contemporary air force technology, could never have been able to
conclusively determine that any unfamiliar material didn't
originate from a secret or experimental project which he had no
knowledge of, perhaps from White Sands, or other nearby
facilities.

What this would evidence, is that there were speculative
conclusions being embraced as fact and which were therefore
prone to beliefs influencing resulting interpretations.


That aside, the press release was a confirmation opposed to more
recent claims that a 'flying disc' didn't in fact land or even
crash-land at the Foster ranch, the debris only being fragments
from a 'flying disc', or, according to Kaufmann a 'delta-shaped'
craft, which eventually crashed elsewhere.

Do proponents of that view therefore concede the intelligence
office of the 509th Bomb Group were mistaken in publicising that
they had acquired "possession of a disc" at the Foster Ranch?



James.
E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
WWW: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

              Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:19:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:08:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Re:  Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:42:21 -0400 (EDT)

>>From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
>>Subject:   The Strange Case Of Art Bell

>>Bell, 52, broadcast his show, "Coast to Coast," via satellite to
>>more than 400 stations nationwide. His home was his studio: a
>>large trailer surrounded by satellite dishes in the Nevada
>>desert about 80 miles east of Las Vegas.   [ East!   -LH ]

<snip>

>Typically accurate reporting.  Look at a map, guys!  80 miles
>east of Las Vegas is in Arizona!
>
>Bob


Hi Bob!

Gawd!  Thats typical " 80 miles East ".

Even if they said "West", that would put them near
Death Valley National Park, in California,  where
Art Bell definitely does *not*  live.

Pahrump,NV is about  50 miles West of Las Vegas,
as the crow flies .. somewhat more over winding roads.

I cannot remember how many times I have had to dig
deep to unscramble little geographical faux-pas like this.

It may not make much difference to the geographically
challenged ( or those who simply don't care ), but its
a major pain in the ass to anyone who wants to map
sightings etc.

Best ..  -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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                         In Defense of Michael Wolf

From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:04:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:31:26 -0400
Subject: In Defense of Michael Wolf


As Posted On Amazon.com.

Read

"A Defense of Michael Wolf: The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy
by Michael Wolf

</exec/obidos/Author=Wolf%2C%20Michael/002-0519692-1911631>

Our Price: $24.00
Availability: This title usually ships within 24 hours.
Hardcover (July 1996)
Dorrance Pub Co;
ISBN: 0805939075


Amazon.com Sales Rank: 60,063
Avg. Customer Review:
Number of Reviews: 7

Customer Comments
Average Customer Review:  Number of Reviews: 7

A Defense of Michael Wolf

Friedman and Wolf Michael Wolf's book, The Catcher's of Heaven,
is one of the best books that have read in a long time. It is
not just a book about UFOs. It is a book on love, courage,
peace, and hope. It is a book about the interconnectedness of
UFOs and ETs to our everyday lives. It is a book about how
science and spirituality are interconnected. It is a book about
us taking responsibility for the care of our own planet. Through
the book, hope is given to the children of the world. The
proceeds of the book goes to a children's foundation and Dr.
Wolf does not receive a penny from the proceeds of the book. I
have had the privilege of visiting with Dr. Wolf at his home and
I have seen his degrees. So, I can honestly say for a fact that
Dr. Wolf did attend both McGill University and MIT. Perhaps, if
Mr. Friedman would take the time to spell Dr/ Wolf's name
correctly, his investigation of determining whether or not
Michael went to these schools would be more successful. Dr/ Wolf
has always used his real name all his life. HOwever, when he
wrote The Catchers of Heaven, he dropped his last name and
retained his middle name. This was done so that Dr. Wolf's
family would be protected from any unwanted intrusions on their
privacy. I also had the privilege of see pictures of Dr. Wolf's
wife and son and as the old adage goes: Pictures speak louder
than words. Furthermore, Mr. Friedman only has a Master's degree
in Physics where Dr. Wolf has his Ph.D. in Physics. Hence, if I
would depend on anyone's research capabilities, I would have to
depend on Dr. Wolf's knowledge and research. Mr. Friedman's
investigation is questionable in that he says he found some of
his information from another Internet researcher. If he did
that, then, I would like to know where the web site is that he
got his information from. If the information is accurate, then
he should not be afraid to give this site out. HOwever, I think
that Mr. Friedman did more than get his information from another
Internet researcher. Various members of Dr. Wolf's family were
called by Charles Wright, who is one of Mr. Friedman's
associates. I know this to be true because I was with Dr. Wolf,
in his home, when he received a call from his brother who had
received a call from Mr. Wright. Dr. Wolf's sister, who
separated herself from MIchael, had received another call. So,
while Dr. Wolf's sister was critical of Michael, his brother was
very supportive of him because Michael and his brother have
witnessed some of Michael's experiences with UFOs. There is a
ten year age difference between Dr. Wolf and his sister, so that
his sister was not even born when Michael started to have his
experiences and therefore would know nothing about them.
Furthermore, James Courant called Dr. Wolf's brother who told
him that Michael's sister has mental problems and told lies
about MIchael. At Roswell, in July, Mr. Friedman quoted the
negative statements of Dr. Wolf's sister and did not even
mention the supportive statements of Michael's brother. On top
of that, in quoting Michael's sister as a source for
information, then his source becomes questionable at best. What
is Mr. Friedman trying to hide when he withholds information and
will not give both sides of the picture? If the public is to be
truly educated, they have the right to all of the information
and not just half of it. The mark of a good investigator is to
look at all sides of the issue and this Mr. Friedman seems
unwilling to do. Concerning my own friendship with Dr. Wolf, I
find him to be a warm, kind, gentle, and loving person who has
the courage to live what he writes about in his book. Therefore,
I would throw the statement of Michael being in a mental
hospital right out the window. I would suggest to Mr. Friedman
that he makes sure of where and how he got his facts before he
starts making statements about other people. Dr. Wolf also has
strong support from people like Bob Dean and Michael Hesseman. I
would further suggest that Mr. Friedman might want to read The
Catchers of Heaven before he makes any other statements about
Dr. Wolf. Furthermore, there are too many people out there who
are too busy criticizing others for no good reason. It is time
that we start supporting one another as we all have a piece of
the truth. It is time that we start helping each other to
discover the truth about UFOs and they are relating to us before
it is too late. We can raise our consciousness only by mutual
support, love and understanding rather than backbiting. It is
time that we start practicing the love and the hope that Dr.
Wolf writes about in his book.

================================================================


About the Author

Dr. Wolf, Chancellor Emeritus of The New England Institute for
Advanced Research, maintains memberships in The New York Academy
of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of
Science, the latter as a patron member. He currently resides in
Connecticut, where he writes and continues his work on a variety
of projects. "For the open mind and heart, this intricately
woven tapestry, 'The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy,' can be a
life-changing book, not only for the children, but for us--the
readers. Michael Wolf takes us to the edge, the launching pad,
if you will, into new learning, new understanding; into an
expanded concept of what 'brother' means, to a place where we
learn that Earth is really at the outer boundaries of what is
happening in the universe.

"The story, engaging, gripping at times, offers choices,
unspoken, but there nonetheless. Dr. Wolf has aptly portrayed
disillusionment, despair, courage, and hope, and above all, his
love for family, for country, for the children, and for brothers
everywhere, even out of time."
--R.T. Ferguson





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:19:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:36:10 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>Hi Errol and list,

>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>opinions.

Okay

>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>pilots saw.

>What your take on this? Looking for input.

I agree totally. I set up the F-16 in the far east. I was with
the bed-down cadre in Okinawa and Korea in 1980 assigned to the
6100 LSS at Kadena AFB. It is an F-16, and that is a UFO, and
damned excellent evidence.


I don't usually comment, but I just had to respond to your post.

Best wishes.

From the author of: Alien Rapture - The Chosen,

Edgar Fouche








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                           Threats Within Ufology

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:42:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:44:45 -0400
Subject: Threats Within Ufology


Following recent speculation over Art Bell's resignation  I
thought it was an opportune time to bring up the subject of
threats within ufology.

Recently I have heard of various people within ufology,
including some on this List, who have received threats related
to their UFO research. These threats have varied from anonymous
phone calls to verbal threats from other ufologists. How do we
combat those who are making these threats?

Would it be beneficial to 'go public' and announce that threats
have been made? This may deter the threats being carried out
especially if the initiator of the threats is known. But what if
the threats are from an unknown source, is there any safeguard
against the threats being carried out?

Again with the recent specualtion over Art Bell etc. can anyone
offer any advice on how these different types of threats should
be handled?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                              Re: Odd Rumblings

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:16:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:47:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Odd Rumblings


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:43:08 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Odd Rumblings

>Dear list,

>Tonight (Wed, 14th) at approximately 7:30, I stepped out onto my
>front porch to see if the rain had stopped. As I stepped out, I
>heard what sounded like the end of a roll of thunder. It had the
>typical random changes of pitch and volume, and faded away
>quickly. This came as no surprise, as the possibility of
>occasional thunder had been forcast for today. I waited for
>another seven or eight minutes to see if I could catch a flash
>of lightning or two, but none were forthcoming. As I turned to
>go back in, two very low frequency rumbles, each of identical
>pitch and duration stopped me in my tracks. The pitch of each
>was perfectly steady, unlike the wandering pitch of a roll of
>thunder, and the two rumbles were spaced about three seconds
>apart, without overlapping.

>This was not thunder. Stormchasing happens to be a hobby of
>mine, and this was different. I once experienced a tremor here
>in NH. It happened to be very quiet at the time, and I actually
>HEARD the tremor before I felt it. This sound was closer to that
>than thunder, so my best guess would have to be a tremor,
>although I felt no ground movement. The sound appeared to
>eminate from northwest of my position in Londonderry NH, but I
>could not hazard a guess as to it's distance.

>For what it's worth.

>Greg


Actually, this is worth a very great deal to me. Last month I
and a number of my neighbors saw an unconventional object flying
slowly over the hills of Westchester. It was visible to
witnesses from the lower section of the County in Greenburg thru
the northern section near the Hudson River, then east toward
Katonah, Somers and Lincolndale. (New York)

The object was reported to local authorities by multiple
witnesses and to Mufon by one witness.... that'd be me. The
object was triangular, large and moving very slowly.

The one common thread reported by each witness was a low
rumbling sound variously described. However your description was
exactly on the money. Checking with several others by sending
out this mail resulted in an overwhelming agreement by those who
responded, that this is the best verbalization of the sound.

While this "sound" was heard by every witness, some did not hear
it during the sighting, others did, and some even heard it
during the daylight hours preceding the sighting.

The only sound which even comes close to this was during an
earthquake which occurred in Westchester in 1985. The low
rumbling was very similar to your description. However that
earthquake "sound" was preceded by a large "crack" type sound,
and of course was felt by the 4.3 Richter shaking which was felt
in three states.

Those to whom this incident was reported initially, that is the
sound which I had so much difficulty describing.

If anyone on this list saw this object or knows of an individual
who may have witnessed it, please have them contact me by email
or report it to MUFON.

Jim Mortellaro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:42:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Now let's move on to the idea of "demons to blame".

>There can be no question among reasonable people that ufology
>has seen several turning points in its relation to science, and
>that those have been almost uniformly negative.

>1) Rejection of the 'Estimate'.

The 'estimate' is an alleged document that no one alive has ever
seen, no one has ever found and that can only be discussed
through second and third hand references. It is an alleged
document without provenance. It was never alleged to be a
scientific document, but a top secret intelligence document
produced to give the best intelligence estimate of then present
situation. As such, its value was tied to the time it was
allegedly produced and only as accurate and good as the
intelligence of the moment subject to change at a moment's
notice. But a turning point for ufology in relation to science?
You're comparing apples and oranges.

>2) Project Sign becomes Project Grudge

Both projects were government/military projects staffed by
military personnel (in most cases the same people) and not
scientists, and governed by military regulations and military
requirements for intelligence and not by science. Again, why do
you call this a turning point for ufology in respect to science?
It appears you have your apple and orange carts mixed up.

>3) Robertson Panel recommends official debunking
>4) Project Blue Book follows recommendations

They sure did, and here you have the real beginnings of modern
day ufology in the US mostly through NICAP and Major Keyhoe and
APRO and the Lorenzens with the emphasis being on government
conspiracies hiding the alien cruiser traffic jam above our
heads from the population and not on applying the scientific
method where possible to ufology. One can argue that there were
exceptions and that there emerged beginnings of some really
serious researchers that were interested in other that
government conspiracies.

>5) Condon provides negative evaluations of scientific relevance
>of ufology, despite contradictions between conclusion, project
>output, and individual project member opinions, this conclusion
>is endorsed by the National Science Foundation and accepted by
>the Air Force.

And most recently conffirmed by the Sturrock panel:


        "nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21
years that has added to scientific knowledge" - Dr. Edward U.
Condon.


        reaffirmed by the Sturrock with the update change of 21
years to 50 years.

It can be argued that ufology never has had a relationship with
science to discuss it in terms of 'turning points' between
ufology and science, especially the above alleged turning points
which are simply an extention of pointing the finger outside of
ufology and blaming the early military intelligence involvement
for todays ufology's woes. That is what ufologists under the
umbrella of ufological wisdom have done continuously for fifty
years instead of doing science. Ufology has never accepted the
responsibility for its own growth as Oberg pointed out in his
paper twenty years ago. Today, the point that Oberg made is
still valid - refusal for any responsibility. Also, ufology has
been demanding special dispensation. They blame science for not
looking into the problem and yet they themselves have not been
able to justify their extraordinary claims. It seems to be a
vicious circle. What came first the chicken or the egg.
Unfortunately, ufology has been unable to provide compelling
evidence that it is holding either the egg or the chicken.

>It has been well documented that most non-US governments
>followed the lead of the US both in deciding if an inquiry was
>appropriate and in terms of the methodology selected. Thus, the
>AF policy of debunking, initiated in response to the Robertson
>panel, had far-reaching effects beyond the US.

Why don't you tell the French that? According to the Sturrock
panel the French have a model in place that ufology needs to
take a closer look at:


        "The GEPAN/SEPRA project of CNES in France has since 1977
provided a valuable model for a modest but effective
organization for collecting and analyzing UFO observations and
related data."


Now, whether or not that observation by the Sturrock panel will
stand up to the test of time remains to be seen. Nevertheless,
what have we done since 1977 except ignore the French?

>In terms of good relations between ufology and individual
>scientists, one needs only look at Menzel and Condon, two
>extremely prominent and influential scientists who were
>adamantly anti-UFO, going so far as to distort or misrepresent
>both the data and the results of research. These men between
>them had more effect on the availability of funding and
>scientists to pursue the UFO phenomenon than anything done by
>CSICOP.

Interesting that they have been dead and gone going on now three
decades and there is still this compelling need to vent out
against them. Well, now we know again. It is all Menzel and
Condon's fault. We have been told that since the very first day
that Menzel and Condon raised there heads on the ufo scene. They
apparently are still controlling ufology's future from the
grave.

>In his capacity with Aviation Week, Klass also had
>significant influence over whether good UFO related work
>would recieve any notice in the aviation press. Obviously, he
>did not use that influence to help.

Obviously not. We can't forget Klass in any meaningfull
discussion involving ufological wisdom.

>I think it is fair to say that these events and persons had a
>negative effect on the development of a science of ufology.

What development in the first place? Ufology has been lazy and
derelict by spending its time chasing conspiracies and blaming
everyone outside its temple for its problems. It has done this
to the point that when it is given an opportunity to show its
best stuff by its best people before a panel funded by a
true-believer, Lawrence Rockefeller, the panel comments thusly:


        "It appears that most current UFO investigations are
carried out at a level of rigor that is not consistent with
prevailing standards of scientific research."


and pertinant to the actual best cases and evidence presented, the
Sturrock panel had this to say:


        "The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
causes of the reports. However, the panel considers that new
data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well
documented, recurrent events), COULD [my emphasis] yield useful
information."


In other words, pack up your existing data. It is no good and
not useful. Start doing real science and you COULD end up with
something useful.

>Further, the rejection of ufology did not stem from a lack of
>proof or the poverty of good work in the field.

Read the above Sturrock panel conclusion.

>The stances of
>these people and organizations were either driven by political /
>security concerns, or were the results of prejudged positions on
>the probability of unusual phenomena. If given the opportunity
>to examine the data, people like Condon turned away from it as
>fast as possible - hardly a scientific attitude.

The Sturrock panel was not impressed either and that is after
another 30 years that ufology had to get its act together. The
Sturrock panel didn't turn away from the 'eeidence'. They were
paid by Lawrence Rockefeller as an handpicked panel to sit there
and listen.

>So pointing out these events and persons as having a determined
>and negative effect on the scientific status of ufology is
>hardly a search for "demons", or an attempt to avoid
>responsibility.

It is simple regurgitation of shifting the responsibility as
Oberg pointed out twenty years ago.

>Not everyone interested in UFOs is suited to doing good
science. >Many are attracted by its sensational nature or its
>entertainment value. Scientists, by their inclinations, tend to
>avoid sensational fields. The risks are very high in those
>areas, and the possibility for career payoff is very small.

So far so good.

>With
>major government agencies and prominent scientists aggressively
>working to poison the well, it can hardly be imagined that
>established scientific talent will be attracted to this field.

Another re-occuring aspect of ufology that Oberg's paper pointed
out was the 'special dispensation' argument. Ufology is
allegedly different and therefore the same rules don't applied.
We cannot do science because the ever present conspiracy against
ufological wisdom.

>Therefore the serious work is left to amateurs and part timers,
>and progress is necessarily slow. Once again, this is just a
>simple consequence, not a search for "demons" or an attempt to
>avoid responsibility.

If you say so.

<Good commentary on anecdotal evidence snipped>

>>Let me see. Critical analysis, discernment, logic, strict
>>interpretation of data, linkage and independent verification are
>>all weapons used by Phil Klass and his ilk.

>I hope this isn't an attempt to seriously characterize debunker
>methodology. It doesn't take much to dispose of such contentions
>about their explanations. Just take Klass' stance on the Coyne
>case or Menzel on the Gill case, or Kottmeyer on Exeter as
>examples.

Debunking has a bad connoctation only inside the circles of
ufological wisdom. Outside this circle it is a respected
endeavor, i.e. "to expose the sham or falseness of ___". It only
works on bunk, nonsense. If in the past Klass, Menzel or
Kottmeyer's arguments failed to expose any sham or falseness in
those cases, then the cases would remain viable. If ufologists
have failed to demonstrate compelling evidence to distinguish
the Coyne, Gill, or Exeter cases as smoking gun evidence then
whatever Klass, Menzel or Kottmeyer might of initially said is
totally irrelevant since the cases are not viable to forward
ufology to the next level and going against Klass, Menzel and
Kottmeyer on those cases are totally irrelevant to the wellbeing
and progress of ufology. Vent if you must, but you are not
advancing ufology forward.

>>Ufology needs to come up with
>>compelling evidence to support its extraordinary claims. All is
>>really needed is one case that stands up to critical analysis,
>>discernment, logic, linkage of data and independent
>>verification. Only ONE CASE!

>Levelland
>Socorro
>The RB-47 case
>Bentwaters / Lakenheath
>Exeter

This is great! Now that ufology has solved the ufo problem we
can all go home and watch it on the six o'clock news.

>Do we need more? They exist. Let's not pretend they don't.

I am afraid the pretense is all yours. None of those cases is
proof for any extraordinary claim.

>Let's also look at the "extraordinary claim" claim.

>Which is more extraordinary:

>1) Solid metallic and / or luminous objects, often structured
>and animated, which affect instruments (radar, magnetic,
>radiation) and the environment (ground traces, medical effects,
>etc) are reported by a demographically normal sample of the
>population (with a skew towards aviators and technical personnel
>in appropriate categories of sightings) and responsible persons
>who take risks with no apparent benefit to report such phenomena
>to police, government, and scientific authority; these reports
>are of a consistent, objectively existent phenomenon.

>2) Solid metallic and / or luminous objects, often structured
>and animated, which affect instruments (radar, magnetic,
>radiation) and the environment (ground traces, medical effects,
>etc) are reported by a demographically normal sample of the
>population (with a skew towards aviators and technical personnel
>in appropriate categories of sightings) and responsible persons
>who take risks with no apparent benefit to report such phenomena
>to police, government, and scientific authority; these reports
>are no more than misperceptions of a wide variety of normal
>natural phenomena caused by excitability, social influences, and
>simple silliness.

>Personally, and scientifically, I find (2) to be lacking.

To prove # 2, one would need to prove all the cases presented.
In other words, it is not possible to address it in scientific
terms because an exception to the cases could never be 100%
ruled out. It is akin to trying to prove a negative, an
illogical fallacy.

As far as #1, nobody questions that ufo reports exists and that
UFO reports are real. So what? If you think that UFO reports are
consistent, I suggest you dive into the literature a little
deeper. The Sturrock panel itself made the observation that


         "the UFO problem is not a simple one, and it is unlikely
that there is any simple universal answer".


What they represent no one knows. The ones that have been
identified have been shown to be due to various causes. The ones
that remain unidentified will never be anything other than
unidentified. Oberg made that argument in his paper twenty years
ago. In simpler terms, if you have an unknown candy in your hand
and collect a bowl filled with this unknown candy, one cannot
look at the bowl when full and declare that he has a bowl of
M&Ms.

>But I think there are a lot better things to be doing than
>apportioning the blame or denying history.

Best thing that ufology could do is to accept responsibility for
itself. That means individuals each have to develop an inner
responsibility before there can ever be a hope of discipline in
ufology.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.co
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:15:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:01:18 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:08:47 -0500
>From: "Donnie W. Shevlin" <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:39:37 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>><snip>

>>Why is this so important, anyway? That piece of footage could be
>>real or, it could have been selected just for that "look" to
>>which you refer, (or is it reefer?).

>><snip>

>> Jim

>Can you name for me just one piece of footage that has been
>declared 'clear cut or real'? Why over look something that could
>be evidence? We should quickly dismiss all of what we see because
>we can prove this portion to be fake. :)

>It's most likely Russian training film at the end of the show.
>Everyone has been focus on that for weeks now. But people here
>are willing, with out knowing any sources, to throw the entire
>show out over that small piece of film.

>Donnie

Donnie, I do not know whether or not the film is real. I do not
know if certain segments are or are not real. I _DO_ know that
UFO's are real. I do know that the abduction experience is real,
at least to the experiencer. Some of this is from personal
experience. Having said that...

... the overwhelming likelihood is that the show is a neat
fabrication. If one believes this, the entire film almost
automatically becomes suspect. I try hard to keep an open mind,
so I do not criticize your opinion. What I am critical of is the
selectivity of this one snippit of film assuming the mantle of
validity for the entire production.

Jim





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Roger R. Prokic <rprokic@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:03:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:30:29 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net, clearlt@pacbell.net
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

>Yes, the RPIT is busy at work trying to complete the reading of
>the Ramey Message. This is being touted as the "smoking gun"
>which will finally -- after 51 years! -- unlock the Mystery of
>Roswell! Incidentally, Josh, you can get your own copy of the
>Ramey Message from the University of Texas at Arlington and join
>in the quest for the truth!

Is it possible to post the Ramey message here, or on the Web?

Roger R. Prokic
Telecom Design Lead
Mars Surveyor 2001 Program
Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Denver, Colorado USA
-=[ sent from a 3Com Palm III & One-Touch Communicator v1.03 ]=-







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:40:25 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:08:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned


>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:11:26 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:28:03 +0100
>>From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald  Ledger)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

<snip>

>>Hello Bruce,

>>If ever there was a case of the international UFO community
>>falling down on the job, the Valentich case is it. Why the
>>heavyweights of Ufology of the time didn't jump on this with
>>both feet is beyond me.

>>Don Ledger

>Has anyone in recent years tried to use newer underwater
>scanning techniques to do a new check for remains?

G'day Josh & List,

To the best of my knowledge there have been no modern searches
for the Valentich plane debris using any techniques, probably
never will be owing to time & cash restraints.

For those not so aware of the land of Oz:

Population of 17 million
Land mass equal to the USA (approx)
You can do the math . . .

Unlike the USA we do not have the population density to generate
the tax revenue to do such searches 'at the drop of a hat' so to
speak. The dreaded economic rationalists have cut a swathe
through Oz too. (More people out of work = less people paying
taxes).

Bass Strait is considered to be one of the most treacherous
shipping areas on earth (with more than its share of wrecks in
testimony) yet it appears that its currents may not be the most
aggressive.

For example, when I was living in Tasmania a few years ago a
friend told me of her find of a piece of airplane wing on a
Devonport beach.

It turned out that the piece had come from a plane that went
down in WWII off the Victorian coast barely 400 kms away. It
took 50 years to make the trip(!)

From that we could possibly assume that if the Valentich plane
ditched then it may not have drifted far before settling in the
silt.

Important note: Bass strait is also _very_ heavily fished,
including scallop shell fish dredging, crayfishing and netting.
It is possible that one day someone will will snag the wreckage
by accident.

Regards,

Leanne





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             -[For The Record]- C-E: Col. Halt Audio CD-ROM Now

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@KONSULTING.COM>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:44:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:51:12 -0400
Subject: -[For The Record]- C-E: Col. Halt Audio CD-ROM Now

The Fund for UFO Research recently released a video tape of Col
Charles Halt's presentation at the "Mysteries of the Sky"
seminar in August of 1997, and that has now been followed up by
a CD-ROM release of his talk.

This is a new item and isn't yet listed on the FUND web site,
but I wanted to let those on this "list" know that it was
available.  Col. Halt spoke about the Rendlesham Forest event
and then took questions from the audiance, which included
queries from Bruce Maccabee, Susan Swiatek, and Jan Aldrich.

The CD-ROM audio format is more durable than cassette, and since
players are now very common it may be the media of choice for
this type of audio record.

In any case, the FUND is selling this CD for $13.00 and profits
are going to support further research.  It will probably be a
month or so before it becomes listed on the FUND web site, but
if anyone is interested in a copy, please let me know via email.

Steve Kaeser

<<<>>>

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:24:29 -0700
From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>
Subject: Re: Col. Halt Audio CD-ROM now available
To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

Hi Steve,

Are the Project Sign documents ready for sale, and if so, what is
the price?

Regards,

Jan

<<<>>>


Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:39:01 -0400
From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@KONSULTING.COM>
Subject: Re: Col. Halt Audio CD-ROM now available
To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>Hi Steve,

> Are the Project Sign documents ready for sale, and if so, what is
>the price?

>Regards,

>Jan

I hope to have the CD-ROM ready for approval at the next FUFOR
Executive Board Meeting (Nov. 8th), and the price will (I think)
be comparable to the $15.00 charged for the FBI/NSA FOIA CD-ROM.

The FUND has now released it's "Project Sign" publication,
edited by Richard Hall (with Introduction by Dr. Michael Swords,
which features a number of documents obtained from the FOIA
office at Wright-Patterson AFB several years ago.  That FOIA
request resulted in nearly 1,000 pages of material that
stretched from the era of Project Sign to that of Project
Grudge, and those documents have been scanned into Adobe Acrobat
format.

The documents have been divided into two categories (Sign and
Grudge) and scanned into groupings of about 50 pages each.
Otherwise, there is no organization to the documents, which are
in about the same order in which they were received.  One
exception is the Project Sign Interim Report, which is scanned
and listed by itself.  I would again emphasize that this is raw,
unorganized, data of interest to researchers, and those who
would like to see what the quest is like.

The Project Grudge Final Report, about 300 pages in length, is
being finalized for reprinting as a document to be sold through
the FUND.  That may be included on a future CD-ROM Project, but
that hasn't been fully discussed.

In addition to the Project Sign and Project Grudge material, I
currently am planning to include Jesse Marcel Senior's Military
File, which I had requested under the FOIA.  While it doesn't
directly relate, it comprises additional raw data that may be of
interest.  I went through some hassle in getting a copy, and
even got a letter stating that it had been destroyed in a fire
in St. Louis.  I've documented that quest in my short
presentation, with scans of the Air Force's original responses,
which ended with my obtaining more than 200 pages of Marcel's
Military file.  Again, this is scanned in as I received it.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                -[For The Record]- C-E: New FUFOR Publication

From: Robert Swiatek <swiman@POP.DN.NET>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:33:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:55:06 -0400
Subject: -[For The Record]- C-E: New FUFOR Publication

List Members--

The Fund's latest publication - PROJECT SIGN AIR FORCE DOCUMENTS,
1948-1949--is now available for sale.  The report,edited by Richard Hall
with a foreword by Michael Swords, is perfectbound, about 200 pages in
length, and features a Liz Coleson-designed cover.  Cost is $22.00 plus
$3.00 postage ($4.50 postage for countries other than the U.S., Canada, and
Mexico).

        --Rob Swiatek





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                              Vadim Chernobrov

From: "Anatoly Kutovoy" <kutovoy@dkd.ot.lt>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 06:49:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:13:00 -0400
Subject: Vadim Chernobrov


Russian reseacher Vadim Chernobrov, 'Kosmopoisk'
(Cosmo-Searching) is on the Web

http://win.ee.saog.ac.ru/~kosmopoisk/index.html

Photos from expedition to Medvyaditskaya Gryada, 1997:

http://win.ee.saog.ac.ru/~kosmopoisk/photo_file/index.html

A strange draw well on prairie, a detailed photo of an amazing
artifact (clear wolfram) was found by digging.


Best,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                         Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:17:14 -0400
Subject: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


I would like to put a few questions out to the list.

Over the years there have been numerous sightings and film clips
of white balls, seen in and around crop formations.

Apart from the explanation, that these balls could be
earth/fairy lights, does anyone really have a clue as to what
they could be.

Just what did Steven Alexandra film at Milk Hill Wiltshire? What
was the Helicopter hovering over, in the famous Colin Andrews
Alton Barnes Harassment case?

What exactly did Matthew Williams film in Wiltshire this year,
which received quite a bit of 'air' time in the Barge Inn
Wiltshire.

Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth
Lights or even optical illusions?

If these balls of light, are earth lights or so called fairy
lights why has the military have such an interest in them?

And why do the military always seem to know when and where these
balls of light seem to appear?

Do the military have earth/fairy light tracking facilities?

If so what is the point in intercepting a natural occurring
phenomena?

If even these so called "Circle Makers" have seen these lights
while they have been busy hoaxing circles, does that rule out
all crop circles are hoaxed?

Can anyone think back far enough when Steven Greer and friends
summoned a craft out of the sky, whilst standing hand in hand in
a crop circle in Wiltshire?

If all the circles are man made, why does audio equipment,
watches, etc go wild in some crop circles?

Does this mean that the so called circle makers are statically
charged and are spreading this across the wheat?

Isn't it just a fact that at the end of the day, despite
skeptics claiming this a solved mystery, like the UFO phenomena,
a mystery it still is?

What did Terrance Meaden really meet in East Field Wiltshire?

Are we really going to give the credit to hoaxers, for the deep
and meaningful and historic symbology of crop circles?

Sensible {libel and slanderous free} comments welcome.

Kindest Regards

Roy..

Essex & London UFO Network in conjunction with the Pro ETH
Alliance.

Watch the Skies (and The Wheat Fields):


Quote Ofthe Month: It's All Helping To Build A Picture:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:10:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:05:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Ufology's problem is internal to itself. Debunking only works on
>bunk.

So...let me get this straight. A case pops up (Phoenix) in which
a large scale sighting has occured. There can be no denial that
something was seen due to (rare) media coverage and a large
number of witnesses. The debunkers determine that flares were
responsible for the lights seen, and proceed to rest comfortably
in the chairs from which the determination was made. The media
reports that flares were the cause. Meanwhile ufologists, not
having the luxury of blanket explanations, continue plugging
away and discover that the lights reported and videotaped share
precisely NONE of the behavioral or physical characteristics of
flares. The media, having already heard a reasonable sounding
explanation, yawns and turns away from the ufologists. What
remains is an unexplained sighting worthy of note not being
"noted" any more by the public. Not "bunk" at all, yet the
effect of the debunkers has been damage to an interesting case.

I concede to your ramblings only to the extent that ufologists
in America had a unique opportunity in the above case to mount a
major PR campaign, and blew it. Some fantastic work was done,
but no one seems to know it except those already more than
casually interested in the subject. At least all the major
media outlets covered the story when it first broke.

>If you have nothing to independently verify your experience, I
>am afraid it is worthless as proof of anything.  That is the
>real world. Accept it and learn to live with it.

But then I would be like you. No thanks, doesn't look like much
fun.

Besides, many sightings go far beyond "independently" verified.
Your statement above seems intended to suggest that ufos are
seen only by people that are completely alone, without cameras
and far removed from any radar installations.

Wouldn't want the uninitiated to think otherwise, _would_ you
Ed?

>I have an interest in UFOs.

I am very curious as to how you would define that interest. You
are completely unwilling to admit that maybe _some_ debunkers
may have twisted the facts a _little_ in their day, and that the
media MIGHT have reported same as fact, leading to mistaken
perceptions of ufos and ufologists.

Oh heavens NO (gasp)! They don't just issue halos to anyone you
know!

>I don't feel like he ever lumped me into any category.

Better have that blind eye checked out. If you have an interest
in UFOs, you must be seeking goblins and fairies too.

>And his popularization of extraterretrial intelligence...

When I read that aloud, it reminds me of congressman Barney
Frank. Try it, it's fun!

>I don't share your view of Carl Sagan as an enemy of ufology.  I
>think in the long term run, he will turn out to be more of a
>friend to ufology then folks that you may now idolize.

If Sagan was a friend to ufology before he died, then Bill
Clinton would make a wonderful Pope. Are we talking about the
same guy?

>The point is that legitimacy in this case is totally irrelevant.
>Ufology is not advanced one yota by pointing fingers, justified
>or not, outside of the field.  It has become a cop-out in
>ufology to attack skeptics, debunkers, the scientific community,
>government and anyone that raises a dissenting opinion against
>the temple.  It hasn't advanced ufology in fifty years and it
>won't advance it in the future.  Most of the finger pointing
>against skeptics and debunkers (debunking only works on bunk) is
>to ellicit support from the gallery, i.e. an illogical fallacy.
>Ufology needs to clean itself up. Nobody will do it for ufology.
>If you wish to vent out against Carl Sagan or Phil Klass, go
>right ahead. But, you are not advancing ufology one yota.

ROFL, I'm sorry, it's hard to get through your monologue when
I'm wondering the whole time what the heck a "yota" is...
snicker...I'll try, I promise.

The finger pointing is a vain attempt by ufologists to get
debunkers to play fair, and you know it. I won't hold my breath
though. :-0

>>Are radar-visual or ground-trace cases "absolutely worthless" too?

>Most are worthless. If they weren't, we would not have this
>discussion. What is missing in all these cases, every last one
>of them is complete linkage of the data from the initial premise
>to the conclusion.  If there is no linkage, the case is
>worthless as proof of any given hypothesis.  Ufology has no case
>in its vast files that links the premise to its final
>conclusion.


Oh Ed...you slipped. "Most" are worthless? So you admit that
some have worth? Well, in that case, why won't mainstream
science have a look HMMMMM?

Then you go on to say that the cases lack "linkage of the data
from the initial premise to the conclusion" in "all these cases,
every last one of them" You mean, except those cases you
excluded by your use of the word "most" above, right? You're
sending me mixed signals.

Ed, we aren't concerned with the truly worthless ones, are we?
We like the ones that have soil baked down to a depth of 10
centimeters following the sighting of a landed ufo. Those are
the neat ones. Must have been Venus again...pesky planet.

>>I wouldn't have minded if he could explain
>>the sightings as easily as he dismissed them. It's much easier
>>to say "You saw Venus" than it is to say "I don't know what that
>>disc-shaped object with blue lights around the perimiter
>>was...let's find out!".

>There is nothing stopping you from doing that. Go for it!

Go for what, Ed? Many sightings are unexplainable, if you have
the cahonis to accept it without altering the details of the
sighting to conform to some ludicrous explanation that my mother
wouldn't buy even if it WAS on sale. So...here I go...NOT being
able to explain a sighting.....

( prolonged moment of silence).

>Carl Sagan is irrelevant to ufology's woes.

Well, he is now.

>Why don't you lambast ufologists for not doing there job right
>and getting the compelling evidence?

Because by definition "compelling evidence" for mainstream
science is unattainable and unreasonable. So there. Ufologists
are doing the best they can with what they have to work with.
What are you doing, besides running along side them like a dog
after a passing car? You said you have an interest in
UFOs...what's YOUR big idea?

>>You remind me of my boss. You see, we have squirrels that build
>>nests along the eaves of our building. They frequently find ways
>>into the building, much to my and my co-worker's amusement.
>>They're just curious, or perhaps searching for food. Well, one
>>day I decided to oblige one of them, and tossed him a few pieces
>>of my doughnut. Unfortunately, the boss walked in, and became
>>furious.

>Do you have a job as a donut taster?

Ed, that was legitimately funny. So, you're not _all_ gloom and
doom, eh? Whaddya know. I'm an automotive computer diagnostics
specialist, actually.

>>Now for some reality. The squirrels build nests there because
>>that's what they've always done....many generations of them.

>They learned to like donuts or is it a hereditary acquired
>taste?

I can't speak for them....I know I do.

>Your boss is the boss.  I recommend you follow his lead and stop
>wasting your valuable time with the squirrels.  With the money
>you save from the extra donuts not wasted on the squirrels, you
>can buy your boss one of Jerome Clark's books on ufological
>wisdom and everybody comes out winners.

Actually, the boss buys the doughnuts. I simply redistribute
them to the evolutionarily challenged. I'll pass along your idea
though, since I cannot as yet afford Mr. Clarks voluminous
volume.

>Wrong! It is not up to science or anybody else to prove that
>there's nothing to the stories. It is up to whoever makes the
>claim, not science, not Carl Sagan, not Phil Klass, not Laura
>Schellinger.

Well, the scientists should certainly be happy that you have
relieved them of the burden of doing their job (science). The
debunkers may continue as they were, however, with whatever it
is that they do, which certainly isn't science.

>>They can prove ufologists wrong once and for all.
>>Or can they?

>Have you ever entertained the concept that they don't care one
>way or the other?

Oh, more than once.

>No one is ever going to lift a hand to help
>out ufology.

Certainly not you, anyway....glad you've elected yourself
spokesperson for the others. That's quite a responsibility.

>Ufology will have to clean up its own act.

Ed, we don't even know what the "act" is yet. That's what we're
trying to figure out. Thanks for the help, by the way!

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:57:12 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:07:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

>Hello List,

>As a good example of how the media may misinterpret information
>on UFO sightings - misinterpreted either on purpose, or as a
>result of pure (technical) misunderstanding - I will use the
>well-known UFO sightings by Kenneth Arnold, observed in his

G'day Asgeir & List,

As a good example of how researchers may misinterpret information
on UFO sightings - misinterpreted either on purpose, or as a
result of pure (technical) misunderstanding - I will use the
remaining contributions of Asgeir's enclosed post. Please note
what he reports as being documented and compare that with his
interpretations and my comments.

<big snip>

>     _smaller than the DC-4_; but, I should judge their
>     span would have been _as wide as the furtherest
>     engines on each side of the fuselage of the
>     DC-4_."

<snip>

>-    "They were approaching Mt. Rainier very rapidly,
>     and I merely assumed they were jet planes. . .

If he assumed they were jet planes  he would not have done so if
they were only the size of a jet engine - being an experienced
pilot.

<snip>

>The conclusion which can be drawn from this report is that:

>-    The objects' size were comparable to a DC-4 engine.

Clearly the size was described as the equivalent of wing-tip to
wing-tip, i.e. engine to engine or a bit smaller than a DC-4!

Have I misinterpreted your comments, Asgeir.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:03:54 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:59:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:19:47 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>>Of course, if debunkers _really_ believed anecdotal testimony to
>>be worthless, they wouldn't pay so much attention to it.  Thus
>>any report, however superficially impressive, could be dismissed
>>out of hand if it came solely from eyewitness testimony.
>>Instead, debunkers go to extraordinary lengths to disprove these
>>cases, on the implicit assumption that the testimony _is_ meaningful.
>>Typically, debunkers employ any argument immediately at hand,
>>even if their actions prove they don't believe it themselves for
>>a second.

>As is pointed out somewhere, probably in "The UFO Book",
>debunkers continually use the anecdotal accounts in their
>attempts at explanations - and when either debunkers or the
>honestly skeptical / honest ufologist succeed in identifying a
>mundane cause it is due to the accuracy of the testimony. But
>when equally or more complete testimony leads to an
>unidentifiable case, with the potential to provide scientific
>information on the phenomenon, the debunker has no room for the
>observations of the witness.

<snip>

Do we (the UFO research community) have any example/s of where a
debunker has accepted the evidence of a witness _against_ a UFO
explanation yet not accepted the very same person's evidence
_for_ a UFO explanation?

Or even the same scenario but two debunkers - one disbelieving
their _for_evidence and anothe believing their _against_
evidence?


Leanne





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Two More Formations in Saskatchewan 10-15-98

From: psa@direct.ca (Paul Anderson)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:31:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:01:02 -0400
Subject: Two More Formations in Saskatchewan 10-15-98


Circles Phenomenon Research Canada Update
October 15, 1998



TWO MORE FORMATIONS IN SASKATCHEWAN

*Preliminary Report*

Yet two more crop formations were reported to CPR-Canada
on October 13 in southeastern Saskatchewan, close to the Manitoba
border. Probably a few weeks old, found during harvesting in late
August or early September but not reported until later. Over a dozen
reports now for this year in Canada. See the CPR-Canada web site
for full reports (URL below). Further details when available.
Also, two additional ground shots of Vanderhoof, BC circles added to
web site.

____________________________


(dates are when initially found or locally reported)

Wapella, Saskatchewan - September 14
Single circle, 11' diametre, counterclockwise, wheat. Tight spiral lay
of crop.

Spy Hill, Saskatchewan - September 21
Circle with ring, 24' diametre, counterclockwise, wheat. Tight spiral lay
of crop.

Both formations are close to location of Rocanville circles in 1996.

____________________________

Web site updated October 15.

_________________________________


For further information or correspondence, contact:


Paul Anderson

Director
CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International
Main Web Site:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310
1998 Updates:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1998

Director
MILLENNIUM RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Web:  mypage.direct.ca/p/psa/ (being revised)

Representative
BLT RESEARCH, INC.

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Tel / Fax:  604.731.8522
E-Mail:  psa@direct.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 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                 -[For The Record]- C-E: Wave '73 Additions

From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 01:35:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:54:20 -0400
Subject: -[For The Record]- C-E: Wave '73 Additions


Thanks to numerous additions from Jan Aldrich, Project 1947, and
also from Napoleon, Ohio researcher Jerry Hamm, The '73 Wave
site has been updated with additional reports. I yet have
numerous reports from Jan Aldrich that will be added in the days
ahead.

The site has doubled in size thanks to the number of quality
reports which have been forwarded. I predict that the amount of
information can still double as more reports trickle in. (feel
free to email me if anyone has any rational data to add)

Reviewing the details while assembling this website has
certainly challenged some skeptical beliefs I have about UFOs. I
would like to see, however, some information advanced from the
'debunking celebrities' who would discount 1973, perhaps using
the 'contagion' or some other dismissive scenario. If anyone is
knowledgeable about the whereabouts or availability of such
information, please let me know.

Interestingly, The Cincinnati Enquirer newspaper included a
small UFO blurb in today's 'History' section, reviewing
highlights on this date from various years. They included the
1973 account of UFOs sighted all across the Cincinnati area on
October 15, describing
'greyish saucers' seen in various places.

The 1973 site is located at:

http://home.fuse.net/task/WAVE73.htm

Thanks,
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 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:25:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:48:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

<snip>

>Now, what did a so-called guided missile look like in
>those days?

>Here's a couple of examples:

>http://www.wa3key.com/regulus.html


>http://www.afa.org/magazine/gallery/aim-4.html



>Could it be a "flying saucer" of this type Arnold
>observed? The readers of The List must judge for
>themselves.

<snip>

>Best regards,

>AWS


Hi List,

The objects Arnold were observing (or, at least one of them)
could possibly also be some newly captured German Horten Ho-IX
(or Ho-229 A-1) jet planes; captured just after the war. But,
possibly also some new planes, and further developments of this
German plane, maybe in close co-operation with the Horten
brothers, i.e.:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/3366/go229.html


At least, the features 'crescent-shaped' wings and tail-less
fuselage, are evident on this plane. (However, I didn't find any
references to a 'crescent-shape' object, as written by Arnold
himself in the referred to reports in my prior mail; I just
discovered that only the newsmen were writing this expression in
some newspapers from those days.)

The speed was 607 mph. (977 km/h), and the wing-span approx. 55
ft. (17 m), i.e., within the speeds and dimensions as estimated
by Arnold.

But, note that this jet is manned with 1 pilot. (However, this
is not a problem at all - but Arnold didn't know that.)


Regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                  Over and out FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATIO

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:40:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:55:50 -0400
Subject: Over and out  FROM  AN  UNDISCLOSED  LOCATIO

Latest on Art Bell:

I was able to get to the Economist web page which is recommended
by Glenn Cambell at Ufomind -

http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/oct/d16-001.shtml:

"For the most insightful report yet on Art Bell's recent
announcement, The Economist's article at...."

http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/current/us3986.html

Something odd about that page (it's not your browser!)  I got a
"Transfer interrupted" after the truncated introduction.  (note:
if this was so, there would be no furher info on the page...but
at the bottom is their copyright. Looks like they did this to
emphasize their last remark.

Here is what they said: (for those who do not have a browser)


UNITED STATES

Over and out

F R O M    A N    U N D I S C L O S E D    L O C A T I O N

For 14 years, from his house in Pahrump, Nevada, Art Bell has
been the voice of truth for up to 10m Americans who have
listened to his late-night radio programme. The truth, as his
audience saw it, was the news they didn�t want you to know: the
fleet of flying saucers at Area 51, the real messages of crop
circles, the hidden third secret of Fatima, government
experiments gone horribly wrong and irrefutable signs of the end
of the world. Mr Bell made Cydonia, the alleged pyramids on
Mars, as well known as the Grand Canyon to his devotees, who
started Art Bell clubs across the country and made 21m visits to
his website this year alone. His programme reached more than 400
radio stations across America.

But on October 13th, citing a "threatening, terrible event" that
had happened to his family, Mr Bell abruptly announced that he
was leaving the air. "What you are listening to is my final
broadcast," he said at the end of the programme. He promised
that, if he could, he would eventually tell his audience the
story of why he had left. In the meantime, the conspiracy
community is in an ecstasy of paranoia. Speculation runs the
gamut from CIA hit-squads to UFO abduction. The Economist,
however, has learned the real reason why Art Bell left. A
government programme targeting


              Transfer interrupted!


(                                 (deliberate blanked area)


c.1998 The Econmist Newspaer Limited. All Rights Reserved

---------------------------------------------------
UFOSEEK's ongoing Y2K poll: "How serious is the Y2K problem?"
See what many people think and will be doing. Vote!

Keep up with the latest UFO and alternative News:
Visit UFOSEEK and find the source... http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                       Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf

From: authority@webtv.net (Doc Barry)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:27:28 -0700 (MST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:03:28 -0400
Subject: Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf


>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: In Defense of Michael Wolf
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:04:10 -0500

>As Posted On Amazon.com.

>Read

>"A Defense of Michael Wolf: The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy
>by Michael Wolf

></exec/obidos/Author=Wolf%2C%20Michael/002-0519692-1911631>

<snip>

Michael Wolf, according to his defenders has many degrees,
Ph.D.s, M.D., law degree, was a flight surgeon with the US Air
Force, and an insider consultant to the National Security
Council.


His New England Institute for Advanced Research did have the
same address and a phone listed at the same address as Michael
Wolf's apartment.  Imagine an Institute that supposedly had 30
full time employees working out of Michael Wolf's apartment !


Michael Wolf's defenders, when confronted with replies from
academic institutions showing he has no such degrees, explain
that government agencies have erased or altered the records.


With the many alleged degrees of Wolf, it would mean that class
year books, would have to be confiscated from hundreds, if not
thousands, of private citizens. Wolf is not identified in the
class year books of his alleged schools, under any name he might
have used.


Now as for the writer of this post, I am having new sets of
diplomas printed, and they will be ready for viewing on my
apartment walls within two weeks. This should suffice as proof
for my intentionally erased
academic and Air Force records.


Signed,
Doc Barry, Chancellor Emeritus of
The Arizona Institute for Advanced Research (Located in my
apartment). Ph.D. (Physics MIT), D.Sc. (Biology Harvard), M.D.
(Tufts University Medical School), J.D. (Yale Law School),
Colonel U.S. Air Force (Ret.), Advisor to National Security
Council and President Clinton. All residuals from my works are
immediately donated to "The Foundation for the Prevention of
Over-Sexed Fish".  Would I lie?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:40:12 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:50:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media
>Misinterpretation

<snip>

>The conclusion which can be drawn from this report is that:


>-    The objects' size were comparable to a DC-4 engine.

<snip>


Hi List,

I now realize that I might actually have misinterpreted Arnold's
text myself! (I guess I hurried too much with this mail.)

I concluded that Arnold described the craft as the _size of a
DC-4 engine_.

What Mr. Arnold tried to describe, was - most likely - the
DISTANCE between the outermost engines, as he says, "on each
side of the fuselage." (Thanks to Pat McCartney here!)

By looking at the DC-4 Skymaster, the distance between these
engines must be be something lower than the total wingspan of,

117' (36 m);

maybe something in-between 15-20 meters?


Regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:47:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:02:57 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:19:26 -0500

>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>>Hi Errol and list,

>>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>>opinions.

>Okay

>>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>>pilots saw.

>>What your take on this? Looking for input.

>I agree totally. I set up the F-16 in the far east. I was with
>the bed-down cadre in Okinawa and Korea in 1980 assigned to the
>6100 LSS at Kadena AFB. It is an F-16, and that is a UFO, and
>damned excellent evidence.

>I don't usually comment, but I just had to respond to your post.

>Best wishes.

>>From the author of: Alien Rapture - The Chosen,

>Edgar Fouche


Damn. . . Guys! Admittedly not having the best copy, I reviewed
the segment very carefully and could detect the definitive pilot
head movement described -- But! Why has no one mentioned the
very definite shadow the UFO casts as it drops into the clouds!
Now _that_ was a dazzler, easily seen in even my bad copy!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                      Bell Books & Kindles Speculation

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:12:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:56:36 -0400
Subject: Bell Books & Kindles Speculation

The Economist has the story on Art Bell.  See:

http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/current/us3986.html

A conspiracy, no doubt. <g>

Terry








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                  Art Bell To Make Statement Monday, Oct/19

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:51:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:51:12 -0400
Subject: Art Bell To Make Statement Monday, Oct/19


Source: Jeff Rense's 'Sightings'

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/bellstatement.htm


Art Bell To Make A Statement
10-16-98

Latest Press Release from Premiere Radio Networks:

Premiere Radio Networks Statement to the Press Coast to Coast AM
with Art Bell Dreamland with Art Bell

October 16, 1998, Kraig T. Kitchen, President/COO of Premiere
Radio Networks today announced, "Premiere Radio Networks will
continue to distribute both Art Bell's Coast to Coast and
Dreamland programs in the regularly scheduled time slots. For a
short duration, Art has requested special guest hosts to do his
show. On October 19, veteran talk radio broadcaster Hilly Rose
will be the first of several potential guest hosts. The
program's tradition of including knowledgeable guests will
continue during this period.

Art Bell will make a statement to his listeners during the first
hour of his broadcast on Monday October 19 on Coast to Coast
with Art Bell."








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:02:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:06:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #276


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Alfred's Odd Ode #276REPLY
>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:43:08 EDT

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:21:14 -0500
>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #276

>>Apology to MW #276 (For October 15, 1998)

>Dear Alfred,


>Thank you for your 'Odd Ode' on John Ford. It is _very_
>powerful.

Thank you ma'am. It was just an honest expression. Thank Errol for letting
it by <g>.

>You asked for his address. It's in a separate email, Subject:
>John Ford Current Status, which I am forwarding to you.

>Sincerely,

>Elaine Douglass


Ms. Douglass;

I have the Jail address (John Ford (8-29-48), Riverhead County
Jail, 100 Centre Drive, Riverhead, NY 11981).

Should money be sent _there_? I would have thought an address
for a lawyer, or even yourself -- someone with a power of
attorney or something. I'm not quibbling, ma'am -- just want to
make sure Mr. Ford can make use of it. I _burn_ to send that
money off to him!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:09:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:18:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>Fwd Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:42:31 -0400
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Previously, Mr. Stewart offered:

>And most recently conffirmed by the Sturrock panel:

>"nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that
>has added to scientific knowledge" - Dr. Edward U.Condon.

<snip>

My reaction:

So? Is there supposed to be a time limit on research into the
unexplained or misunderstood or the results aren't valid? This
isn't a gameshow; there's no 'buzzer' waiting to go off. Some
researchers dedicate their lives to solving just one problem;
some succeed and some don't. But the work they do, successful or
not, forms the basis for future research by others.

For example:

The Wright brothers were thought to be crazy for their study of
flight. They mistakenly focused on wing warpage in an attempt to
emulate the flight characteristics of birds. This cost them a
LOT of time with false starts and many early failures. And
though they eventually succeeded, many of their assumptions
regarding aerodynamics were still flawed due to faulty
conclusions based on experiments carried out with little funding
and home built equipment.

But did they really have a choice?

Should they have recognized their 'lack of experience' in a
field that didn't even exist and quit? Should they have thrown
in the towel because they were underfunded? Hell, did they even
_know_ they were underfunded? My bet is that they were driven by
a fanciful dream that, ultimately, became the very real science
of 'aerodynamics'.

Or perhaps, Mr. Stewart, aerodynamics isn't a 'real' science
because air can't be seen and, in addition, airplanes can't fly
because they're too heavy. The point is that many things we take
for granted now were a mystery 100 years ago, so 21 (or even 50)
years is nothing. The fact that I'm posting this message
electronically for you to read is something that most people
would never have imagined when Project Blue Book was being
banged out on carbon paper on some old Remington typerwriter!
Yet, here we are, arguing in a virtual environment, using a
technology that would make top military brass of 1947 believe
that, indeed, aliens DO exist and communicate through the ether
without speaking a word!

Moving on, you presented:

>        "It appears that most current UFO investigations are
>carried out at a level of rigor that is not consistent with
>prevailing standards of scientific research."

Well, I'm sure that Lockheed is very grateful for the fanciful
dreams of the Wright brothers, even though their experiments
were carried out at a level of rigor that is not consistent with
prevailing standards of scientific research. I guess those dumb
old Wright brothers just didn't know any better. Thank you, Mr.
Stewart, for making me understand the difference between REAL
research and the research of amatures like the Wright brothers.

Further you maintained:

>and pertinant to the actual best cases and evidence presented, the
>Sturrock panel had this to say:

>        "The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
>presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
>causes of the reports. However, the panel considers that new
>data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well
>documented, recurrent events), COULD [my emphasis] yield useful
>information."

>In other words, pack up your existing data. It is no good and
>not useful. Start doing real science and you COULD end up with
>something useful.

This last sentence reminds me of the old Steve Martin joke:

"I can teach you how to be a millionaire and not pay taxes.
First, get a million dollars. Now the next thing you do is....."

And how does one do 'real science', Mr Stewart? And with what
resources?

I'm a fairly patient man, but let's get right down to the nuts
of the whole thing:

I have followed your writings for several weeks as you blasted
everyone under the sun for their beliefs and/or study methods in
UFOs and the 'inability of ufology to clear its desk of bunk'.
But, unless I'm wrong, I have yet to see you declare exactly
what YOU would do differently.

It's very easy to sit back and say:
"You shouldn't have done that. That was a mistake."

It's something else altogether to be proactive and say:
"Here's how you _should_ do it."

Why? Because that would mean taking a risk; and taking risks is
what real research is all about. If you are interested in real
research, then why don't you take the same chance that everyone
you lambast takes; tell us how _you_ would do it. We're all
eager to learn. And while you're at it, why don't you give us a
budget breakdown on what the endeavor will cost on a line by
line basis? After all, that's how _real_ research is funded.

And, of course, you _do_ know where the funding will be coming
from?

Right? Hello?

In closing, you wrote:

>Best thing that ufology could do is to accept responsibility for
>itself. That means individuals each have to develop an inner
>responsibility before there can ever be a hope of discipline in
>ufology.

This is so unbelievably vague that it makes me wonder if you've
gone into politics. Just what is your 'inner responsibility',
Mr. Stewart? The best I can tell it's your absolute dedication
to the notion that -everyone_ in ufology is doing it wrong and
it is your duty to inform the world of their errors. On the
other hand, you sit comfortably at your keyboard and do nothing
that would put you at the same risk.

Shrewd.

When was the last time you originated a new post instead of
slamming everyone else's? Or does the thought of someone else
scrutinizing your methods on UFO research make you overly
cautious?

Don't be scared, Mr. Stewart. We ARE on the same side.

Aren't we?

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:59:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 03:49:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:10:58 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>I have an interest in UFOs.

>I am very curious as to how you would define that interest.

I am interested in indexing the existing literature in this
field and providing bibliographical research tools for serious
researchers that would like to see ufology become a disciplined
field of study. I have self-published indexes to Flying Saucer
Review (FSR) and the combined issues of Skylook, The MUFON
Journal, and the MUFON Proceedings.  Each index is over 600
pages, double column and contains thousands of entries. These
indexes are by author, title, category and volume number and are
available at the Library of Congress and for sale through
Arcturus Books.

I have provided Canadian ufologists with an electronic index of
the 1947 wave newsclips, both local and wire service (over 1200
newsclips) for their research needs and have cross-indexed the
entire Library of Congress UFO microfilm collection with Lynn
Catoe's bibliography of UFOs. Both were produced to support the
University of Colorado Study popularly known as the Condon
Committee.

I am on the verge of completing an index to 'Just Cause' from
Todd Zechel's era to the end of Barry Greenwood's editorship.

I am in the process of indexing the APRO Bulletin, the NICAP
literature, Rod Dyke's & Lou Farish's Newsclipping Services plus
various microfilm collections and various defunct newsletters
from the 50s which I have complete runs of.

Ongoing projects that are continuous in nature and constantly
updated are the newspaper indexing of the newsclip accumulations
of various UFO serious researchers and historians such as Barry
Greenwood and Loren Gross who I work closely with almost on a
daily basis.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. It does not include various
correspondence files and case report files that have been
photocopied from various sources both individuals and libraries.

I could bore you further with what is on top of my desk to do.

I have accumulated over the years one of the most comprehensive
UFO literature collections in the world and that is what
initiated my indexing and electronic databasing projects. If you
are searching for a specific reference or citation and you can't
find it, you might as well not have it. When I found out that
none of the periodical UFO journals and newspaper articles had
ever been indexed, I decided to try publishing indexes to fill
the void and help myself at the same time.

>>Why don't you lambast ufologists for not doing there job right
>>and getting the compelling evidence?

>Because by definition "compelling evidence" for mainstream
>science is unattainable and unreasonable. So there.

Not true. Read Phillip Morrison's essay 'On The Nature Of
Evidence' in Thornton Page's/Carl Sagan's UFOs: A Scientific
Debate. He argues the position that compelling evidence is
attainable and within the grasp of ufology. The book has been
reissued by Barnes & Noble and should also be available at your
local library.

>Ufologists
>are doing the best they can with what they have to work with.
>What are you doing, besides running along side them like a dog
>after a passing car? You said you have an interest in
>UFOs...what's YOUR big idea?

See above. It is not a big idea. It is one that is necessary for
ufology to move up the ladder, but I found there is little
support in ufology and even less demand. Scholarship and
discipline are not at the top of the interest list among most
ufologists that according to you are doing the best they can
with what they got.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------


:
:
:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 03:44:20 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:32:49 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

>Responding to Bob, Jim wrote-

>>Interesting that it dates back that far. I wouldn't have thought
>>that they'd have so much paperwork back around 1800 to need one.
>>But a president's secretary has to have all the letters all
>>lined up properly in advance on the device if it's going to save
>>the president any time.

>>But it does seem to be a more plauible solution to the
>>duplicate-signature problem than that it occurred by chance,
>>though the latter may not be totally out of the question, as a
>>previous list member pointed out.
>>   Jim

>If you are refering to my post, "previous list member" sounds a
>little like I've left the group. . . . <g>

Sorry, Steve, I didn't mean it that way. I failed to save your
post, then when another came along that more strongly called for
a response, I had forgotten who (you) had posted the former
message.

But to emphasize the point of it all, those into examining
signatures re MJ-12 would do well to stay on the alert for any
other Truman signatures around early Oct, 1947, having that same
signature, or other identical pairs of signatures occurring at
other times of Truman's presidency.

    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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

              Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:25:29 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 03:52:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:19:32 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Art Bell - Off the Air and hiding in Arizona

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>>Re:  Bell - Off the Air and Into the Ether?
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:42:21 -0400 (EDT)

>>>From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
>>>Subject:   The Strange Case Of Art Bell

>>>Bell, 52, broadcast his show, "Coast to Coast," via satellite to
>>>more than 400 stations nationwide. His home was his studio: a
>>>large trailer surrounded by satellite dishes in the Nevada
>>>desert about 80 miles east of Las Vegas.   [ East!   -LH ]

><snip>

>>Typically accurate reporting.  Look at a map, guys!  80 miles
>>east of Las Vegas is in Arizona!

>>Bob

>Hi Bob!

>Gawd!  Thats typical " 80 miles East ".

>Even if they said "West", that would put them near
>Death Valley National Park, in California,  where
>Art Bell definitely does *not*  live.

>Pahrump,NV is about  50 miles West of Las Vegas,
>as the crow flies .. somewhat more over winding roads.

>I cannot remember how many times I have had to dig
>deep to unscramble little geographical faux-pas like this.

>It may not make much difference to the geographically
>challenged ( or those who simply don't care ), but its
>a major pain in the ass to anyone who wants to map
>sightings etc.

>Best ..  -LH


Actually, I have been in Pahrump several times, though I can
never remember how to spell it!!!!

I can't imagine a more depressing place to live, unless it would
be Blue Diamond, another town in Nevada's desert.  I often
wondered why Art chose to live in the middle of nowhere like
that.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:08:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:07:22 -0400
Subject: Re:  MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:37:43 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

 Hello, list,

  <snip>

>Kevin Randle's response was:

>>The dates on the documents in question, if I remember correctly
>>is September 23, 1947, and October 1, 1947, which means, that it
>>is unlikely that both documents were signed at the same time so
>>that the signatures would match. Both are letters or
>>correspondence that was of a perishable nature. They would have
>>been signed and then sent on, so that you wouldn't have had the
>>September 23 memo setting around for five or six weeks.


>My gut reaction is that the MJ-12 document isn't real. However,
>Mr. Deardorff brings up an interesting notion. As far as the
>dates are concerned, the difference between September 23, 1947
>and October 1 1947 is only 7 days, not five or six weeks. Having
>worked in a corporate environment, I can tell you that it is not
>unusual for an executive to dictate a week's worth of letters
>and sign them all at once at the end of the week, with different
>dates atop each. In a rapidly changing political environment, it
>is also not uncommon to dictate memos and hold them until
>feedback on certain issues is obtained. Then, if necesary, the
>memos could be modified to fit the needs of that memo's
>particular goal. This would be especially true if Truman were
>traveling a lot and generated correspondence on the road,
>without benefit of his close advisers. I would be interested to
>see what his travel agenda was for
 the week in question. Just a thought....

First Roger is absolutely right when he said the difference
would have been a few days rather than weeks. I don't know where
my brain went on that one.

Second, the corporate environment has no relevance when
discussing classified documents, and we all have been told,
repeatedly, that the MJ-12 documents are highly classified.

Third, this really is a discussion that should never have
happened. The Truman memo, based on the evidence presented over
the years is a fake. Autopens, multiple pens, and the corporate
world have nothing to do with this. It is only opening a thread
that has, as Ed Stewart noted, already run its course.

>Moving on, Kevin opined:

>>Second point is, again if I remember correctly, that when the
>>October 1 document was found, the MJ-12 proponents suggested
>>that it proved the authenticity because it was an exact match.
>>When they learned that no two signatures from the same hand
>>should match exactly, Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera went to a
>>great deal of trouble to prove that they weren't an exact match.
>>That should rule out the multiple pens trick.

>Hmmm.


>Maybe, maybe not. Having played with one of the darned things,
>I can tell you they don't work as well as you might expect. One
>of the things that must be realized is that, since no two
>signatures are expected to be identical, then the device wasn't
>required to produce that exact a replication. What makes a
>signature official is WHO signed it, not the actual details of
>the signature itself. For example, auto giant Henry Ford was
>totally illiterate his whole life and signed everything with an
>"X" in front of witnesses. When a repeating device like the one
>mentioned above was used with Truman, there was always a witness
>present to testify to the signature process, for obvious
>reasons!

Tell that to the MJ-12 proponents who seem to have lost sight of
reality in their quest for belief.

>>Finally, a questioned document expert in New York City
suggested>>that the October 1 "donor" signature had been
slightly modified>>so that it would fit onto the memo. The
stroke on the T in>>Truman had been shortened. Truman also
signed his documents so>>that the T extended into the body of
the text but on the MJ-12>>document, it was
uncharacteristically low. Both of these things>>suggested that
the signature had been lifted from an authentic>>document and
applied to the memo. That meant the memo was a>>fake.

 <snip>

>I don't know. Do we dispute the signature because it's too
>identical or not identical enough?

>I think that, even in consideration of the "repeating device"
>mentioned above, Steven Kaeser hit closer to the truth when he
>pointed out in a previous posting that it is totally possible
to>write two signatures exactly the same. After reading his
>posting, I went through my files and found at least three of my
>own signatures that were, for all practical purposes, exact
>matches to one another when held to the light.

>Truthfully, I would have bet a lot of money against it, but I
>can't deny what I see with my own eyes!

The real point here, and not the red herrings thrown out, is
that real questioned document examiners, when they studied the
memo, said that they could see where the stroke on the T of
Truman had been modified. That, to them, suggested a hoax.

Second, something that hasn't been mentioned here is that the
original MJ-12 document has not been found. We're working from
Xerox copies from photographs so that the angle from which the
photograph was taken, not to mention the stretching done by the
copying process, means that there will be some physical
differences between the Oct. 1 letter and the Truman memo. The
proponents said that the signatures were an exact match proving
the documents were authentic and then said that they weren't
when they learned that an exact match, especially when the donor
document had been found, proved it to be a hoax.

During the last go around, Stan Friedman said that two
questioned document experts had said the memo and the signature
were authentic, but he never would identify those experts. He
said he never talked to them but he did talk to a third. He
never seems to remember that he was told the signature was a
fake and the memo is a hoax by that third whose initials are PT.

>If Truman did sign a stack of documents all at the same time,
>then that would increase the likelihood of a "duplicate"
>signature, whether a 'repeater' device was used or not.

Again, irrelevant if the document is a fake. Let's not forget
that Bill Moore said he was going to create a Roswell-type
document in the months before he was sent the MJ-12 documents.
True, he has denied that he faked them, but the early copies
received anonymously by other researchers were made on the copy
machine Moore used, the botched dating was one used by Moore,
and he has admitted to "re-typing" other documents to make them
clear including the Aquarius Telex which has been proven to be a
hoax.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:08:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:04:37 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:37:43 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:01 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

 Hello, list,

  <snip>

>Kevin Randle's response was:

>>The dates on the documents in question, if I remember correctly
>>is September 23, 1947, and October 1, 1947, which means, that it
>>is unlikely that both documents were signed at the same time so
>>that the signatures would match. Both are letters or
>>correspondence that was of a perishable nature. They would have
>>been signed and then sent on, so that you wouldn't have had the
>>September 23 memo setting around for five or six weeks.


>My gut reaction is that the MJ-12 document isn't real. However,
>Mr. Deardorff brings up an interesting notion. As far as the
>dates are concerned, the difference between September 23, 1947
>and October 1 1947 is only 7 days, not five or six weeks. Having
>worked in a corporate environment, I can tell you that it is not
>unusual for an executive to dictate a week's worth of letters
>and sign them all at once at the end of the week, with different
>dates atop each. In a rapidly changing political environment, it
>is also not uncommon to dictate memos and hold them until
>feedback on certain issues is obtained. Then, if necesary, the
>memos could be modified to fit the needs of that memo's
>particular goal. This would be especially true if Truman were
>traveling a lot and generated correspondence on the road,
>without benefit of his close advisers. I would be interested to
>see what his travel agenda was for
 the week in question. Just a thought....

First Roger is absolutely right when he said the difference
would have been a few days rather than weeks. I don't know where
my brain went on that one.

Second, the corporate environment has no relevance when
discussing classified documents, and we all have been told,
repeatedly, that the MJ-12 documents are highly classified.

Third, this really is a discussion that should never have
happened. The Truman memo, based on the evidence presented over
the years is a fake. Autopens, multiple pens, and the corporate
world have nothing to do with this. It is only opening a thread
that has, as Ed Stewart noted, already run its course.

>Moving on, Kevin opined:

>>Second point is, again if I remember correctly, that when the
>>October 1 document was found, the MJ-12 proponents suggested
>>that it proved the authenticity because it was an exact match.
>>When they learned that no two signatures from the same hand
>>should match exactly, Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera went to a
>>great deal of trouble to prove that they weren't an exact match.
>>That should rule out the multiple pens trick.

>Hmmm.


>Maybe, maybe not. Having played with one of the darned things,
>I can tell you they don't work as well as you might expect. One
>of the things that must be realized is that, since no two
>signatures are expected to be identical, then the device wasn't
>required to produce that exact a replication. What makes a
>signature official is WHO signed it, not the actual details of
>the signature itself. For example, auto giant Henry Ford was
>totally illiterate his whole life and signed everything with an
>"X" in front of witnesses. When a repeating device like the one
>mentioned above was used with Truman, there was always a witness
>present to testify to the signature process, for obvious
>reasons!

Tell that to the MJ-12 proponents who seem to have lost sight of
reality in their quest for belief.

>>Finally, a questioned document expert in New York City
suggested>>that the October 1 "donor" signature had been
slightly modified>>so that it would fit onto the memo. The
stroke on the T in>>Truman had been shortened. Truman also
signed his documents so>>that the T extended into the body of
the text but on the MJ-12>>document, it was
uncharacteristically low. Both of these things>>suggested that
the signature had been lifted from an authentic>>document and
applied to the memo. That meant the memo was a>>fake.

 <snip>

>I don't know. Do we dispute the signature because it's too
>identical or not identical enough?

>I think that, even in consideration of the "repeating device"
>mentioned above, Steven Kaeser hit closer to the truth when he
>pointed out in a previous posting that it is totally possible
to>write two signatures exactly the same. After reading his
>posting, I went through my files and found at least three of my
>own signatures that were, for all practical purposes, exact
>matches to one another when held to the light.

>Truthfully, I would have bet a lot of money against it, but I
>can't deny what I see with my own eyes!

The real point here, and not the red herrings thrown out, is
that real questioned document examiners, when they studied the
memo, said that they could see where the stroke on the T of
Truman had been modified. That, to them, suggested a hoax.

Second, something that hasn't been mentioned here is that the
original MJ-12 document has not been found. We're working from
Xerox copies from photographs so that the angle from which the
photograph was taken, not to mention the stretching done by the
copying process, means that there will be some physical
differences between the Oct. 1 letter and the Truman memo. The
proponents said that the signatures were an exact match proving
the documents were authentic and then said that they weren't
when they learned that an exact match, especially when the donor
document had been found, proved it to be a hoax.

During the last go around, Stan Friedman said that two
questioned document experts had said the memo and the signature
were authentic, but he never would identify those experts. He
said he never talked to them but he did talk to a third. He
never seems to remember that he was told the signature was a
fake and the memo is a hoax by that third whose initials are PT.

>If Truman did sign a stack of documents all at the same time,
>then that would increase the likelihood of a "duplicate"
>signature, whether a 'repeater' device was used or not.

Again, irrelevant if the document is a fake. Let's not forget
that Bill Moore said he was going to create a Roswell-type
document in the months before he was sent the MJ-12 documents.
True, he has denied that he faked them, but the early copies
received anonymously by other researchers were made on the copy
machine Moore used, the botched dating was one used by Moore,
and he has admitted to "re-typing" other documents to make them
clear including the Aquarius Telex which has been proven to be a
hoax.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 1

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@ccsi.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:05:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:44:02 -0400
Subject: ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 1


Hello ELFIS Listers,

A ways into Fall and ELFIS #7 is finally explorable in this
quarter's first installment. I hope the lapse in "weekly
updates" has not dismayed too many and if it has . . . get over
it. Here it is:

This issue is a result of recent "net-trawling" for archival
purposes regarding several strands of the ufo dialogue; from
Explaining 'flying saucers' as space critters to reviews of
books tackling the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder phenomena
(albeit in a non-ufo context). This issue also lends me some
inspiration in the area of ACTUAL writing (which I need to do so
much more of) by way of Mr. Baggins' recent voluminous
contributions to be featured thru-out each of this issues
installments.

So without further hubbub bub . . . Table O Contents follows:

ELFIS ISSUE 7 Fall 1998 MAIN
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/A7.htm

In the "NEWS?" department we have info on BLATHER's new domain &
look as well as some data archived at UFOMIND within moderator
Errol Bruce-Knapp's UFO UpDates mailing list concerning existing
practical human use of IMPLANTS:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/A7.htm#news?

This issue features AUTODESK founder John Walker's 1997 paper
converging the pre-existing Space Critter/Animal Theory of UFOS
with modern research into tapping the vacuum/Zero Point Energy
as described by Austin's own Hal Puthoff:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7JWufoexplnd.htm

Plus more background on this Space Animal theory archived at:
http://www.ufobbs.com/txt3/2780.ufo

And as promised the first installments of two articles by
resident hobbit Mr. Baggins:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL0/mrbagginscorner/mrbbcrnr.htm

The first installment of his EHE autobiography relates his early
childhood experiences with the sacred and profane which made him
the twisted shaman hermit he proudly is today:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7bbeheab1.htm

The second article is the first installment in a piece about Mr.
Baggins' experiences with interpersonal relationships,
sexuality, energetics, Worthy Adversary encounters, and his
shamanic explorations:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7psikick1.htm

Next up is "Between Two Worlds;" a transcript of San Antonio art
critic Frances Colpitt's interview with minimalist alienist
sculptural artist John McCracken who recounts some very
interesting perspectives on his own art as well as his own
exceptional human experiences with spacetime and concepts of the
alien other: http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7mccracken.htm

Atlantic Monthly featured this "mindwar" review of a book on
PTSD: Shook Over Hell, Post-Traumatic Stress, Vietnam, and the
Civil War: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98mar/mindwar.htm

Within the Austin Anomalous milieu we have FORTEAN TIMES #115
featuring cover article on the Aurora Texas Airship Hoax and
more . . . including info on the closing of Sony's PSI Labs:
http://www.forteantimes.com/artic/115/aurora.html
http://www.forteantimes.com/artic/115/sonypsi.html

And last but by no means least more lucidity from the Excluded
Middle camp's Peter Stenshoel who is Awake But Dreaming. Also
within this issue's DreamTime NOW! you will find links to
Nanook's Nook's Extraterretrial Contact, MIB, Lucid, Encounter
dreams: http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7DT.htm#awake

Next installment I promise I'll finally have something
explaining the soon to be, activation of hitherto dusty
quadrants of the ELFIS network, especially the long awaited
opening of UFOU-The Visible College: Earth's First UFO
University: http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/UFOU/ufou1.htm

Until then, enjoy . . .

SMiles
--

Stephen MILES Lewis

Writer, Designer, Producer, Editor
& INFORMATIONALIST

E.L.F. INFESTED SPACES -
Journal of Possible Paradigms

mailto:elfis@ccsi.com

ELFIS OnLine :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin

ELFIS Archive :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL0/ELFOLARC.html

ELFIS Links :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/links/ELFLinks.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                              Re: Odd Rumblings

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:16:44 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:33:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Odd Rumblings


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:43:08 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Odd Rumblings

>Dear list,

>Tonight (Wed, 14th) at approximately 7:30, I stepped out onto my
>front porch to see if the rain had stopped. As I stepped out, I
>heard what sounded like the end of a roll of thunder. It had the
>typical random changes of pitch and volume, and faded away
>quickly. This came as no surprise, as the possibility of
>occasional thunder had been forcast for today. I waited for
>another seven or eight minutes to see if I could catch a flash
>of lightning or two, but none were forthcoming. As I turned to
>go back in, two very low frequency rumbles, each of identical
>pitch and duration stopped me in my tracks. The pitch of each
>was perfectly steady, unlike the wandering pitch of a roll of
>thunder, and the two rumbles were spaced about three seconds
>apart, without overlapping.

>This was not thunder. Stormchasing happens to be a hobby of
>mine, and this was different. I once experienced a tremor here
>in NH. It happened to be very quiet at the time, and I actually
>HEARD the tremor before I felt it. This sound was closer to that
>than thunder, so my best guess would have to be a tremor,
>although I felt no ground movement. The sound appeared to
>eminate from northwest of my position in Londonderry NH, but I
>could not hazard a guess as to it's distance.

>For what it's worth.

>Greg

Hi Greg,

The place where I work has a seismometer in a vault below ground
level and a drum recorder in the main floor of one of the
buildings which I check once in a while. Although our
seismometer is very sensitive to vibrations, including some
higher frequencies that are in the audible range, it can also
pick up local "cultural" noise such as car/truck traffic on the
highway and trains moving on rail tracks many kilometers away,
not to mention noisey aircraft flying nearby and even high wind
(which causes trees and buildings to vibrate) and lake waves
beating on the shore.

If there is a seismometer within a few kilometers of where you
live (USGS, university, etc.), check it out yourself next time
you hear similar rumbling sounds. If these sounds were recorded
by three or more such seismometers, the direction and distance
of the source of the rumbling sounds can be determined.

In the quite of the night, I too have heard strange rumbling
sounds which I have attributed to the odd late airplane coming
into Pearson (Toronto) International Airport (which closes
during the night) or to long heavy frieght trains a few
kilometers away from my home. Of course, even normal noises can
sound strange in different air temperatures/densities; from
echos or and when sound reflects off nearby buildings
(interference); when the noise source is in motion (doppler
effect), etc. Maybe we should check into these strange sounds a
little bit more closely too next time we hear them.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:56:17 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:40:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


Roger R. Prokic and List:

The General Ramey Message of July 8, 1947, is posted on the web at:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/ramey.html

The letter in General Ramey's hand

I apologize for its poor quality but the actual message on the
original 4"x5" negative from which this blowup was made is less
than 1/4th of an inch wide -- and it is 51 years old! (Older
than perhaps MOST of the List members!)

There are related references to it in my unofficial link page:

http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/

James Bond Johnson


We have ordered from the University of Texas at Arlington
Library (where the negatives are housed) enlargements of just
the message itself. Hopefully that will give us a sharper image
from which to work. I urge you and many of the List members to
do the same -- and share with us the benefit of your sharp eyes!
Perhaps together we can solve the Mystery of the Century!

James Bond 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:15:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:23:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Crop Circles/Balls of light A point to ponder on?
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Apart from the explanation, that these balls could be
>earth/fairy lights, does anyone really have a clue as to what
>they could be.

According to a recent film on the Discovery channel, circle
hoaxers are also hoaxing UFOs. The hoaxers offered a pretty
disgusting rationale for their efforts to make a difficult
problem more difficult.

Some of the hoaxers are floating large helium balloons with
biolumes; others use more elaborate systems with flashing lights
in the balloons.

Obviously these lead to some fairly convincing UFOs.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:36:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

In responding to my comments on this thread, Ed snips the most
important part of my argument - that "ufology" lacks the
infrastructure to do what he insists is important - "clean up
its act".

So I will say it again -

Without peer-reviewed journals and conferences that dominate
both the internal activities of ufology and the external
perception of it by the media, it will be impossible to alter
either the internal workings of the field other than on an
individual basis, or in the view of the public at large, or, by
extension, in the scientific community. We cannot depend on
exhortations by Ed or anyone else to disabuse the various fringe
elements of ufology from their involvement in the field.

The corollary is therefore, if Ed or anyone else is truly
interested in both attaining progress in the development of
ufology and in "cleaning up its act", they, who are the better
part of ufology, must dedicate themselves to the development of
this infrastructure, and to ensuring that the fringe is left out
of that process.

It is not easy, it is not fast, and it is perhaps not as
satisfying to some as lambasting everyone interested in UFOs for
the faults of some, but _it is necessary_.

Some of this is underway. The Fund For UFO Research is an
example of a responsible funding source for our community, and
their publications are high quality. The Journal of UFO Studies
is also a high quality publication, though I suspect, like Fund
publications, it has all too few readers. The work of GEPAN /
SEPRA seems to be interesting and important, but its lack of
English language output makes it one which is largely
inaccessible to serious researchers. Project 1947 has attracted
a variety of excellent workers who have produced excellent
publications and web resources.

There are some good and serious books - Jerry Clark's reference
work, Paul Hill's book, and the reissue of The UFO Evidence
among them.

There are also problem areas. The Journal of Scientific
Exploration publishes some excellent UFO related papers, but
they are mixed in with papers on crop circles and cold fusion,
and other areas unrelated to UFOs, reinforcing public perception
that these are actually related, and reinforcing scientific
opinion that the relationship lies in their fringe nature. The
MUFON conferences often feature excellent papers - but they also
allow speakers with wide ranging conspiracy theories, fringe
claimants, and topics of a fringe nature. Local MUFON groups
often have such wide-ranging membership, including fringe
theorists and claimants, that it is difficult or impossible to
use such groups as a focus for recruiting local scientific
resources. In bookstores, one finds UFO materials next to books
on astrology and witchcraft (lumped into so-called "metaphysical
studies"), which probably keeps all but the hard-core from ever
approaching them. And, of course, the vast majority of UFO
books, which are hardly worth the paper on which they are
printed, and which are filled with pseudoscientific and mystical
material that hardly even rises to the level of speculation.

Now perhaps Ed will place these comments in the category of
whining about unfair treatment. Frankly, I don't think problems
can be addressed without recognizing what they are. But that's
only half the story. The other half is - "what do you want to do
about it?"

Let's look at the problem realistically. What do we have a hope
of changing and how?

1) Doing our own work - we need to make sure that we are doing,
on an individual basis, good and serious work, and that we are
making that available to the public, through journals, web
publications, books, and conferences. We need to extract every
piece of quantitative data from existing sightings and patterns
and publish it. We need to drop Roswell, MJ-12, government
conspiracies, crop circles, psychic research, black helicopters,
etc. We need to de-emphasize abductions and emphasize RV,
CE-1/2/3 cases, especially CE2s.

2) Debating whether or not we should continue to participate in
"contaminated" venues. There are good arguments to be made
pro-and-con as to whether serious workers should publish in
journals and conferences that include fringe subjects or papers
by fringe claimants and advocates, and whether we should support
by membership and by attendance, organizations which allow
themselves to be contaminated in this way.

3) Development and support of non-contaminated venues. There is
no question that we need serious conferences and journals and
serious local organizations which exclude the fringes. We need
to be discussing ways to create these and make them available to
serious researchers and both public and media.

...So, enough said for the moment on this subject. I hope Ed and
others will take these topics seriously and engage in useful
discussions on them. Otherwise we are fated to simply stand
paralyzed by the voices of doom while chances slip past us.

Next I'd like to turn to Ed's comments on my list of events
which I believe had a negative influence on the relationship of
ufology and science. Ed derided this idea, making comments on
the length of time some of the proponents had been dead and so
forth.

I fear that this shows a certain innocence about the nature of
scientific work and how it gets selected and funded.

First, the US government is the largest single funding agency
for abstract research. It funds all kinds of foolishness amidst
serious programs. Yet it does not fund research into UFOs, and
its official position is based on the results of the Robertson
panel, the behavior of the Air Force during its tenure over the
problem, and the results of the Condon Committee. I don't see
any grounds in Ed's comments for doubting this.

Further, this major funding source has explicitly stated, along
with a number of prominent scientists, among which Condon and
Menzel were well-known both to working scientists and
ufologists, that UFOs are unworthy of funding or attention.
Condon and Menzel both worked hard to protest even the slightest
attention to UFOs by responsible groups, going so far as to
attempt to disrupt the AIAA plans for a subcommittee to study
the subject. Jerry Clark has documented Klass' attempts to
prevent a conference from being held at a university. I do not
believe these are isolated incidents.

In the light of these positions, and the influence they have had
on scientists, grantors, and administrators, I think it is fair
to say, and I have seen no evidence from Ed to dispute this,
that scientists have been discouraged from paying attention to
UFOs due to the career threat such an interest represents, and
by the lack of sufficient funding to form an alternate career in
the field. Even if such funding existed, however, I find it
difficult to believe that many scientists would avail themselves
of it in the present intellectual climate - after all,
scientists need to have the respect of their peers; a respect
which typically vanishes at the first sign of interest in this
problem of ours.

On the other side of the problem, scientists and debunkers alike
have shown themselves to be fundamentally incurious about this
problem. Physical scientists have blamed UFOs on psychology and
sociology, essentially trying to say "this is not our problem".

Hynek relates an instance where astronomers at a conference had
a chance to see a UFO, but they simply laughed and none went to
look. Vallee relates a situation where possible UFO data was
destroyed to avoid dealing with the consequences.

Certainly this indicates a problem on the side of science that
only compounds the isolation of ufology.

Claims that ufology has not made its case to the satisfaction of
science would be laughable if they were not so misguided. The
function of science is to be curious about all phenomena in the
universe. In the case of UFOs, even if one does not accept a
physical reality for the phenomenon, it still represents
enormous and potentially fertile areas for scientific research
into cognitive and perceptual psychology, sociology, and other
subjects, able to keep researchers active for years. Yet very
little is being done on this, and unless one cares to posit an
X-Files conspiracy, one must simply come to the conclusion that
the stigma of the subject has blunted the curiosity of the
scientist.

It is also ridiculous to state that "science has not been
advanced by the study of UFOs", since it is highly unlikely that
amateurs and part timers with little or no funding are going to
generate a scientific advance from a phenomenon which is very
elusive and difficult to study. Change the context a little and
apply this comment to the study of meteorites prior to their
acceptance by science. "Science has not been advanced by the
study of meteorites" was certainly true at that time. It was not
until science recognized the existence and source of meteorites
that they became a valued source of information on the early and
present solar system. Frankly, the groups and individuals
involved in ufology have been forced by circumstance to adopt a
holding action - attempting to collect and preserve data
wherever possible in the hope that someday scientists will find
that data a resource for a serious look at the subject.

I also find reliance by ufologists on any conclusions from the
Sturrock panel to be surprising. History has shown that short
multi-day meetings on the subject of UFOs, a subject where the
body of cases numbers at least in the tens of thousands, and
where even the serious printed work is thousands of pages of
case work and analysis, is bound to be futile. The Robertson
panel was such a group, and Hynek's perspective on its process
is illuminating for anyone considering what to make of the
Sturrock panel. Frankly, I find it hard to understand how anyone
could expect that the presentation of a few cases and a small
amount of quantitative research could demonstrate the UFOs as an
objectively existent phenomenon to a skeptical or uninformed
audience, much less prove any validity to the ETH.

Saunders, Vallee, and Hynek have all documented the dangers and
the result of non-specialists attempting to attack the difficult
problem of UFOs, demonstrating that those scientists lack the
depth of knowledge of the subject required to even develop valid
research directions. What could we expect of Sturrock when we
have seen what happened in the internal workings of the Condon
Commitee?

Ed also disputes my selection of events within the AF, such as
the rejection of the "Estimate", as events which had a negative
influence on the relationship of science to ufology. In fact, as
far as I can tell, Ed's position seems to be that no external
events have been responsible for a negative perception of
ufology by the scientific community. Yet let us invert these
events into events which were positive for ufology, and one can
see that the negative aspects of ufology need never have
existed. If the AF had accepted the Estimate, whether or not ETH
ultimately was supportable, can it be doubted that the best AF
scientists would have been put on the job of unraveling the
phenomenon? If the Robertson panel had not recommended debunking
UFOs, can one doubt that the low status of Blue Book, especially
its lack of scientific talent, would have been maintained, or
that technical or scientific witnesses to UFO phenomena would
have been discouraged from reporting to them? Or that if the AF
had thus seriously investigated UFOs, that outside scientists
would not have been attracted to study the problem? If the
Condon Report had simply affirmed what its contents showed, that
despite their best efforts, their scientists were forced to
admit several cases which seemed to show the objective existence
of a solid and physical UFO phenomenon, would it not be likelier
that external scientific resources would be available to study
this problem, and that scientific interest would be higher? If
Condon and Menzel had urged their colleagues to study the
problem, had supported Hynek, McDonald, and Vallee in their
efforts, can one doubt that more scientific interest would exist
now? It defies sense to assume otherwise. And if science were
interested in the subject, would the fringe elements have the
dominance in our field that they now exhibit? Again, it defies
sense to assume that would be true. These are not "apples and
oranges". These are historical events, any one of which, not to
mention the combination of them all, could have changed the
course of scientific interest in the phenomenon.

Ed then goes on to claim that the cases I cited in response to
his claim that no good cases exist mean that we can all go home
and the problem is solved. This is a facetious. There are quite
a few solid cases on record which demonstrate the objective
existence of UFOs to the unbiased, and those listed cases were
among them. But Ed's position seems to be that if these cases,
or any cases, were any good, there would be scientific
acceptance of the subject; therefore, since such acceptance is
not forthcoming, these cases are no good. Such a position
ignores the objective value of these cases and simply places
their value in the court of the opinion of the biased and
uninformed.

There are strong and valid sociological and psychological
reasons which tend against the scientific acceptance of these or
any other cases short of UFOs raining down on the lawn of the
National Academy of Sciences.

One is a definite bias of science and scientists against the
existence of phenomena which are claimed to be the result of
non-human intelligence. This bias exists as a reaction to the
animism which science has had to combat for its entire
existence, and is not, as such, a bad thing. It also exists
because scientists, like many non-scientists, believe that a
non-human intelligence would, of necessity, engage in open and
comprehensible contact with humanity. Such contact does not
exist, therefore, in this view, UFOs cannot be the result of a
non-human intelligence; further, since UFOs seem to demonstrate
characteristics which require a non-human and intelligent
source, but such a source cannot exist because it does not
engage in overt contact, UFOs cannot exist except as products of
the imagination of the witness, with the witness' intellect
providing the indications of intelligence and intelligent
manufacture (behavior, metallic structure with components,
occupants, etc.)

Obviously, the critical path in this reasoning extends through
the assumption of the nature of non-human intelligent behavior.
If this assumption, which is extremely unscientific (since it is
not testable), is discarded, the remainder of this reasoning
collapses. Nevertheless, if it is accepted, then one can see
that there is very little potential for any case to convince a
skeptical scientist.

Furthermore, because of the difficult, non-reproducible, and
transient nature of the phenomenon, the type of data which is
available very seldom approaches the quantitative level which
physical scientists prefer. Hynek has engaged in extensive
discussion of this, and my discussion in that area was snipped
and not responded to by Ed - yet it is at the core of doing
science with UFO data. It is not a case of "special
dispensation", any more than recognition of the nature of
meteorite data required "special dispensation". The data is what
it is - like it or not. If you really can't stand it, come up
with proposals to improve it, or find a way to deal with it
anyway, but don't whine that the nature of it makes it too hard
to do science. _It isn't data that's scientific_ - it's what we
do with it. But Ed doesn't seem to accept that either.

I attempted to point out that the claim that UFO reports are the
result of misperception, hoax, and hallucination is, in fact, a
claim which requires evidence.

The MHH proponents have advanced a hypothesis, and as soon as
they did so, they took on the burden of proof - a burden which
Ed seems to think they do not have. But in science, anyone who
advances a hypothesis is required to demonstrate the proof of
that hypothesis, and the truth is that the MHH advocates have
failed to prove their hypothesis.

It is not our responsibility to deal with the fact that they
have chosen a method of attempting to prove that hypothesis
which essentially amounts to trying to prove a negative. There
are many ways to approach MHH, some of those have been tried,
and all have failed. Furthermore, the pattern of their failure
has seemed to indicate that MHH loses explanatory power as the
quality of the witness intelligence and perception improves and
as the angular size of the phenomenon increases or its distance
decreases. This pattern is important in attempting to assess
whether the "residue" would be explainable by MHH if more data
were available. The indications are that it would not. It is in
the hands of MHH proponents, of which Ed seems to be one, to
demonstrate that this is not the case.

Ed then claims that UFO reports are not consistent, and that if
I think they are, I should delve more deeply into the
literature. Perhaps Ed is unaware that I am the custodian of
Project 1947 EM Effects catalog. In that capacity, I have
personally reviewed and typed several hundred vehicle
interference CE-2s. I have found those cases to show, within the
limits of individual differences between witnesses, significant
consistency. Further, work by Vallee, Rodeghier and others has
shown the presence of specific patterns within and across
categories. So I think we need more than Ed's bald assertion of
inconsistency to contradict such facts.

If UFO reports were completely chaotic, no one would be
interested in them. But the presence of notable and specific
patterns of geometry, behavior, and physical traces is
undeniable. It is that which has led to and maintained interest
in UFOs by the rational and scientifically oriented people in
the field.

Ed then turns to epistemological argument, attempting to claim
that the fact that reports are unidentified does not mean that
they come from the same statistical universe, or the same cause.
This is, of course, only true if we blank out that we know more
about the reports than that they are unidentified. And we do. We
know about the patterns which I mentioned above, which are
accessible to anyone with even a casual interest in the subject.
These patterns, which are within the unidentified cases and have
not been demonstrated to be shared with the knowns (mostly NL
and distant DD cases), and which, in fact, two studies (Battelle
and GEPAN) reportedly deny are shared with the knowns, offer a
cohesiveness to the unknowns which does not seem to be
disputable.

Conclusion

It is difficult to summarize such a complex and wide-ranging
debate. However, I will restate my positions in summary:

1) Ufology lacks the infrastructure which would enable it to
censor fringe positions. The only answer to the problem is to
develop that infrastructure.

2) The unwillingness of science to look at the problem of UFOs
was initiated by the position of governments and important
scientists. The residue of their efforts, lack of effort, and
their clearly stated positions continue to discourage scientific
interest.

3) The consequence of this unwillingness has been the
proliferation of fringe viewpoints among interested amateurs.
These viewpoints also discourage scientific interest by
increasing the stigma of association with the subject. However,
as is clear from (1), there is no mechanism by which responsible
researchers may censor such viewpoints, or even avoid the
appearance of guilt by association.

4) Efforts to examine the subject on a short-term basis by
inexperienced scientists relying on a small subset of UFO data
are fraught with problems, and generally lead to tentative or
negative conclusions, or significant conflicts within the
examining group. Such panels are akin to having a group of
engineers examine the evidence for RNA as a medium for the
recording of long term memory - when reviewing a small amount of
evidence presented by the top workers in biology, they are
unlikely to have the depth of knowledge required to even suggest
profitable research directions.

5) The MHH as a hypothesis has had negative results. These
results cannot be defended on the basis that MHH requires
proving a negative, since taking up the MHH requires taking up
its burden of proof. Moreover, the pattern of failure of MHH
indicates that the residual cases cannot be explained by the MHH
even were more data available on those cases, since those cases
already tend to be those with the most data.

6) Epistemological attempts to discount UFO data are
contradicted by the studies which show consistency in the
accounts and their patterns on geometric, behavioral, and other
grounds. Studies which indicate statistically different
universes for knowns and unknowns have been made and so far no
contradicting studies seem to exist.

Finally, I can only say that we have a long way to go, but there
are people in this field and on this list who have the potential
to do the organizational, quantitative, and qualitative work
required to attain the desired end - a scientific understanding
of the cause of UFO reports.

We can have debates on the best way to accomplish this end. but
in debating we must focus on the facts, philosophies, and
methods which will allow us to accomplish it - not personality,
not spelling or grammar, and, most of all, not our own
frustration and anger.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

              Steven J. Dick [was: Re: Failure Of The 'Science'

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:48:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:51:45 -0400
Subject: Steven J. Dick [was: Re: Failure Of The 'Science'


>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:05 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Edoardo Russo <edoardo.russo@torino.alpcom.it>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 13:09:53 PDT

>>An excellent paper on the strong involvement of scientists in
>>the UFO controversy, especially in the 1970s, is Steven J.
>>Dick's "Edward U. Condon, UFOs, and the Many Cultures of
>>Science," read at the History of Science Meeting in Washington,
>>D.C., on December 28, 1992.

>Was it published anywhere?
>I'd be interested in getting a copy of it.

I spoke to the History of Science Society and they told me that
the only thing they may have was an abstract since society
meeting speakers were required to turn in abstracts of their
speeches and that 1992 society material was sent to the
Smithsonian for archiving. In my phone queries and
conversations with the Smithsonian archivist who is a point of
contact for the History of Science material, he hasn't been able
to locate the paper or an abstract. A copy may still exist at
the Smithsonian archives, but they just haven't been able to
locate any if it exists there.

I called Steven J. Dick and he said that the paper was never
published and that he didn't think that he even had a copy
himself anymore. After conversing at lenght, Steven Dick
suggested that all he knew and presently knows about the subject
and was contained in the 1992 original paper has been included
from his notes into his 1996 book:

    "The Biological Universe: The Twentieth-Century
    Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science"
    Cambridge University Press, 1996, ISBN 0-521-34326-7

Also, an abridged version has just been published and released
on 10/15/98 as:

    "Life on Other Worlds: The 20th-Century Extraterrestrial
    Life Debate"
    Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0 521 62012 0

Relevant material in both books was written from his original
notes used to address the History of Science meeting back in
1992 according to Steven J. Dick.

Relevant Chapters in "The Biological Universe":

    6 The UFO Controversy and the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis

        6.1 Rise of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis
        6.2 The Peak of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis
         1965-1969
        6.3 Aftermath: The Nature of Evidence and the Decline
         Of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis in Physical
         Science

Relevant chapter in "Life On Other Worlds" is Chapter 5 as
outlined above but consisting on only 32 pages instead of the
original 54 pages in "The Biological Universe" chapter.

I suggest that for an appreciation of Steven J. Dick's thoughts
on the subject to read either of the two chapters/books above in
context instead of relying on an online fragmentary rendition of
what Steven J. Dick was supposed to have said in an unpublished
paper from 1992 that apparently cannot be easily and
independently verified. Both books are in print and available.
I received my copies today in the mail from Barnes & Nobles.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

               Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:21:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:42:46 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note


>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:53:59 -0400
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note
>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

>Regarding...

>>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:28:21 EDT
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More On Ramey Photo & Note

>James wrote:

<snip>

>>And now phrases like "four victims" and "SW of Magdalena, N. Mex."
>>and "Site Two" and "Fort Worth, Tex." being rather easily read in the
>>Ramey Message with its official looking heading and logo.

>I can't see one word in the message which is indisputable.

>Even at the simplest analysis, there are words which appear to
>comprise of only two letters, the first being an 'O'. Do those
>words say 'OF', can we be certain it isn't 'OR', 'ON'...

>One segment which seems to offer interpretation is "FORT WORTH,
>TEX.", from the section which is most prominently lit.

>Where you believe the word 'VICTIMS' can be read, my best guess
>at that passage would be, "AND THE REMAINS OF THE ? WAS
>FORWARDED TO THE
>? AT FORT WORTH, TEX."

>Where you see 'VICTIMS', I would guess 'REMAINS' and not necessarily
>of ET bodies.

>On Neil Morris's web site, part of the message is interpreted as:
>
>1) ---------------------------***ARY WERE --------------------- AS THE
>2) --------------fxs 4 rsev1 VICTIMS OF The WRecK and CONVAY ON TO THE
>3) -------------*** at FORT WORTH. Txe.
>4) ------------***S** smiThs *ELSE* ***** unus-d**e T&E A3ea96
>L*******

>5) -------------SOught CRASHEs pOw*** *** N***** SITEOne IS reMotely
>*****

>6) -----------------***D** bAsE ToLd ***a* for we**ous BY STORY are
>*****

>7) -----------------lly thry even PUT FOR BY WEATHER BALLOONS n*d**
>were

>8) --------------------**** *** la** l***denver *****
>9)
>10)                                                   Temple
>

>Isn't the fact that such a combination of upper and lower case letters
>would obviously never occur, illustrative of the RPIT's subjective
>analysis and evidence the text can't be reconciled?

>One point which looks to be evident from the scanned image is that the
>type is entirely in capital letters. Another is that the spacing
>between words is distinct. As such, the phrase 'CONVAY ON' [presumably
>'CONVEY'] may not consist of two words, only one, which would be
>'FORWARDED', in my above suggestion.

>Although the initiative to make some sense of this text is absolutely
>commendable, wouldn't it be fair to say it's simply impossible?

>Incidentally, why would the message be signed 'Temple'?


James,

You didn't read the notes below the "paper" layout on my site,

The letters on the "paper" which I can see clearly I insert into
my "take" as uppercase, those I "assume", and "fit", I insert as
lowercase, other letters seen as totally indistinct are
indicated as "*". The letters on the paper appear typewritten in
"uppercase" and as such are ona fixed grid, this help in
identifying just how many letters are in the less distict words.

My "take" may or may not be correct, but as more of the
individual letters are identified and slip to "uppercase" we
will get a firmer idea just what is on that paper.

Neil,







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: neil morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:36:15 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:45:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Roger R. Prokic <rprokic@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'
> To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>


> Is it possible to post the Ramey message here, or on the Web?


It is on the Web at my site, image and current "take" of the
text:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/

Just follow the RPIT links, other image enhancements from the FW
photo's can also be found there too.

Neil.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:26:21 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:00:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:18:57 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>>For example, in Scientific American the Australian plasma
>>physicist John Lowke, a world-class authority on ball lightning,
>>states his reasons for belief in the reality of this curious
>>natural phenomenon:

>>"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
>>that there is no question that ball lightning exists. I have
>>talked to six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is
>>no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their
>>observations. Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably
>>similar and have common features with the hundreds of
>>observations that appear in the literature."

>>Needless to say, not a word was raised in objection to Fowke's
>>conclusions, based on six -- I repeat: _six_ -- so- called
>>anecdotal reports of ball lightning. Imagine, however, what a
>>scorching Lowke would have received if he had been talking about
>>UFOs.

>Jerry,

>Your characterization here isn't completely correct.

Nah, I stand by it. The guy does not go into the speculative
stuff you cite here. He states simply -- the quote was not out
of context, as you imply -- that his belief in the reality of BL
comes from six personally investigated sightings and a pattern
from several hundred reports he regards as reliable.

Amusing, isn't it, that a phenomenon like this -- surely an
unknown, surely based on evidence less substantive than that for
the best UFO reports -- is being used as an explanation for some
or many UFO reports?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:14:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:56:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Subject: Crop Circles/Balls of light A point to ponder on?
To: updates@globalserve.net

Roy

>Just what did Steven Alexandra film at Milk Hill Wiltshire? What
>was the Helicopter hovering over, in the famous Colin Andrews
>Alton Barnes Harassment case?

Whatever these objects are, do they offer any evidence that they
are responsible for the creation of crop circles?

>What exactly did Matthew Williams film in Wiltshire this year,
>which received quite a bit of 'air' time in the Barge Inn
>Wiltshire.

Does having UFO footage aired in a pub "quite a bit", constitute
proof that UFOs create crop formations?

>Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth
>Lights or even optical illusions?

Probably not.

>If these balls of light, are earth lights or so called fairy
>lights why has the military have such an interest in them?

This does not mean the lights are of extraterrestrial origin and
are responsible for the creation of crop formations.

>And why do the military always seem to know when and where these
>balls of light seem to appear?

Perhaps they know more about these lights than we do.

>Do the military have earth/fairy light tracking facilities?

See above

>If so what is the point in intercepting a natural occurring
>phenomena?

Research maybe, or they know the origin of the lights but again
does this offer evidence that these lights are responsible for
crop formations and are of extraterrestrial origin.

>If even these so called "Circle Makers" have seen these lights
>while they have been busy hoaxing circles, does that rule out
>all crop circles are hoaxed?

No, man-made formations are genuine, perhaps those allegedly
made by anomalous balls of lights should be considered hoaxed,
if it can be proved they have actually created a formation.
Flashes of lights have allegedly been reported by circle makers
but these have not been proved to be extraterrestrial crafts
making formations elsewhere.

>Can anyone think back far enough when Steven Greer and friends
>summoned a craft out of the sky, whilst standing hand in hand in
>a crop circle in Wiltshire?

The sighting is familiar but not with Steven Greer and co.
standing in a crop formation hand-in-hand, can you quote the
source of your information?

>If all the circles are man made, why does audio equipment,
>watches, etc go wild in some crop circles?

Probably the same reason healing occurs in some formations and
headaches etc. in others.

>Does this mean that the so called circle makers are statically
>charged and are spreading this across the wheat?

No, perhaps you should investigate why and where the formations
are created rather than speculate on guesses of other wordly
explanantions.

>Isn't it just a fact that at the end of the day, despite
>skeptics claiming this a solved mystery, like the UFO phenomena,
>a mystery it still is?

Crop formations should not be now classified as an enigma, but
there is still alot of mileage yet to do on UFOs before they can
be dismissed entirely.

I prefer to keep away from classifying researchers as sceptics
or believers, there are some who prefer to view these phenomenon
objectively and are not trying to prove a theory either way, but
just find answers to the questions.

>What did Terrance Meaden really meet in East Field Wiltshire?

Did he witness a formation being created?

>Are we really going to give the credit to hoaxers, for the deep
>and meaningful and historic symbology of crop circles?

Yes, because that is the what's happening.

>Sensible {libel and slanderous free} comments welcome.

Do you know what slanderous means? And libel for that matter?

Btw, how's the filming of your Puerto Rican documentary going?

Tony






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:41:15 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:05:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 20:32:55 PDT

>>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

><snip>

>For the record, new readers can pick up the thread from the
>archives in UFOMIND by clicking either on my name or Jerome
>Clark's name and the entire archived thread from the inception
>will become available.

>Jerome Clark's ufological wisdom portrays the following
>clap-trap:

>>The Sturrock
>>panel's conclusions show us what the best ufology, and the best
>>ufologists, can accomplish, and they give us some reason for
>>optimism about future prospects.

>After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these
>are some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the
>Summary Report of the Scientific Review Panel:

>       "On the other hand, the review panel was not convinced that
>any of the evidence involved currently unknown physical
>processes or pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial
>intelligence."

Of course that was not the panel's intention. It was making
judgments from the limited number of cases it looked at. It
found those cases impressive and worthy of further scientific
inquiry, at the end of which - presumably a long process - it
would be possible to come to a far more firm judgment about
the nature and origin of UFO phenomena. But haven't we gone
through this before? Or are we to be subjected to yet more
special pleading - and quotations out of sense or context -
from would-be debunkers.

The Ed Stewarts of the world, alas, seem only to want to
snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Those who want a
more honest and realistic picture of the panel than Stewart
provides ought to go to the SSE website and read the whole
report. Meantime, the rest of us can scratch our heads at
the strange things Ed wants us to believe: that a report
attacked, sometimes virulently, by skeptics and debunkers
is a report that validates the skeptic/debunker position.
It seems that skeptics and debunkers are better able to read
simple English and to follow an argument than Stewart is.


>       "It appears that most current UFO investigations are
>carried out at a level of rigor that is not consistent with
>prevailing standards of scientific research."

And who would disagree? That's why we need the involement of
scientists.

>       "The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
>presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
>causes of the reports."

Of course. Given the available information, there was only so
far both the ufologists and the scientists could go. That's why
the panel urged further real scientific investigation of UFO
reports. Even the New York Times and the Washington Post, never
friendly to ufology, grasped that point, which has sailed over
the point on Ed's head, easily. CSICOP and the debunkers
understood the positive drift of the panel's conclusions. Why do
they evade Ed? Because they have to?

>It went further on extenting the conclusion of Dr. Edward U.
>Condon of the Colorado Study that:

>       "nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21
>years [add another 29 years now to it] that has added to
>scientific knowledge."

Of course fully one-third of Condon's reports remain
unexplained. According to McDonald and others, even some of the
supposedly explained really were unknowns. In other words, a far
higher percentage of unexplaineds - even by Condon's own
questioned figures - than Blue Book was willing to acknowledge.

Ed's reading of the Sturrock panel is bizarre, but much of what
we hear from this man, as we have seen, answers to that
adjective. For a fascinating inside account of what went on
inside the panel's proceedings, see Michael D. Swords and Mark
Rodeghier's "The History-Making Sturrock Workshop," IUR, Fall
1998, pp. 3-8, available from CUFOS, 2457 West Peterson Avenue,
Chicago, Illinois 60659.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:00:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:13:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Now let's move on to the idea of "demons to blame".

>>There can be no question among reasonable people that ufology
>>has seen several turning points in its relation to science, and
>>that those have been almost uniformly negative.

>>1) Rejection of the 'Estimate'.

>The 'estimate' is an alleged document that no one alive has ever
>seen, no one has ever found and that can only be discussed
>through second and third hand references. It is an alleged
>document without provenance. It was never alleged to be a
>scientific document, but a top secret intelligence document
>produced to give the best intelligence estimate of then present
>situation. As such, its value was tied to the time it was
>allegedly produced and only as accurate and good as the
>intelligence of the moment subject to change at a moment's
>notice. But a turning point for ufology in relation to science?
>You're comparing apples and oranges.

Ed I think you are either being intentionally misleading here or
unaware of the following because Loren E. Gross in his UFOs: A
History Volume 2:1948 pp. 51. states the following:

"Supporting testimony of the documents existence (Project Sign's
Estimate of the Situation) later came from Dr. J. Allen Hynek
who told West Coast journalist Robert B. Klinn and David Branch
in 1972 did not only did he know about the document, but that he
even had read. Keyhoe, evidently using the influence he had with
Dewey Fournet, got a peek at a three-page summary of the
"estimate" due to a sympathetic colonel in Air Force
intelligence."

What clever wording you are using,"alleged document that no one
alive has ever seen", did you tutor Bill Clinton? or do these
wordings come
from watching too many X-Files episodes?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

               Re: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 21:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:27:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Walthamstow Sightings:  The Full Version


Dear Colleagues,

As an update to the original posting I made earlier this week, I
now have the full version of events as they were undertaken.
This is the full report, from one of our East London
Investigators Mr Tony Golbourn.

Before I continue with this sighting I would just like to
mention the following:

FOR THE SAFEGUARD OF GROUP INTEGRITY:

As like any other group or organisation, who would like to
preserve the Integrity of their name this is no different for
ELUFON. So if I may I would like to state the following.

As it is now possible to be libled on the inter-net,any
individual, researcher or otherwise who is thinking in partaking
in the action of the use of slander, and libelous, and
defamatory remarks against either my name Roy Hale, or that of
my group ELUFON (Essex & London UFO Network and anyone
associated with it should and will be opening their selves up to
the due process of full legal U.K. Libel Laws.

The sole purpose of ELUFON subscribing to UpDates, was for the
intention of contacting and connecting with researchers from
around the world, to constructively debate, share thoughts and
opinions, and and to help research all aspects of the UFO
phenomena.

I know of no other service which provides for the ufologist of
today, the fresh and most recent UFO related events, and a
service which also offers some of the greatest debate forums.
UFO UpDates - Toronto, from my point of view, which is moderated
by Errol Bruce Knapp is in a class of its own.

ELUFON did not subscribe to UpDates, so that its name and that
of its members can be publicly dissected, slandered and libeled
by individuals who may have an axe to grind for what ever reason
that maybe.

I am sure most of you would agree, that if this was to happen to
you , then you would expect the persons to be called to account
in what ever manner. ELUFON has never shied away from any debate
on UpDates, and I would like to think that I and my group have
contributed in a constructive and worthwhile manner.

For evidence of this please read my latest posting "Crop
Circles/Balls of light a point to ponder.This is what UpDates is
all about, getting our head around the UFO phenomena. It is
quite plain to see that there are non-believers and there are
skeptics. Each individual has the right for free self
expression, but when that individual looks to single a group or
person, and decides to start libelling them on UpDates, this my
friends is where the line should be drawn.

I would say to anyone who for what ever reason, good or bad who
has an axe to grind with me, well, you know my e-mail address,
and some may even know my home phone number. If you dont know my
home address, email me for it if you would like to put pen to
paper, but please try not to abuse the excellent service which
UFO UpDates provide for all ufologists, believers or not.

Can I also quickly mention that since joining UpDates, I have
made many friends from around the world, and have had some great
chats about UFOs, and find it to be an immense pleasure on
meeting new friends.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, I will only ever say
this once.

Now then what, did I post this message for originally? Oh yes,
sorry guys and girls here it is the Walthamstow sighting in
full, TAKE IT AWAY TONY!!!!!



Hi, my name is Tony Golbourn, one of the group members of
'ELUFON',alongside Roy Hale and the rest of the gang.

I would like to tell you about some recent sightings witnessed
by myself and another group investigator, Brian Jessop.

On Sunday 11th October 1998, whilst standing in my back garden
at approx 1900 hrs, I spotted what I could only describe as a
gold orb traveling in a north easterly direction at an
approximate altitude of 2000ft.

It is usual to see aircraft stacking above my home, as it is
located in one of the main flight paths for Heathrow Airport.
Whilst observing this object, I also noticed a satellite passing
over which due to the visible differences, convinced me that
this was not a satellite, because (for instance) it was
brighter, bolder and  moving a lot faster.

A few minutes later, I noticed two additional orbs white in
color traveling northwards. As they approached me, the one on
the right turned in a north easterly direction and the other
carried straight on north.

Being as there was so much activity in the sky, I decided to set
my camcorder up. And surprise surprise all activity ceased.

On the following evening on the 12th, at approx 1845hrs I
noticed as with the following evening, the gold orb had
returned, traveling the same route. I rushed in and grabbed my
camcorder, called Roy on the phone and went back to the garden.

I then noticed another white orb which whilst traveling became
brighter. The size was similar to the end of a pencil but
gradually expanded to the size of a tennis ball and then seemed
to implode inwards and disappear altogether.

This happened so quickly, that I was unable to get it on film.I
was so taken with this event, that I decided to try and project
a message directly to the orb and ask, that if this was who I
thought it was, then to please show me the gold orb again as a
form of confirmation.

The gold orb re-appeared.

Later that evening, I called another group member 'Brian'. I
relayed the events and my experience of that night.  Brian
stopped me mid-sentence and told me that he was coming round.
When he arrived he was pretty excited, as when he was traveling
home along a road which leads to my home, he had spotted a
bright white light, this would be at approximately 1855 hrs.

Brian who describes himself as a pretty cautious driver, could
not help but be distracted by this light, as as it got closer he
realized that it was a triangle shaped object.

My wife Lynne also had a sighting last week(detailed below)
although she cannot be specific of the date and time.

She was also in the garden, when she noticed a bright light
approaching, it was not a circular object but looked like three
balls of light linked together, the middle light being slightly
larger.

As the object approached, it became so bright that she had to
avert her eyes. It passed over some thin cloud but could still
be seen, it then came back into full view. It then passed over a
smaller, cloud and just disappeared. Just after this, she heard
and saw a plane pass over, which made her realise, that the
object she had seen before, hadn't made a sound.

Myself and Brian have been studying sightings in the
Walthamstow/Chingford area, and we would welcome any extra
information anybody might have about this sighting or indeed
others. You can contact us via e-mail on ELUFON@yahoo.com.uk all
reports will be published in our new face lifted Magazine "Down
to Earth" and updates will be kept fully informed of our
progress.


Yours

Tony Golbourn {East London Investigator for the Essex & London
UFO Network}.

All the best

Roy..

Quote of the night: Learn to be quiet enough to here the sound
of the genuine within yourself, so that you can hear it in
others:

Marian Wright Edelman (1939) American Writer







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 19:27:48 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:09:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:12:31 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <104744.2543@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>.

>>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>The bottom line is that there are sightings which are so far
>beyond the capability of conventional physics to explain that
>they have to be either hoaxes of "the real thing" by which I
>mean a guaranteed unexplainable phenomenon. Exactly what that
>phenomenon might be is still open for speculation (and several
>phenomena mght be involved in some sightings) but that does not
>deny its "inexplicableness" (!!).

>I recently mentioned in a message that we are coming up on 20
>years since Valentich disappeared, and, in December, on the New
>Zealand sghtings that involved multiple witnesses, ground and
>airborne radar detections and 16 mm color movie film. No doubt
>about it..... there were unexplained phenomena in the air that
>night. And Phil Klass, that "paragon:" (or is it parrot gone?)
>of scientific virtue and accuracy "explained:" one of the
>unknowjn lights that was filmed (in his book, 'UFOs, The Public
>Deceived'... in which he deceived the public) as a rotating
>beacon on TOP of the aircraft , filmed from inside the
>cockpit..... by reflection* off a propellor..... (give me a
>break!) even though I had provided him with conclusive
>optical/photographic proof that the white film images could
>_not_ have been made by filming the red rotating beacon by any
>means, including reflection off a propellor.

Bruce,

It is more and more apparent that the extraordinary claims are
being made by debunkers and their apologists inside and outside
ufology. When the history of this sad episode (the UFO
phenomenon and the refusal of those who ought to have known
better to confront it honestly) is written, I do not doubt that
it will be cautious, sensible ufologists who are judged the
conservatives in the debate, the debunkers the wild-eyed cranks.

I just hope we live long enough to see this thing through. If
not, we can go to our rest certain of one thing: we were right,
and they were wrong.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:41:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:35:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned


>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:11:26 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down


>>>Semi-"old timers" will know that we are fast coming up on the
>>>20th anniversary of the disappearance of Frederich Valentich
>>>who disappeared along with his small plane over the Bass Strait


>>>Date: Oct. 21, 1978, 7:12:28 pm local time, just after he said
>>>"...is hovering and it's not an aircraft...."

>>>Fred had described a strange object traveling back and
>>>forth over his aicraft:"It's got a green light and a sort of
>>>metallic light. It's shiny on the outside."

>>>Whym you may ask, dare I write quotes from a person who
>>>disappeared (and hence was never "properly interviewed" about
>>>his UFO sighting)?

>>>Answer:  quote are abstracted from the AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
>>>CENTER (Melbourne) audio tape of the incident.  Fred was in
>>>communication with the radar, but, unfortunately, was below the
>>>altitude at which the radar would detect him..... and the other
>>>object.

>>>Yes, the bones of many reside at the bottom of the ocean, but on
>>>the other hand, there was no evidence of problems with
>>>Valentich's plane and.... no residue, flotsam, jetsam, junk,
>>>evidence of any kind was ever found, yet there should have been
>>>had he "simply" crashed into the ocean.>

>>>Fred was gone.....>

>>>is gone......

>>>RIP.

>>>(A search of the Bass Strait was carried out for several days.
>>>Nothing was ever found)

<snip>

Has anyone in recent years tried to use newer underwater
scanning techniques to do a new check for remains?


Have never heard of any recent (within the last 10 year)
searches. However, they had quite good sonar back in those days
which could map the bottom (i believe about 600 ft deep).
Usually if a plane crashes there will be pieces or oil slick or
whatever. In this case the search commenced within a day....and
nothing was ever found.

I might mention that the complete lack of debris led some
skeptics to suggest that Fred was... guess what .... alive!.
Yes, it was all a hoax by Fred to cover up some smuggling
activity and he flew the plane to xsome place in the center of
Australia rather than to King Island. Probably there are still
some people who assume Fred is alive and well...... somewhere.

About 12 years ago Richard Haines published a book on this
event, "Melbourne Episode", (L.D.A. Press, CA, 1987), with
introduction written by Yours Truly....  This book contains more
information than you'll ever want to know about it (unless you
intend to carry out your own 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:36:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:32:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:03:51 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>I've pretty much stayed out of this, since much of it has been
>no higher than mudslinging. But now that we're getting to some
>meaty issues, I think it's worth stepping in.

Great commentary by Mark Cashman.

I have been reviewing the Sturrock Panel report with an intent
to write a paper rebutting the implication that all radar and
radar -  visual sightings amount to nothing (probably just
atmpospheric refraction effects, according to Von Eschleman,
Appendix 4). I was once again struck by their endorsement of
Condon's conclusion that nothing had been learned after 21 years
of study.... now updated to 51 years by the review panel.

What has really stymied research has been the "self-coverup" by
scientists of reputation who have been unwilling to admit
"defeat" when it comes to explaining some sightings. In ths
particular case of radar visual.... wich has many examples going
back nearly 50 years...... the two sightings described briefly
in the Sturrock report simply cannot be explained by atmospheric
refractions unless the atmosphere can do things far beyond
anything ever recorded or imagines (e.g.,bend light many, many
degrees instead of a fraction of a degree). If the atmosphere
were "that bad" astronomy never would have gotten off the ground
and people would have trouble distinguishing anything in the
real world, including trees and tall buildings.  from a
distorted mirage.

The bottom line is that there are sightings which are so far
beyond the capability of conventional physics to explain that
they have to be either hoaxes of "the real thing" by which I
mean a guaranteed unexplainable phenomenon. Exactly what that
phenomenon might be is still open for speculation (and several
phenomena mght be involved in some sightings) but that does not
deny its "inexplicableness" (!!).

I recently mentioned in a message that we are coming up on 20
years since Valentich disappeared, and, in December, on the New
Zealand sghtings that involved multiple witnesses, ground and
airborne radar detections and 16 mm color movie film. No doubt
about it..... there were unexplained phenomena in the air that
night.  And Phil Klass, that "paragon:" (or is it parrot
gone?) of scientific virtue and accuracy "explained:" one of the
unknowjn lights that was filmed (in his book, "UFOs, The Public
Deceived...in which he deceived the public) as a rotating beacon
on TOP of the aircraft , filmed from inside the cockpit..... by
reflection off a propellor.....( give me a break!)  even though
I had provided him with conclusive optical/photographic proof
that the white film images could NOT have been made by filming
the red rotating beacon by any means, including reflection off a
propellor.

Oh , well, sic transit gloria skeptica (??)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:42:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:38:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:19:47 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 05:14:32 PDT

>>Of course, if debunkers _really_ believed anecdotal testimony to
>>be worthless, they wouldn't pay so much attention to it.  Thus
>>any report, however superficially impressive, could be dismissed
>>out of hand if it came solely from eyewitness testimony.
>I>nstead, debunkers go to extraordinary lengths to disprove these
>>cases, on the implicit assumption that the testimony _is_ meaningful.
>>Typically, debunkers employ any argument immediately at hand,
>>even if their actions prove they don't believe it themselves for
>>a second.

>As is pointed out somewhere, probably in "The UFO Book",
>debunkers continually use the anecdotal accounts in their
>attempts at explanations - and when either debunkers or the
>honestly skeptical / honest ufologist succeed in identifying a
>mundane cause it is due to the accuracy of the testimony. But
>when equally or more complete testimony leads to an
>unidentifiable case, with the potential to provide scientific
>information on the phenomenon, the debunker has no room for the
>observations of the witness.


As I pointed out over a week ago in this Oberg thread, Jimmy
made a convincing argument for his identification of numerous
sightings over Chile and South America..... he identified these
strange lights and phenomena as fuel dumps and staging of Soviet
rockets. And guess what he used as his proof.....

Yup. you guessed it..

_Witness_Testimony_!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                          Lecture On UFOs in Brazil

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:17:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:41:23 -0400
Subject: Lecture On UFOs in Brazil


+++ Lecture On UFOs in Brazil +++

Hi Folks!

For those living in Southern California, I want to inform that I
will be presenting a lecture on UFO sightings and ET contacts in
Brazil for MUFON LA and MUFON Anaheim, respectively on the 21
October (Wednesday) and 24 October (Saturday). Information about
the program can be obtained with Don Waldrop (DONZON@aol.com).

The topics include an update on the Varginha Case (January 20,
1996), a report about the Brazilian military Operation Saucer
(conducted in 1977), including an extensive interview with its
commander, col. Uyrange Hollanda. Finally, I will be presenting
some of the best cases reported and researched in Brazil in the
past 2 years, including a whole new set of images.

Those interested in attending should contact Don at the above
address. Please be welcome.

A. J. Gevaerd
editor, Brazilian UFO Magazine
Private: gevaerd@ufo.com.br
Corporate: ufo@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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                        Psychic Predictions for 1999

From: Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research <iufor@frii.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:21:16 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:58:24 -0400
Subject: Psychic Predictions for 1999


While in the supermarket checkout line, a tabloid newspaper
article caught my eye: "Psychic Predictions for 1999". Upon
browsing through the article, it became clear to me that I was
fully as psychic as the author. To prove it, I offer my own
psychic predictions for 1999, and I fearlessly go on public
record with them, so that they can be verified as predicted
events transpire.

-------------------------------------

Bob's Psychic Predictions For 1999
Remember -- You saw it here first!


January -- New Scandal:

A new Washington financial scandal will be in the headlines,
when it is discovered that extraterrestrial aliens contributed
campaign funds to the Democratic National Committee. Not knowing
how to return the money, the government will transfer the funds
to the NSA, thus converting the "Gray" Budget into a Black
Budget. The windfall funds will be spent on wild parties, but of
course no one will know it. The aliens have, of course,
anticipated this, as it was their plan all
along to keep the NSA incapacitated for the next 12 months.


February -- Missing Time:

A new record in "missing time" will be set by the reappearance
of Jimmy Hoffa, who was abducted by aliens in 1975. His 24-year
record will be short lived however, lasting only until the
return of Amelia Earhart, missing since 1937.

Another record of sorts will be posted by a candidate for County
Treasurer in a western state, who will be returned by
time-traveling aliens one day before he left. Both instances of
the individual will vote for himself, thus winning the county
election by the narrowest of
margins.


March -- Global Warming:

Global warming will produce unprecedented thawing in the far
north. Receding ice will lead to the rediscovery of the grave of
St. Urho, the saint who drove the grasshoppers out of Finland.
Finnish legend credits him with the phrase, "Hein=E4sirkka,
hein=E4sirkka, meine t=E4=E4tt=E4 hiiteen", or "Grasshopper,
grasshopper, get the hell out of here". (In support of the
legend, note that although Finland has no grasshoppers, there is
a word for grasshopper in the language.)


April -- Stock Market:

The stock market will fluctuate up and down throughout the
month. Some people will make money, others will lose. There are
strong psychic indications that this trend will persist through
the end of the year.


May -- Global Weather:

The subsidence of El Ni=F1o and El Ni=F1a will give rise to a new
weather pattern, known as "Il Bambino del Maltempo" (the bad
weather baby), as the job of naming weather anomalies will be
taken over by the Italians.

I also feel at this time that there is a strong possibility that
a 6.8 or higher earthquake will level the Serbian National
Library, destroying their book.


June -- Environmental Issues:

An environmentally insensitive move by the French to harvest
trees along their traditionally tree-lined country lanes, will
be met with vociferous opposition by the rest of the European
Community; particularly by the Germans, who prefer to march in
the shade.


July -- Pole Shift:

A massive pole shift will leave Warsaw a ghost town, and Chicago
overflowing with new immigrants. A subsequent, but smaller, pole
shift will see the Pope retiring to Hawaii, where he will be
known affectionately as "Big Papa Kahuna".


August -- Government Spending:

Government overspending will be in the news as a military
warehouse is discovered containing an estimated 400,000,000
rolls of toilet paper -- enough to "wipe" the entire planet
earth, if the appropriate - shall we say - "orifice" could be
found somewhere on the planet. In the belief that this location
is already known, the entire supply will be shipped to
Cleveland.


September - News Items:

I foresee several items in September's news.

- The IRS will disallow claims of implant removals as short-term
losses.

- Hillary Clinton will deny a secret agreement with the Ashtar
Command.

- Philip Klass will finally admit to membership in MJ-12.

- A crop circle will appear in Colin Andrews' shag carpet.

- El Chupacabras will sign to star in a Japanese horror film.


October -- UFO Lands on White House Lawn:

The long-awaited landing of an alien space ship on the White
House lawn will finally take place, where it will be first
approached by the dog, Buddy. By universal tradition, Buddy will
automatically become earth's ambassador to the Galactic
Federation, and earth's highest ranking entity. His first
official move will be to have his Human neutered. The action
will be met with widespread popular approval and relief.


November - Fiscal Mystery:

November is traditionally the month of mysteries. A high
official of MUFON will reveal for the first time that the
organization is supported financially by a tabloid newspaper,
the National Enquirer.

The mystery deepens as it is discovered that the National
Enquirer is financed by the Bilderberger Group, who in turn are
financed by -- MUFON.

In a surreptitious effort to learn how it is done, Canada's
Minister of Finance will initiate a covert inquiry into the
matter.

December - Celebrities in the News:

- Rush Limbaugh will be fired. Unemployed, he will become a Democrat.

- Hugh Hefner will abruptly leave his Playboy empire and will throw
all his time and money into the search for a cure for impotence. He
will not discuss his reasons.

- Brooke Shields' eyebrows will finally grow together.

- PBS Television will announce a new series on the lives of famous
composers. In the series opener, Arnold Schwarzenegger will be Bach.

-------------------------------------

I expect no less than full credit for these psychic predictions
as events occur.

Best regards,
Bob
--
=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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|     I N S T I T U T E   F O R   U F O   R E S E A R C H     |
=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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|         Bob Thrift           |    Editor, UFOCUS Magazine   |
|    Webmaster, IUR Web Site   |  http://www.frii.com/~iufor/ |
|    Fort Collins, Colorado    |    email: iufor@frii.com     |
=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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                   Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 17 Oct 1998 10:01:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:49:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'


>From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:23:49 EDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:49:51 -0400
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements & 'People Links'

Delay in response due to having "fudged-up" sending it correctly
(sorry ebk) on my end from work; I hafta receive my List
messages thru my home account via Netscape but hafta send em out
from work with Microsoft mail. <sigh>

YEAH! Someone finally responded to a post of mine (besides my
response to the People Links request). Replies inserted below:

>Date: 13 Oct 1998 17:48:55 -0500
>From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
>Subject: Re: Roswell Statements
>To: Errol Bruce-Knapp <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:44 -0800
>>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Roswell Statements

>Good Lord, man... are you asserting that the Army Air Force was
>prescient? They had to be in order to create such an elaborate
>hoax. First they (AAF) claim by press release that a flying disk
>was "captured," then they claim that it was a mistake. Now,
>which lie, if indeed either or both stories were untrue, are we
>supposed to believe? Any assertion of "planning" a Roswell hoax
>by our "Storm Trooper" mentality military is oxymoronic.

>Planning + Military = oxymoron

>First we say we do, and then we don't!
>So whaddya gonna do?
>Cha, cha, cha!

First let me admit to the fact that I haven't really thoughtt
thru this idea/conspiracy, it is based, obviously, on
speculation.

Second, are you kidding? I would be the first to agree with your
depiction of our military intelligence as oxymoronic but the
record, as I will try and document below, speaks for itself.

Whatever the true origins or nature of the crashed material, is
it not possible that the Army Air Force [after learning of the
influence reports of foo fighters and ghost rockets had on the
beliefs of pilots (ie-they are the enemies new technology and
thus possibly dangerous), and especially after making an art of
disinformation thru such organizations as the LCS (London
Controlling Section-as part of the "Martian Conspiracy" as
outlined by Vallee in his Messengers of Deception book)] or some
agency within it could have sent word to the respective parties,
Marcel, Ramey (a relative of mine) etc., to play up the
possibility of the debris being first described as the remains
of a flying saucer and then recanting so as to _compound_ the
belief in U.S. possesion of said technology? {whew! that
hurt-runonandonand}

>The many connections between UFO researchers and psych warfare
>groups! I didn't know they were connected. It would be a lot
>like the blind leading the blind leading the deaf, dumb and
>blind, wouldn't it?

>Just what connections are you referring to anyway?

I am referring to Vallee's and others assertions that:

"Most UFO organizations are led by people who are independent
and sincire..... Such sincire individuals are surrounded with
people who have links to the world of espionage or to military
intelligence. I found that some of the links were open and
obvious: for instance, the Board of Directors of NICAP lists
among its members the former head of the CIA; and it is no
secret that CUFOS (Dr. J. Allen Hynek's Center for UFO Studies)
has several "former" agenst among its associates. Sometimes the
link is less obvious, but is known to members of the
organization, who admit it when confronted with the fact."

I'm not trying to be a 'guilt by association' conspiracy
theorist. Honest. But . . .

Vallee goes on to state the reason for this is simple data
gathering as well as "the social influence of such groups can be
manipulated for political reasons."

Without going into excessive quoting, Vallee also explored the
possibility/probability that the 'Martian Conspiracy',
specificly the London Controlling Section, continued in some
form after WWII, manipulating _information_ towards some unknown
ends. He goes into detail on this idea on pp196-204 in
'Messengers of Deception'. By controlling the flow of info they
can control what people "know" and believe.

If you haven't read this book 'MOD', or his 'Revelations' then I
can quote more or expand on specific questions you might have
regarding the LCS. See also Anthony Brown's 'Bodyguard of Lies'.

>Vallee is portrayed in the movie, "Close Encounters" as being
>connected with the military and our government. Can you see that
>connection as being a reality as well?

Absolutely! In the final chapters of the talking book version of
ethnobotanical enthusiast Terence McKenna's 'True
Hallucinations' TM criticizes Vallee's 'MOD' as paranoia and
states observantly that (to paraphrase) "If the military didn't
know of this psychological warfare potential they certainly do
now." I am not unaware of assertions that Vallee is part of "the
cover-up" however, having read all his books (except for the
computer and fiction in French works) especially his personal
journals in 'Forbidden Science' I can only see him as a very
balanced human who seeks to understand the mult-faceted nature
of UFO phenomena and the misuse of peoples belief in that
phenomena by human agencies.

>There exists today, such a mistrust of government by society,
>our society, that people tend to see things only a paranoid
>schizophrenic stage three syphilitic would see. That says more
>about us than U.S.

Rigthfully so, I would say. But I haven't taken my medication in
days so . . .

Seriously, is it that outrageous to mistrust a government and
its agencies who keep far too many secrets, who have
experimented on their own unwitting populace in hundreds of
documented instances, who have traded arms for hostages, who
have continually armed other countries only to turn around and
attack them, who invade our southern neighbors and kill hundreds
(or thousands depending upon your sources) because the guy we
put in power stopped selling drugs the way _we_ wanted him to
(Noriega), who try to impeach our President for lieing [sic]
about blow-jobs!?!?!

Dang straight I'm full of mistrust of my government. But I still
try and vote when I'm not too depressed by the sorry state of
the union.

>As Colonel Potter would have said (MASH), "HORSE HOCKEY!"

I've seen nearly every episode. Darn good show. Which probly
helped me become the govt/military distruster I am today. Thanks
MASH!

>Sorry I yelled,

Same here, I mean my yelling of course.

>Jim

SMiles
ps-thanks again for taking the time to respond Jim.
mailto:elfis@ccsi.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                                Re: Dr. Wolf

From: Kathleen Andersen <KAnder6444@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:40:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:08:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Dr. Wolf


>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: In Defense of Michael Wolf
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:04:10 -0500

>"A Defense of Michael Wolf: The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy
>by Michael Wolf

>Friedman and Wolf Michael Wolf's book, The Catcher's of Heaven,
>is one of the best books that have read in a long time.

Perhaps I missed something. You mentioned, Friedman, like in
Stan? Did Stan have a hand in writing this book?

>It is a book on love, courage, peace, and hope.

No problem, we can use some more love and peace. Not complaining
there.

>>It is a book about the interconnectedness of UFOs and ETs
to our everyday lives.

Not being a real skeptic, however when has it been concluded
what the motivation of Ets is? Seems to me in cases I've
investigated, victims are traumatized, landing traces show signs
of serious environmental consequences, children being taken (not
by free will) out of their bedrooms at night. Gee, you could
have fooled me about love and peace.

>The proceeds of the book goes to a children's foundation

Which childrens foundation and is it accepted by the IRS as
registered non-profit foundation?

>Mr. Friedman would take the time to spell Dr/ Wolf's name
>correctly.

Not sure what the spelling of "Dr/ Wolf" means? Maybe I need a
refresher in English.

>So his family would be protected from any unwanted intrusions
>on their privacy.

What family of his were your referring to? I understood he was
single. How come all the other authors are open about their
address and phone numbers. An author of love and peace shouldn't
feel threatened by fans should he?

>Furthermore, Mr. Friedman only has a Master's degree in Physics
>where Dr. Wolf has his Ph.D. in Physics.

Interesting. I wasn't aware that having a degree in _anything_
made you a better researcher or gave you the answers to what the
whole UFO phenomenon was about. Aren't we all experts?

>Furthermore, James Courant called Dr. Wolf's brother who told
>him that Michael's sister has mental problems and told lies.

Isn't James Courant the pilot that has preached Dr. Wolf's
opinions and claimed that there would be a mass landing of ETs -
let me see - wasn't it last year sometime?


>there are too many people out there who are too busy
>criticizing others for no good reason.

I am not criticizing but trying to find out what category some
of the authors fit into to. The way I see it, there are a lot of
people saying a lot of things for the sake of making money. Not
to say that the good Dr. Wolf is one of them. But sometimes I
think its important to determine in what context things a being
written. after all, there is a lot of room for all publications.
Take the contrast of magazines such as Discovery or the other
realm of the National Inquirer.

>The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy,' life-changing book, not
>only for the children, but for us--the readers.

I wish Dr. Wolf the best of success. Changing lives for the
better, is not a bad thing. Not sure why its always connected
with ETs and not just from our own heart.

Kathleen  Andersen
Seattle Washington






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Earth Microbes On The Moon

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:01:52 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:32:36 -0400
Subject: Re:  Earth Microbes On The Moon


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 02:04:44 +0200
>Subject: Earth Microbes On The Moon

<snip>

>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast01sep98_1.htm

<snip>

>Forthcoming anniversary

>Space historians will recall that the journey to the stars has
>more than one life form on its passenger list: the names of a
>dozen Apollo astronauts who walked on the moon and one
>inadvertent stowaway, a common bacteria, Streptococcus mitis,
>the only known survivor of unprotected space travel. As Marshall
>astronomers and biologists met recently to discuss biological
>limits to life on Earth, the question of how an Earth bacteria
>could survive in a vacuum without nutrients, water and radiation
>protection was less speculative than might first be imagined. A
>little more than a month before the forthcoming millennium
>celebration, NASA will mark without fanfare the thirty year
>anniversary of documenting a microbe's first successful journey
>from Earth.

>Apollo 12 remembered

>In 1991, as Apollo 12 Commander Pete Conrad reviewed the
>transcripts of his conversations relayed from the moon back to
>Earth, the significance of the only known microbial survivor of
>harsh interplanetary travel struck him as profound:

>"I always thought the most significant thing that we ever
>found on the whole...Moon was that little bacteria who came back
>and lived and nobody ever said [anything] about it."

>(Left: Astronaut Pete Conrad (photographed by crew mate Alan
>Bean) inspects Surveyor 3's camera assembly. Surveyor 3 landed
>on the moon on April 20, 1967, at 2.94o S, 23.34o W in Oceanus
>Procellarum.On Nov. 12, 1969, Conrad and Bean piloted the Apollo
>12 Lunar Module (background) to a landing 156 m (512 ft) away.)

<snip>

Hi guys,

Who knows, but some of the really strange microbes found here
could now be explained as E.T.s who hitched a ride to Earth on a
meteor and may now be hitching rides on us.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs

From: Ron Jorgenson <rjorgens@whidbey.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:13:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:29:51 -0400
Subject: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs


Hi all,

I was hoping to get some more information about a video clip I
saw on the news the other night. I live just north of Seattle
and was watching our FOX affiliate's 10 o'clock news about 2
nights ago, and they showed about 10 seconds of a clip of three
equally spaced orange fireballs going slowly across the daytime
sky. Supposedly the sighting had happened that day, but I missed
exactly where it happened. I think it was Ohio or somewhere in
the Midwest.

They looked like bolides to me, but the announcer was saying,
"local astronomers say they moved too slowly to be meteors."
They yucked it up about UFOs, and no more information was
forthcoming. I am curious because I've heard no other mention
about it in the news, or from my usual sources of UFO info on
the web (NWUFO Reporting center, Filers Files, UFO Roundup, CNI,
or on the UFOUpdates list.

Does anyone have any information or leads I can follow? Isn't
odd how real looking video taken by regular people never seems
to make news, or if it does it disappears very quickly, like a
splash?

Ron Jorgenson
rjorgens@whidbey.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 98 17:05:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:38:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
>From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:01:51 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:17 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>Case in point: Mr. Sagan (who by now probably believes
>>wholeheartedly in the Devil) loved to pontificate about the ever
>>present human need to believe in the supernatural, hence UFOs
>>are the modern day equivalent to goblins and leprechauns and the
>>like. He referred to all UFO sightings as "nonsense", most of
>>the time not even bothering to revert to the old "misidentified
>>natural phenomena" line. "Anecdotal stories are absolutely
>>worthless", he would say. Besides stretching his obvious
>>distrust for his fellow man to an absurd and unreasonable level,
>>he provided more than enough incentive for many people _not_ to
>>join ufology who otherwise might have proved invaluable, and
>>thus the field has not progressed to it's potential.

>Dr. Sagan's view of the world encompased far more tolerance than
>I have heard from you.

I think this is an unwarrantedly generous assessment of a man
whose record is less rose-colored than shaded in gray. Sagan was
a curious amalgam of courage and opportunism, the latter more
prominent in his later years. "Tolerance" was not much in
evidence in the last quarter-century of his scientific and
business life (though he did have the guts to criticize CSICOP
for its wrong-headed crusade against astrology, which he rightly
characterized as dumb, authoritarian, and counterproductive).

>I don't know your background Mr. St. Pierre but Dr. Sagan was
>one of the reasons UFOs & EBEs are even discussed among people
>who are not part of 'Ufology'.

This is frankly nonsense. UFOs are discussed because of UFO
sightings and would be talked about and written about if Carl
Sagan (or, for that matter, anybody reading these words) had
never existed. In his early years, to give him credit, he
courageously advocated the scientific study of extraterrestrial
life (so long, of course, as it was at a safe distance) when
SETI was considered a radical and even crazy notion. He also
helped organize the 1969 AAAS symposium on UFOs, in the face of
furious opposition from hostile older scientists led by Edward
Condon. Sagan, however, stacked the deck with skeptical
scientists, most of whom (e.g., Philip Morrison, whose own
knowledge, such as it was, was based, by his own admission, on
occasional casual reading of the UFO literature) had little or
no investigative experience and were largely unfamiliar with the
evidence.

After that Sagan allied himself with hard-line debunkers and
wrote ill-informed attacks on UFOs and other heresies, refusing
to investigate cases personally (Budd Hopkins has a particularly
interesting story to tell here; see his "Carl Sagan and Me,"
IUR, Summer 1997) even as he used his position as
scientist-celebrity to make UFO research look illegitimate. If
this is tolerance, ignorance is strength, war is peace, and I am
emperor of the moon.


>Please, it is not necessary to demonize a respected man and a
>wonderful communicator ('Cosmos' probably brought many people
>into the mind frame necessary to think about UFOs etc) just
>because he disagrees with you and may actually have good arguing
>points, just as you most likely do to support your position.

Interesting that our correspondent here uses the verb
"demonize." Sagan, as his 'Demon-Haunted World' book makes
clear, charged, and may have even believed on some level, that
people who hold views about controversial anomalies different
from his are little better than superstition-crazed
demonologists. Sagan's role in ufology is not, to be fair, so
uniformly dismal as Donald Menzel's was, but it was not among
his better or more admiral moments as a scientist, and it is
foolish - and blind to unhappy reality - to praise it.

In a piece I wrote on Sagan for IUR, Summer 1996, I made this
observation:

"As one puts down 'The Demon-Haunted World', one uneasily asks
oneself, Is this what science has come to? The answer,
fortunately, is no. There is science, and then there's the
`science' of this book: a slogan in the service of the
passionately held but self-serving convictions of a man so awash
in unexamined prejudices - 'traditions of disbelief', in
(behavorial scientist David J.) Hufford's phrase - that he has
become what he abhors most. The Carl Sagan we encounter here
looks dismayingly like a pseudoscientist. Too bad he didn't heed
the sage words of Sherlock Holmes he quotes on page 152: 'It is
a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly
one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories
to suit facts'."

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                      Hoagland's Conversation With Bell

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:07:09 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:00:08 -0400
Subject: Hoagland's Conversation With Bell



The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au

*******************************************

From: Rob Meyer [mailto:robmeyer@sedona.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 1998 12:38 PM
To: Recipient List Suppressed:;
Subject: News Update Art Bell From Hogland conversation w/ Bell


Hi Folks,

I am working on having Richard Hoagland on "Live" this Thursday
October 22nd to further discuss Art's personal crisis.

Sincerely,
Mitch Battros
Producer - Earth Changes TV
<http://www.earthchangesTV.comhttp://www.earthchangesTV.com

Art Bell denies behind-the-scenes negotiations...10/17/98

Yesterday afternoon, Thursday, October 15, I had a wonderful
surprise: my friend and colleague, Art Bell, called.

We had perhaps the best off-air conversation in a year. Among
other items, Art and I discussed not only his abrupt, shocking
"resignation" Tuesday morning ... but the
reasons.

I will not divulge details, except to say that his (to many of
his friends) completely enigmatic actions are sincere; they are
NOT mere "hype" for "Coast-to-Coast"; they are NOT "positioning"
for some mysterious, behind-the-scenes contract negotiations
with Premiere (his parent network). They are simply rooted in a
complex family problem, which has been building to a crisis for
a year ... and which climaxed so "messily" on Monday night.

There are government agendas and conspiracies. But I am
satisfied -- from a first-hand conversation with my friend --
that this is not one of them! Unless we clearly separate this
truth from all the rumors, we are lost; the serious subjects and
agendas discussed on "Coast-to-Coast" will be totally negated
and ignored, if we do not firmly distinguish a personal crisis
from a "black-ops" project.

The good -- actually, great! -- news: Art will be back. With
time and a much clearer head, as well as much outside
assistance, he can see a way clear to deal with the delicate
issues which precipitated this emergency, and he assures me, he
will return to both the Show and the audience he
loves.

As well he should.

Richard C. Hoagland
Oct 16, 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                          BWW Media Alert 19981017

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:22:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:23:26 -0400
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19981017


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).


October 17, 1998

A BELL GOES SILENT
The biggest news this week (and probably this year) in weird media is the late
night radio host Art Bell's announcement that he is leaving the show.  Many of
his approximate ten million listeners were shocked when he announced that he
was making his final broadcast.

The mainstream media has reported on it, and Bell's still-functioning website
(http://www.artbell.com) has carried listener reactions as well as other news.
One of the elements that made it into such a big story was the nature of his
statement.  It said, in part:

"...You may recall about a year ago... I told you that there was an event, a
threatening terrible event occurred to my family, which I could not tell you
about. Because of that event, and a succession of other events...for the
protection of my family, until it is otherwise revealed, I can't discuss it, I
won't discuss it. And if you were in my position, you would do exactly the
same thing."

This has led to all sorts of wild speculation.  The Nye County Sheriff, Wade
Lieseke, supposedly a friend of Bell's, has indicated there is no immediate
physical threat to the family.  It has now been said that Bell will clear up
the matter a bit more on Monday's show.

For people who are thinking that Bell has been silenced by "the shadow
government", or hushed up by the Men in Black (as was reportedly the case with
Albert Bender...if you need more information on that one, e-mail me), let me
suggest this.  A "threat to the family" need not be any sort of physical or
criminal threat.  There are many elements of family dynamics that could be
stated clearly the same way.  I have no special knowledge in this case: I'm
saying that, hypothetically, there are legal, but that some might consider to
be unethical, activities that could, in some cases, be stated to be a threat
to a family.  In a case like that, many people would choose discretion to
protect certain parties, unless it came out independently.

I was never a regular listener, although I have heard the show.  When I did
listen, it was because of a specific guest.  Its obvious, though, that it
wasn't just the guests that built Art Bell's audience.  In some way, he
touched a lot of people.  His show reminded me of Long John Nebel's, the man
who basically created overnight radio with a guest list that included
contactees and psychics.  He too kept people company in the long quiet hours
by shining a light on those things that are usually kept in the dark.  It
wasn't always a spotlight: in some cases, it was the gentle flickering of a
candle as tales of a midnight ghost are exchanged at a slumber party.  He will
be missed.

That said, where can fans of weird radio turn?  Well, it's possible that
DREAMLAND and COAST TO COAST will continue without Art.  His network was
coincidentally(?) recently bought (I'd have to track down the specifics, but
that's my recollection) however it's likely they will try and keep it going.
They are going to try a mix of reruns and "guest hosts", perhaps reminiscent
of the last days of THE TONIGHT SHOW.   It would be fun to guest host it, but
I love being a teacher.

As to other shows, my first recommendation is Jeff Rense's SIGHTINGS ON THE
RADIO.  I have been on with Jeff a few times (the archives are at the website:
http://www.sightings.com), and have always found him a great host.  He is
intelligent and insightful, while making sure the guest is the main focus.
You can hear him on Real Audio through the site as well.  If you are a station
programmer, I'd strongly and wholeheartedly recommend Jeff's show.

Secondly, there are regional shows that focus on these topics as well.  I used
to provide a feature for Jeff Middleton's NIGHTSEARCH on WREC in Memphis.
Quite simply, I flaked on him once (which is very not like me...we got wrapped
up in something, and I missed the call time.  I've been too embarrassed to
straighten it out with him).  His show has quite a following in the South.
Unfortunately, last I heard, they had no Internet presence.  I'm sure there
are other such shows as well.

Third, there are the more New Age.  You might try Laura Lee at
http://www.lauralee.com: you can listen on your computer to hers as well.

Fourth, some other shows have frequent weird guests as well.  I mentioned last
week that Darian O'Toole had returned.  When she has a guest like that (which
is frequent), they are usually on for just a few minutes.  Her attitude can be
mocking, but she's getting back into the rhythym of letting the guests speak.
I'm trying to get their Producer to give me advance notice of guests: might
not hurt if you e-mail her at darian@ksan.com and tell her you get your
information from bufocalvin@aol.com (I'd appreciate being cc'd).  She should
know who I am.  At any rate, you can hear her show from 5:00 AM to 9:00 AM
weekdays (Pacific Time) at http://www.ksan.com via Real Audio.

On the website front, I've developed a new system which makes updating much
more frequent (I've added a lot this week).  I'm going to try something new in
this mailing, and please give me your opinion on it.  When I have a show
listed here, and I have the tape at Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books, I'm going to try
to add a link.  I'm doing that because many people do not have access to the
networks where these shows run. My concern is that not all e-mail systems will
resolve it as just a short link, and may show the whole HTML instead.  Again,
let me know if you do (or don't) like this.

With Halloween coming up, look for a lot of activity on local tv and radio.
The cable channels get into it as well...it's not often I have any listings
for HOME AND GARDEN TV ;) .  In particular, HAUNTED HISTORY on THE HISTORY
CHANNEL has been recommended by Dennis Hauck.  Also, this upcoming week brings
us the fourth SIGHTINGS special, this time on SPEAKING FROM THE GRAVE.

TELEVISION

AMC
Next Friday, October 30, 6:00 PM, HOLLYWOOD GHOST STORIES (featuring Elke
Sommers and Flip Wilson)

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, October 18, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT LIZARD (cryptozoologist
Rex Gilroy of Australia is featured)
Thursday, October 22, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS (big cat
in the UK)
Thursday, October 22, 9:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline pilot
witnesses and a New Zealand filming)
Friday, October 23, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS
Friday, October 23, 1:30 AM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline pilot
witnesses and a New Zealand filming)
Next Saturday, October 24, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
PSYCHIC DETECTIVES
Next Saturday, October 24, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: ARE
ALIENS TRYING TO CONTACT US?
Next Sunday, October 25, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS
Next Sunday, October 25, 1:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline
pilot witnesses and a New Zealand filming)
Next Sunday, October 25, 2:00 PM, INSIDE AREA 51
Next Thursday, October 29, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE
Next Thursday, October 29, 9:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE (ghosts in Dover;
spontaneous bone regeneration
Next Friday, October 30, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE
Next Friday, October 30, 1:30 AM, STRANGE BUT TRUE (ghosts in Dover;
spontaneous bone regeneration

E!
Next Friday, October 30, 8:00 AM, HAUNTED HOLLYWOOD (hosted by John Astin)
Next Friday, October 30, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HOLLYWOOD (hosted by John Astin)

THE HISTORY CHANNEL
Sunday, October 18, 7:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Sunday, October 18, 11:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Friday, October 23, 3:00 AM, THE HAUNTED HISTORY OF HALLOWEEN
Next Saturday, October 24, 3:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Next Monday, October 26, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Next Monday, October 26, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Next Tuesday, October 27, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS
Next Tuesday, October 27, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS
Next Wednesday, October 28, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Next Wednesday, October 28, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Next Thursday, October 29, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO (Dennis
Hauck, http://www.haunted-places.com, is involved with this one)
Next Thursday, October 29, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO
Next Friday, October 30, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY OF HALLOWEEN
Next Friday, October 30, 8:00 PM, GHOSTS OF GETTYSBURG

HOME AND GARDEN TV
Next Sunday, October 25, 7:00 PM, THE GOOD LIFE: CHARLESTON GHOST TOURS
Next Sunday, October 25, 10:00 PM, THE GOOD LIFE: CHARLESTON GHOST TOURS
Next Tuesday, October 22, 7:00 PM, KITCHEN DESIGN (includes a haunted kitchen)
Next Tuesday, October 22, 10:00 PM, KITCHEN DESIGN (includes a haunted
kitchen)
Next Friday, October 30, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED HOUSES

THE LEARNING CHANNEL
Friday, October 23, 9:00 PM, UFO: STORIES OF ALIEN ABDUCTION
Next Saturday, October 24, 1:00 AM, UFO: STORIES OF ALIEN ABDUCTION
Next Sunday, October 25, 8:00 PM, THE HAUNTED
Next Sunday, October 25, 9:00 PM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (hosted by Michael
Dorn) (
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6304164483/bufosweirdworld">
BWWB</A> )
Next Sunday, October 25, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED LIGHTHOUSES
Next Sunday, October 25, 11:00 PM, THE HAUNTED
Next Monday, October 25, 12:00 AM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (hosted by Michael
Dorn)
Next Monday, October 25, 1:00 AM, HAUNTED LIGHTHOUSES

MTV
Monday, October 19, 10:00 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO stories (I don't know if this is
really appropriate to the list or not...never seen the show)
Next Sunday, October 25, 3:00 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO stories

THE SCIENCE CHANNEL
The new schedule is weird programming for an hour each at 6:00 AM, 2:00 PM,
and 10:00 PM.  Rotating shows include: INTO THE UNKNOWN, STRANGE BUT TRUE, and
ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE.

THE SCI-FI CHANNEL
Sun, October 18 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4028: psychic police officer; Queen
Mary ghosts
Sun, October 18 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4028: psychic police officer;
Queen Mary ghosts
Mon, October 19 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4029: farm ghosts; Israeli UFOs,
premonition
Mon, October 19 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #211: Russian UFOs; Jack the Ripper
Mon, October 19 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #211: Russian UFOs; Jack the Ripper
Tue, October 20 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4030: Iranian UFOs; Colorado
haunting; life on Mars
Tue, October 20 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #212: psychic detective; Champ lake
monster of Lake Champlain
Tue, October 20 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #212: psychic detective; Champ lake
monster of Lake Champlain
Wed, October 21 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4031: bigfoot museum; generational
abduction syndrome; Peruvian ghosts
Wed, October 21 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #213: Kentucky haunting; astrologer
Richard Nolle
Wed, October 21 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #213: Kentucky haunting; astrologer
Richard Nolle
Thu, October 22 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4032 : Georgia UFO; haunting;
psychic cop
Thu, October 22 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #214: forecasts for 1993 (should be
interesting to compare to how it came out, hm?)
Thu, October 22 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #214: forecasts for 1993 (should be
interesting to compare to how it came out, hm?)
Fri, October 23 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4033: Tesla; alien autopsy; ghost
train in Oregon
Fri, October 23 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #215: Russian psychics; voodoo
Fri, October 23 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #215: Russian psychics: voodoo
Sun, October 25 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS SPECIAL #4 THE LIVING DEAD: SPEAKING FROM
THE GRAVE
Sun, October 25 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4034: jet/UFO encounter;
Nostradamus
Sun, October 25 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS SPECIAL #4 THE LIVING DEAD: SPEAKING FROM
THE GRAVE
Sun, October 25 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4034: jet/UFO encounter;
Nostradamus

SYNDICATED
Next Monday, October 26 (day may vary somewhat), ACCESS HOLLYWOOD (Marilyn
Monroe's ghost)
Next Friday, October 30, psychic Sylvia Browne
___________________________

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     WBAI 'UFO Desk' Audio Files On-Line

From: Paul Williams <paulw@escape.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:26:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:16:13 -0400
Subject: WBAI 'UFO Desk' Audio Files On-Line


Hello all,

Just want to share that there are now three more UFO Desk audio
files available at the UFO Desk website.

1.Interview with Scott Carr, editor of Flying Saucer Gazette.
Many of you have read his material online, now hear his voice.
Also featured Joseph Trainor of UFO ROUNDUP, the newspaper that
binrgs it home.

2.Talk with John Velez webmaster at Intruder Foundation. John
shares experiences he's had while in contact with alledged alien
beings. What do you think, listen and get more info.

3. Scott Corrales, is a writer, and researcher. His book
Chupacabra and other Mystery's is available via Amazon.com. He's
our featured guest this time around. Listen as he shares a very
neat chupacabra story, and then shares with us information about
Spains Air Force opening it's UFO files.

At this time I'm leaving the Betty Hill and Maria Cuccia stories
up.

Please visit often, more coming.

Much thanks,

Paul Wms.
Executive Producer UFO Desk
WBAI NY 99.5 FM
www.escape.com/~paulw/ufodesk.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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Gt McCoy" <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:44:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:25:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media



>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:25:52 +0100
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

>>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

><snip>

>>Now, what did a so-called guided missile look like in
>>those days?

>>Here's a couple of examples:

>>http://www.wa3key.com/regulus.html

>>http://www.afa.org/magazine/gallery/aim-4.html


>>Could it be a "flying saucer" of this type Arnold
>>observed? The readers of The List must judge for
>>themselves.

><snip>

>>Best regards,

>>AWS

>Hi List,

>The objects Arnold were observing (or, at least one of them)
>could possibly also be some newly captured German Horten Ho-IX
>(or Ho-229 A-1) jet planes; captured just after the war. But,
>possibly also some new planes, and further developments of this
>German plane, maybe in close co-operation with the Horten
>brothers, i.e.:

As I recall, the Horten Bros. went to Argentina at the end of
the War, Jack Norhtrop was real close in innovation & design to
the Hortens. hence little need to emulate them. the Ho229 was
well documented and as I also recall flew just before the end of
the war.

>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/3366/go229.html

>At least, the features 'crescent-shaped' wings and tail-less
>fuselage, are evident on this plane. (However, I didn't find any
>references to a 'crescent-shape' object, as written by Arnold
>himself in the referred to reports in my prior mail; I just
>discovered that only the newsmen were writing this expression in
>some newspapers from those days.)

>The speed was 607 mph. (977 km/h), and the wing-span approx. 55
>ft. (17 m), i.e., within the speeds and dimensions as estimated
>by Arnold.

Sorry, if you are referring to Drones, the state of the art
didn't permit such flying of fast, pilotless aircraft in the
late 40's. The Hughes missles were not drones, they were
infrared seekers, the Regulus was an effective missle in its
latter days, but it didn't exsist in 1947,let alone formations
of them.

Also, if the refernce to the Hugues missles includes the F102 in
the background, F102 was the brainchild of another German
designer Alexander Lippishch. the father of the delta wing and
the F-102,106,Mig 21, Concorde, and any other high speed
delta.Flying wings do not have the potential for speed that the
Delta has; the De Havilland "Swallow" was believed to be the
supersonic answer,and it did, eventually break the sound
barrier, but not without a couple of crashes , and no more
pursuit of tailess supersonic "wings" - for the time being.

-GT
McCoy





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                    UFO Hot Line Numbers For Australasia

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:57:10 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:05:44 -0400
Subject: UFO Hot Line Numbers For Australasia


Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au

*******************************************


Australaisia LINKING UP

Call anyone of these UFO HOT LINE numbers and Report a Sighting
in your area.

UFO HOT LINE NUMBERS AUSTRALASIA
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/Hot%20line.htm

QUEENSLAND
************************************
SPRING WOOD QLD   (07) -3808 8567  Robert

UFOICQ QLD(07) -38043022 Jane, Rob


The Keith Basterfield Network QLD (07) -55477933 Diane

JINDALEE QLD (07) -3376 1780  Martin & Tino

MT GRAVAT QLD (07) -3849 6450 Glennys


Sunshine Coast, Noosa  (07) - 54483535  Endra

FAR NORTH QLD (07) - 40 97 2222  Lawrie Williams



Hollways Beach QLD  (079) - 40559611 Victoria Wellard


      NEW SOUTH WALES
***********************************
INFO LINE & REPORTING CENTER (02) -96522731 Frank

SOUTHERN HIGLANDS  (02) -488 985 05 Doug

CENTRAL COAST NSW  (049) -596 699 Peter

SYDNEY NSW (02) -968 725 06 Mathew


SYDNEY NSW  (02) -979 9843 Robert

SYDNEY, WEST PENNANT (02) - 94844680 Bill Chalker

VICTORIA
*******************************
VICTORIA (03) - 933 72597

VUFORS (03) - 9506 7080 24 Hours

SOUTH AUSTRALIA
**********************************
ADELAIDE SA (08) - 827 23131

Blair Athol. SA (80) - 82856840 Alian Jones

PERTH
***********************************
UFO investigation Center
WESTERN AUSTRALIA (08) -9337 1638  Murdoch

CENTRAL AUSTRALIA
***********************************
ALICE SPRINGS  (08) -8953 3023 Keith Douglass

NEW ZEALAND
**********************************
NEW ZEALAND HOT LINE (CALL AFTER 7.30PM)  (09) -634-5285 Murray Bott

IFSI - NEW ZEALAND ( MOBILE PHONE 79 CENT MIN ) (021) -2156653 TONY

TASMANIA
*****************************
TUFOIC SOUTH   HOBART (03)-6223 6009 Keith Roberts


All of the above phone numbers are the  normal Std or local
charge call, remember its cheaper after 7.00pm you can talk for
as long as you like here in Australia for only $3.00 Monday to
Friday.

If you ring any 1900 number you will be charged around $3.75 per
minute which can become quite Expensive on your Telephone bill.

Try one of the above numbers First

Regards Diane Harison







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                        Maussan Presents New Footage

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:26:46 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:44:09 -0400
Subject: Maussan Presents New Footage


Source: "alt.alien.research".

Stig

*******

From: "Mark Hall" <mark@black.softnet.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.research
Subject: Re: Any new Mexico City UFO'S ?
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:51:43 +0100


In September I went to the UK Leeds International UFO
Conference.

Jaime Maussan was one of the lecturers there. It was his first
appearance in Europe. He had two lectures over the course of two
days.

I must admit that I've been to many UFO conferences in the past
few years, but because of Jaime, this was definately the best
one. He brought with him some excellent Mexico UFO footage, even
better the the Elder's three part video set. The best footage
were of fleets of UFOs numbering 100-150 above Mexico City. He
also brought along a video recently released from the Russian
version of NASA of a fleet of about 10-15 UFOs flying alongside
the Mir spacestation.

Mark Hall.


Paul Richardson wrote in message
<3622-362513B0-51@newsd-141.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Or the north central Gulf coast of the









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     UFO Videotaped Over Kunming, China

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 07:52:40 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:40:23 -0400
Subject: UFO Videotaped Over Kunming, China


[List only]

Source: Guangzhou Morning Post

http://www.asia1.com.sg/gzbao/mp067/p107.htm

Kunming is situated in a high mountaineous area in the southernmost
part of China, near the border with Burma, Laos and Vietnam.

Stig

*******

Morning Post
Published by Guangzhou Daily Press Group
October 16,1998
Vol.002 No.067

UFO over Kunming

By Alan Zhang

At noon on October 3rd, an unidentified flying object (UFO)
moving across the sky over Kunming has been photographed by a
man named Han with his video camera.

The UFO transforms constantly in the air, sending out dazzling
light. First it flies in the shape of a blazing ball sandwiched
by two pieces of black rubber and then five diamond shaped
objects flying in a diamond formation, says Han. This process
continued for more than ten minutes.

The Han family was in the graveyard paying their respects. At
about 11: 50, Han took a look far into downtown Kunming and all
of a sudden discovered an extremely dazzling object  flying over
the city. He observed the flying object with his video camera
and shot about 3 minutes video tape of the UFO.


Guangzhou Morning 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     Recent Scotland UFO Photo July 1998

From: Dave Ledger <dledger@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 13:40:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:59:33 -0400
Subject: Recent Scotland UFO Photo July 1998


Greetings Errol & Listmembers,

Here at UFO Scotland, we recently received an interesting
picture taken by a tourist in Stirling whilst on holiday.

I thought that some of the List members may also find this
picture of interest and any comments etc would be well
appreciated.

The URL is:

http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/dledger/stirling2.htm

Take care all!...............................Dave.
--
==================================================================
If you see someone without a smile......give them one of yours :)
******************************************************************
Posted by: Dave Ledger  (mailto:UFOSCOT@cableinet.co.uk)
Visit "UFO SCOTLAND" at:
http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/dledger/index.htm
Reach us on ICQ #4851425
******************************************************************
THE TRUTH IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER!..................BUT HOW FAR?
==================================================================






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                        New On Video: 'X-Files' Movie

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:43:52 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:34:14 -0400
Subject: New On Video: 'X-Files' Movie


[List only]

Source: The Los Angeles Times via Hollywood Online

http://www.hollywood.com:80/news/topstories/10-17-98/html/1-2.html

Stig

*******


Hollywood Online

Saturday, October 17, 1998

New on Video: 'The X-Files' by Kenneth Turan, Times Staff Writer


Who hasn't walked into a movie late and tried desperately to
catch up with the plot, to make sense of what's on the screen?
For those not washed in the blood, that's what it's like to
watch "The X-Files" movie. Except instead of being only
momentarily tardy, we're five years behind the curve.

That's how long the popular cult TV show has been on the Fox
network. And despite impressive billboards for the movie
insisting "Only in Theaters," only those familiar with the
small-screen series will get many of the film's characters and
references. Despite attempts to make "The X-Files" palatable to
nonbelievers, its creators couldn't resist a series of complicit
winks to the cognoscenti that can only irritate those not in the
know.

"The X-Files" movie is put together by many of the same people
responsible for the series, starting with writer-producer Chris
Carter, the show's creator. Director Rob Bowman has directed 25
episodes over five years, and editor Stephen Mark and composer
Mark Snow are both veterans as well. So it's not surprising that
what we've got here is essentially a big-budget version of the
small screen, kind of a "Triple-X-Files" to reward the faithful.

With its shrewd mixture of paranoia and the paranormal, the way
its elaborate mythology combines enigmatic phenomena with potent
cabals intent on running the world, "The X-Files" experience
resembles "Twin Peaks" crossed with "The Twilight Zone." It's
even replete with recurring characters without real names: Who
is the Cigarette-Smoking Man (William B. Davis) after all but
the Log Lady with a bad nicotine habit?

At the heart of things are Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) and Dana
Scully (Gillian Anderson), a pair of FBI agents usually assigned
to investigate the inexplicable. The film awkwardly attempts to
fill in five years' worth of back story on this pair, letting us
know that Mulder is the true believer who thinks his sister was
abducted by aliens, while Scully is the cool, unflappable
rationalist, someone not quick to believe sinister forces are
out to control the universe.

When the movie opens, Mulder and Scully have been reassigned to
an anti-terrorism unit in the Dallas FBI bureau, the X-Files
having been officially closed. While they're trying to prevent a
major bomb from going off, something seriously weird is going on
in a small town in rural Texas.

In an echo of something we saw happen 35,000 years ago, a boy
stumbles onto an underground cave and gets more than he
bargained for from a skull he encounters. Local paramedics are
called and suddenly the area is teaming with helicopters,
unmarked tanker trucks and impatient men in white quarantine
suits. "That impossible scenario we never planned for," a man
says into a phone. "We better come up with a plan."

If this sounds vague, it's because "The X-Files" likes it that
way. Writer Carter, director Bowman and cinematographer Ward
Russell are expert at doling out information one intriguing
dollop at a time. Things get more or less explained by the
close, but the fun of "The X-Files" is clearly more in the
creation of unease than in the cleaning up of mysteries.

Though the inside baseball stuff, like the appearance of three
oddballs known as the Lone Gunmen that no one but constant
viewers will understand, let alone appreciate, is a continual
frustration, the rest of the movie is a properly spooky, always
professional diversion that is happiest when it's throwing
continual plot complexities into the mix.

At the center of things is Dr. Alvin Kurtzweil (veteran Martin
Landau), a renegade scientist who says he was a friend of
Mulder's father. His knowledge of all things sinister leads
Mulder and Scully to not only the Cigarette-Smoking Man but also
the Well-Manicured Man (John Neville) and an operative who has
the audacity to have a real name, albeit the strange one of
Conrad Strughold (Armin Mueller-Stahl).

As much as these creepy doings, it's the too-hip relationship
between Mulder and Scully (co-workers who never resort to first
names and have a lot of conversations on mobile phones) that is
a major "X-Files" attraction. Their supercool attitudes,
however, are too distant to work as well on the big screen, and
the intense interest devotees have in whether they'll ever kiss
is not one that beginning viewers should expect to share in.

While it's not the ideal introduction to the phenomenon, this
feature is assured of at least an "X-Files"-sized audience.
People are always happy to believe, as Hamlet (who would've been
a viewer had the show been available) said to a friend: "There
are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of
in your philosophy."

* MPAA rating: PG-13 for some intense violence and gore. Times
guidelines: some violence, gruesome doings and
unpleasant-looking
creatures.

'The X-Files'

David Duchovny: Fox Mulder

Gillian Anderson: Dana Scully

Martin Landau: Dr. Alvin Kurtzweil

Blythe Danner: FBI Assistant Director Dana Cassidy

Armin Mueller-Stahl: Conrad Strughold

A Ten Thirteen production, released by 20th Century Fox. Director Rob
Bowman. Producers Chris Carter, Daniel Sackheim. Executive producer
Lata Ryan. Screenplay by Chris Carter. Story by Chris Carter and Frank
Sponitz. Cinematographer Ward Russell. Editor Stephen Mark. Costumes
Marlene Stewart. Music Mark Snow. Production design Christopher Nowak.
Running time: 2 hours, 1 minute.

AN 'X-FILES' CHEAT SHEET

Key Characters: Supporting players from the TV series featured
in the movie:

FBI Assistant Director Walter Skinner: Mulder and Scully's boss,
he has worked at times to help them. Generally a skeptic, he has
not embraced Mulder's crusade as his own.

Cigarette-Smoking Man, a.k.a. Cancer Man: As part of dark forces
operating within and around the government, his activities have
included hiding the truth about UFOs and an apparent role in the
disappearance of Mulder's sister and the deaths of Scully's
sister and Mulder's father. He and Mulder's father worked
together during the Cold War, and it's been implied that Cancer
Man may be Mulder's real father.

Well-Manicured Man: A leader in the Syndicate, he has clashed
with Cigarette-Smoking Man over his tactics, which risk exposing
"the project."

The Lone Gunmen: A trio of slightly daft conspiracy theorists
who occasionally assist Mulder.

Key Events

Dana Scully is paired with Fox Mulder in the X-Files,
investigating unexplained phenomena for the FBI. Mulder is
obsessed with UFOs and the paranormal because he witnessed his
sister's abduction as a child.

*

Mulder learns from a "Deep Throat" source of conspiracies
reaching into the highest levels of government regarding the
existence of extraterrestrials.

*

Scully is abducted. She is found later in a coma and awakens
with only vague memories of what happened to her.

*

Evidence indicates the government has been engaged in
experiments using alien DNA, trying to create alien-human
hybrids.

*

The Syndicate, a shadowy group whose members include the
Cigarette-Smoking Man, is working on what's referred to as "the
project," which entails possible plans for alien colonization of
Earth.

*

An alien "black oil" is encountered that invades people and
controls their consciousness.

*

Bees are discovered carrying a deadly toxin. The Syndicate is
behind the experiment, possibly in advance of some larger plot.

*

A war is being fought between two alien groups--one planning to
colonize Earth, the other opposing it.

*

In the most recent episode, the X-Files are shut down by the
government and Cigarette-Smoking Man torches Mulder's records.

Key Numbers

Two recur frequently on the show and are seen in the movie:
10-13 and 11:21. Those are the birthdays, respectively, of Chris
Carter and his wife, Dori.


Copyright 1998 / Los Angeles Times






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                   Object Was "Half The Size Of The Moon"

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:10:43 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:57:29 -0400
Subject: Object Was "Half The Size Of The Moon"


Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au
*******************************************
Sighting at Albany Brisbane 4th 10. 1998

UFOICQ Hot line Tel, 07 3804 3022, QLD

Object was half the size of the moon

Time 6.33pm 8 Witnesses. Sighted for 8 minutes. Around 2 to 3
thousand feet up

Mr. & Mrs. Eddy

Object was half the size of the moon, at arms length the size
of a tennis ball, shape was, spherical with a square-ish
bottom, colour was orange to red.

Moving for North to South on a straight path, object had flames
coming from it, but they where different not like the flame of a
object coming in from space, but more like a small plane on
fire, the flames where jagged in shape. Mr. Eddy said that's
what he thought it was at first, but there was no noise to be
heard the object was traveling in a straight line, speed, moving
a little faster that a Hot Air balloon and slower than a tiger
moth. Being a ex-Army man he said, the reason that he called it
in, was because it was nothing like he had seen before.

Regards 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 07:05:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:14:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


Date: Sun, Oct 17,1998 10:30 CET
From: Joachim Koch <achimkoch@compuserve.com>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Crop Circles/Balls of light A point to ponder on?
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Apart from the explanation, that these balls could be
>earth/fairy lights, does anyone really have a clue as
>to what they could be.

These BOL (Balls Of Light) really do exist. Suddenly they
appear and float along a valley or across a field. Sometimes
they do show intelligent behaviour, sometimes they are just
there.

If you see them at daylight (very seldom) you are able to
examine the appearance, the shape and compare the size in
correlation to other objects such as aeroplanes or trees. BOL at
daylight are always a gift for the ones who are blessed to
witness this manifestation. BOL in daylight are often genuine.

Mostly BOL are bright and shimmering and sometimes BOL are
translucent and you can distinguish some structures inside. We
remember an incident at Silbury Hill which was a real CE III
with visible beings emerging from such a BOL. These BOL are part
of the alien 'technology' which we do not understand with our
momentary capabilities.

Well, you could understand but then you would have to accept
what it said in many ancient and modern myths: that we and this
planet Earth are evolving into higher stages of existence where
we have a higher vibrational level, where we understand to use
the natural energies (free energy) and therefore do not have to
use burning rockets anymore. Many of the (truly existing) cosmic
comunity have already reached this fourth and fifth stage of
evolution (seven at all)and live there (you could call it a
parallel universe)and they have the ability to pop in here-
which we don't have the other way round.

These BOL are the closest this higher intelligence can come
"down" to us in our momentary "density" and they are something
extremely positive. That is the reason why they manifest so
often in the vicinity of the old stones - to make us aware of a
larger reality. Probably this is the only reason of the UFO
phenomenon in general - to make us aware.

Right now I am aware that some of you venerable list members
might call this New Age gossip and you should feel free to do
so. Most of the UFO researchers are more interested in hardware
- according to the actual paradigms in science. But when you are
down in Wiltshire, England or at some places in Germany, you get
a glimpse of what is meant with what I wrote above.

>And why do the military always seem to know when and where these
>balls of light seem to appear?

>Do the military have earth/fairy light tracking facilities?

It is an open secret that the military in England does not
really know what is going on. So they are eager to get every bit
of information because if publicly asked they would have to
admit that they don't have under control what happens right
before their (electronical) eyes. For you must know, there is
the biggest army base of Southern England in the Salisbury
Plains, only a few miles apart from the famous East Field. And,
on the other hand,this phenomenon happens right in the middle of
Englands granary.

So the whole area is under military surveillance day and night.
Every researcher who is in the field has been photographed from
the air by the ubiquitous helicopters with cameras and other
electronical equipment mounted to. They only have to fly a few
minutes from the base down to the Vale of Pewsey which on the
other hand is their favourite training area with permission of
the farmers. They are not allowed to land or to chase for people
in the fields - but they sometimes do, as it happened to us.

A couple of miles to the north is the Farnham base where they
are training the Transall crews. They have huge black aeroplanes
there and sometimes they fly at night with no lights on in
low-level-flight and they make the night to day with their very
sophisticated equipment. This very intensive and ongoing
military interest is the best indicator that there still is a
geniune phenomenon.

>If even these so called "Circle Makers" have seen these lights
>while they have been busy hoaxing circles, does that rule out
>all crop circles are hoaxed?

Yes and no. There is no proof that the BOL are related to the
creation of crop circles - except in the Oliver Castle video
hoax. But the BOL do exist and even some hoaxers have seen them.
And because they were so fascinated (and maybe frightened the
first time they saw one) they have started to hoax BOL. It's
very easy to do: take a balloon, fill it with (helium) gas, add
a bit of smoke from a cigarette (to diguise the spheric shape of
the balloon) and then slide a so-called "crack-light", divers
use under water, into the balloon.

Then launch the balloon - and you have a beautiful BOL. Someone
will immediately see it because many people are out on the hills
crop-watching. The next morning its breathlessly reported at the
Barge Inn. You can combine multiple balloons with different
colours and adjust blinking lamps and when they are floating
along in the dark night you cannot decide what is right and what
is wrong.

>Can anyone think back far enough when Steven Greer and friends
>summoned a craft out of the sky, whilst standing hand in hand in
>a crop circle in Wiltshire?

They did not that. It was a rainy night and they'd intended to
leave. All the cameras were stored away. There were four people
sitting in two cars. Suddenly they saw something floating along
the line where the Kenett-Avon-Canal is. The description of what
they saw differs a bit according to whom you ask. Fact is that
there was something in the air. Something "structured". But
remember: it was raining and misty and dark and the object was
nearly one mile away. And it floated along slowly.

A few days before we'd been together with the group up on
Woodborough Hill. We saw many lights of terrestrial origin. The
were massive intentions to disturb this "UFO party" by hoaxers
and even on the first evening there started a treacherous
blinking by torches from inside some fields or from hills
nearby.

And you must know that not far away there is a valley between
Milk Hill and Clifford Hill which is a favourite place for kite
flyers. They do their training there. You can see the Hills from
top of Woodborough Hill but you cannot look inside this valley
from there. And on the first evening of Dr. Greer's efforts,
right before dawn, we (three of us)saw a part of a hot balloon
or something like
that peeping around the Hill's edge for a moment.

>If all the circles are man made, why does audio equipment,
>watches, etc go wild in some crop circles?

This might have happened, maybe by chance who will decide this?
And it happened in known hoaxed circles. So I would be very
cautious regarding these aspects. But generally it is the
understanding of the energies which will bring
us forth and to the solution of many enigmas.

>Does this mean that the so called circle makers are statically
>charged and are spreading this across the wheat?

You come very close to the reality in the fields. There have
been genuine crop circles/formations in the beginning, we tend
to say up to 1992 around the area of Avebury and Alton Barnes.
(We are in the position to say that because Hans-Juergen Kyborg
and I are one of the very few German researcher who have been
down there year by year. We know of no other German team who did
research according to a special concept as we did with our
astronomical theory.) Then the phenomenon changed from the
visible (touchable patterns in the fields)to the unvisible
(energetic patterns in the fields).

In 1992, the phenomenon showed the next stage of its evolution
and while many continued to take the ongoing (hoaxed)formations
for the real thing a few grasped what was going on and became
aware that it was "energy" that was meant to deal with.

So the "crop circle phenomenon" of nowadays, to my opinion, has
become a bit shizophrenic. On one side, there are the very
deliberate hoaxes which drag many people down there year by
year. This is the "Crop Circle Circus" which has become a good
business for many. On the other hand there are a few who
continued their work with the "energetics" and who enlarged
their knowledge year by year - with the help of the
intelligences behind this genuine phenomenon. In Wiltshire in
Southern England something happened in 1991 which so many were
waiting for and now that it happened many will not accept it
because it happened not with the expected hardware and devices
but with software: the contact
to another non-human intelligence.

>Are we really going to give the credit to hoaxers, for the deep
>and meaningful and historic symbology of crop circles?

No. The hoaxers are "copy-cats" as Doug and Dave named their
competitors and successors. Only a very few show other
intentions than fooling people or making money with pictures
(yes, Steve Alexander is very fast with pictures of new
formations...)These few have something different in their mind
and these few sometimes get the attention from the higher
intelligences as the energy patterns around their nightly
product sometimes testify.

Awareness of energies - that is the key to our future.

Joachim Koch, Berlin







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                         Re: Threats Within Ufology

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:47:22 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:58:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology


>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:42:36 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Threats Within Ufology
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Following recent speculation over Art Bell's resignation  I
>thought it was an opportune time to bring up the subject of
>threats within ufology.

>Recently I have heard of various people within ufology,
>including some on this List, who have received threats related
>to their UFO research. These threats have varied from anonymous
>phone calls to verbal threats from other ufologists.
>How do we combat those who are making these threats?

<snip>

There is one thing you can do to combat threats if you get it by
e-mail, send it to all your friends, I did and I still do, if
they call by telephone put the answering machine on and let it
take the message and turn the sound down, they do record :>).
You will find a wimp never wants to talk to a recorded message
:>)

I myself have had threats, but I'm lucky because I'm just one
small brick in a big brick wall and all the other bricks
surround me. Its what I call a solid foundation (Mate -Ship )
thanks guys. Art Bell will need all his mates to rally around
him, there ( is ) strength in numbers. In  the states the  UFO
Phenomena  is big business, with plenty of people trying to make
big bucks, so there is always going to be infighting & Egos, but
if you stand together it's harder to knock down that brick wall
.

We have One little man here in Aussie who loves to make phone
calls at 2 to 3am, telling use UFO investigator to get our facts
right, Funny he's what I call an Armchair Ufologist, you have to
laugh don't you, small things do amuse small minds.

I think  if your doing a good job !!NO A great job Ladies &
Gents!! your always going to get some kind off Egotist making
threats.
I don't know about you but threats  make me work even harder :>)


>Would it be beneficial to 'go public' and announce that threats
>have been made? This may deter the threats being carried out
>especially if the initiator of the threats is known. But what if
>the threats are from an unknown source, is there any safeguard
>against the threats being carried out?

<snip>

If the threats are from an unknown source, you just have to
watch your back, I think. One could walk down the road and get
run over by a truck, but as one would say, one would never stand
infront of a moving truck now would one, so what can you do?.


>Again with the recent specualtion over Art Bell etc. can anyone
>offer any advice on how these different types of threats should
>be handled?

Sue Keep up the good work, And Art Bell goodluck :>)

Kind regards 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:38:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:05:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:59:46 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>I am interested in indexing the existing literature in this
>field and providing bibliographical research tools for serious
>researchers that would like to see ufology become a disciplined
>field of study. I have self-published indexes to Flying Saucer
>Review (FSR) and the combined issues of Skylook, The MUFON
>Journal, and the MUFON Proceedings.  Each index is over 600
>pages, double column and contains thousands of entries. These
>indexes are by author, title, category and volume number and are
>available at the Library of Congress and for sale through
>Arcturus Books.


>I have provided Canadian ufologists with an electronic index of
>the 1947 wave newsclips, both local and wire service (over 1200
>newsclips) for their research needs and have cross-indexed the
>entire Library of Congress UFO microfilm collection with Lynn
>Catoe's bibliography of UFOs. Both were produced to support the
>University of Colorado Study popularly known as the Condon
>Committee.

>I am on the verge of completing an index to 'Just Cause' from
>Todd Zechel's era to the end of Barry Greenwood's editorship.

>I am in the process of indexing the APRO Bulletin, the NICAP
>literature, Rod Dyke's & Lou Farish's Newsclipping Services plus
>various microfilm collections and various defunct newsletters
>from the 50s which I have complete runs of.

>Ongoing projects that are continuous in nature and constantly
>updated are the newspaper indexing of the newsclip accumulations
>of various UFO serious researchers and historians such as Barry
>Greenwood and Loren Gross who I work closely with almost on a
>daily basis.

>That is just the tip of the iceberg. It does not include various
>correspondence files and case report files that have been
>photocopied from various sources both individuals and libraries.


That all sounds impressive, Ed. And I'm sure you're providing a
service that will prove invaluable. What I don't understand is
why you spent the last couple months beating up on many of the
people who created this information in the first place, claiming
that none of it was done in a proper manner and was therefore
worthless. Now, you collect it, rearrange it to your liking and
proclaim it ready for redistribution. What gives? Are you going
to call it the "Bunkless Database According to Ed"?

Please accept my apology for my dog-alongside-the-car analogy.
It was poorly chosen, though intended as a visual and not as an
insult or to be suggestive as to your physical appearance.

>I could bore you further with what is on top of my desk to do.

Why stop now?? :-)

>>Ufologists
>>are doing the best they can with what they have to work with.
>>What are you doing, besides running along side them like a dog
>>after a passing car? You said you have an interest in
>>UFOs...what's YOUR big idea?

>See above. It is not a big idea. It is one that is necessary for
>ufology to move up the ladder, but I found there is little
>support in ufology and even less demand. Scholarship and
>discipline are not at the top of the interest list among most
>ufologists that according to you are doing the best they can
>with what they got.

Please accept my apology for my dog-alongside-the-car analogy.
It was poorly chosen, though intended as a visual and not as an
insult or to be suggestive as to your physical appearance.

Ed, all the stuff you've collected has been there there all
along. Access to the data has never been the issue. Interest in
the data has. I have no wish to discourage you, but do you
really think your collection will garner interest where none has
existed so far? In addition, it's my understanding that Mr.
Clark has been working along the same lines, so why loose your
venom on him? Because he goes out on a limb to add personal
insight (the nerve of some people!) to the data?

Good luck anyway.

Greg






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                           Crypto-Zoology Help...

From: David Baker <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:27:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:41:41 -0400
Subject: Crypto-Zoology Help...


Dear List,

Can anyone  tell me if there are any crypto zoological
equivalents to good old UFO UpDates?

Thanks in advance,

Dave Baker- Yorkshire UFO Society





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                      Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:50:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:21:04 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:08:53 EDT
>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:04:37 -0400
>Subject: Re: MJ-12 And Truman's Signature

Earlier, I pointed out:

>>Having
>>worked in a corporate environment, I can tell you that it is not
>>unusual for an executive to dictate a week's worth of letters
>>and sign them all at once at the end of the week, with different
>>dates atop each. In a rapidly changing political environment, it
>>is also not uncommon to dictate memos and hold them until
>>feedback on certain issues is obtained. Then, if necesary, the
>>memos could be modified to fit the needs of that memo's
>>particular goal. This would be especially true if Truman were
>>traveling a lot and generated correspondence on the road,
>>without benefit of his close advisers. I would be interested to
>>see what his travel agenda was for
> the week in question. Just a thought....

Kevin's response was:

>... the corporate environment has no relevance when
>discussing classified documents, and we all have been told,
>repeatedly, that the MJ-12 documents are highly classified.

To begin with, the issue of how anyone in a position of power
might handle sensitive correspondence, whether government or
business, is totally relevant to the discussion at hand. I used
the corporate environment because, in fact, classified documents
are produced on a daily basis and handled just as I described.
Obviously, Truman wasn't born as president of the United States.
Work habits developed within a business environment are quite
often carried into public office by government officials
(sometimes to ill effect!). It was merely my intent to show the
nature of how people in key positions don't always follow the
most intuitive path regarding timely dispersal of documents and
correspondence.

The following is good info:

>Second, something that hasn't been mentioned here is that the
>original MJ-12 document has not been found. We're working from
>Xerox copies from photographs so that the angle from which the
>photograph was taken, not to mention the stretching done by the
>copying process, means that there will be some physical
>differences between the Oct. 1 letter and the Truman memo.

So, is it your position that the differences are due to optical
distortions or due to forging? Obviously, it's awkard to
maintain that, without such distortions, the signatures would be
a perfect match thereby indicating forgery; that would be just
guessing. So how can anyone, pro or con, really make a judgement
on authenticity? I ask this, respectfully, because for every
MJ-12 advocate using the signature as evidence, there's also
someone claiming it to be fake using the very same evidence. It
sounds to me as if it would be a toss up, either way. So why
take such an intractable position if the evidence is as
unconclusive as you describe above?

Further, you pointed out:

>Let's not forget
>that Bill Moore said he was going to create a Roswell-type
>document in the months before he was sent the MJ-12 documents.
>True, he has denied that he faked them, but the early copies
>received anonymously by other researchers were made on the copy
>machine Moore used, the botched dating was one used by Moore,
>and he has admitted to "re-typing" other documents to make them
>clear including the Aquarius Telex which has been proven to be a
>hoax.

My feeling, also, is that the MJ12 document is a fake; it's
resurfacing is too convenient. However, I don't see what the
actions of Bill Moore has to do with anything. Certainly, he
wouldn't be doing himself a favor by telling the world of his
intent if he meant to fool anyone. Admittedly, the sequence of
events is highly suspicious. But, even if he 'took credit' for
forging the MJ12 document, I'd want proof to that effect.
Without proof, we really don't know just where the document came
from.

Further, you noted:

>Third, this really is a discussion that should never have
>happened. The Truman memo, based on the evidence presented over
>the years is a fake. Autopens, multiple pens, and the corporate
>world have nothing to do with this. It is only opening a thread
>that has, as Ed Stewart noted, already run its course.

Apparently not!

As I noted:

>>Steven Kaeser hit closer to the truth when he
>>pointed out in a previous posting that it is totally possible
>>to write two signatures exactly the same. After reading his
>>posting, I went through my files and found at least three of my
>>own signatures that were, for all practical purposes, exact
>>matches to one another when held to the light.

>>If Truman did sign a stack of documents all at the same time,
>>then that would increase the likelihood of a "duplicate"
>>signature, whether a 'repeater' device was used or not.

Your response:

>Again, irrelevant if the document is a fake.

Agreed. If the document is proven to be a fake.

And finally, you offered:

>The real point here, and not the red herrings thrown out, is
>that real questioned document examiners, when they studied the
>memo, said that they could see where the stroke on the T of
>Truman had been modified. That, to them, suggested a hoax.

Not to be argumentative, but a suggestion is hardly a fact.
Returning to the corporate environment, it is well known that
executive secretaries sign papers for their bosses all the time.
The amount of forging that goes on is unbelievable. Now, I'm
hardly suggesting that Truman's secretary forged his signature
on the MJ12 document. However, there are many viable
explanations that can account for variations in a persons
signature, even Truman's. Believers and debunkers see either too
many similarities or not enough.

But to cast all pro-signature theories into the catagory of "red
herrings" is to create a climate of adversity; i.e. 'us against
them'. It basically says that "we shouldn't even discuss it",
which in fact, is what you claim above. Again, I personally feel
that the MJ12 document is more than likely a fake. However, I'd
rather have the amount of discussion and research needed to
prove it as fake rather than risk assuming it to be one and be
wrong. I don't really feel that it is my place, yours or Ed's to
draw a line in the sand and claim "enough discussion" on any
topic, including MJ-12.

In reference to the above, perhaps a link can be offered where
people
can view the Truman memo for closer inspection?

Later all,

Roger Evans






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     Chat with Astronaut Edgar Mitchell

From: Yvonne Hedenland <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:20:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:00:42 -0400
Subject: Chat with Astronaut Edgar Mitchell


NASA's Close Encounters?

Join the UFO Community on MSN, for a special chat with Edgar
Mitchell this Tuesday, October 20th at 6pm, PT. Apollo 14 was
just the beginning of a long, strange trip for the sixth man to
walk on the moon.

The chat is available at http://communities.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.

Also be sure and listen to Diana Botsford's audio interview with
Edgar Mitchell.....available 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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     Another Ufo Researcher Passes Away

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:07:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:58:19 -0400
Subject: Another Ufo Researcher Passes Away



Dear Errol and List Members,

I have been asked by Roy Lake of London UFO Studies to pass on
the sad news that Ron West the President/Chairman and Founder of
Essex UFO Research Group (EUFORG) passed away on Thursday 15th
October. Ron had been suffering from cancer.

To avoid causing further distress to Ron's family would anyone
wishing to contact EUFORG in the future please do so via the new
chairman Micheal Joyce, who was asked by Ron to take over.

Details are as follows:

Essex UFO Research Group
c/o Michael Joyce
22 James Gardens
St. Osyth
Essex
CO16 8QD

Phone: 01255 821121


Regards,


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/
UFOICQ Australian UFO Reports and Experiences:-
        http://ufoinfo.com/ufoicq/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     Roswell in the 1947 Canadian Press

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:07:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:52:51 -0400
Subject: Roswell in the 1947 Canadian Press


Roswell news articles in 1947 in the Canadian press with some of
the sample analysis of the news media afterwards that a properly
designed database with accurate input can extract.  It is by no
means rigorous or scientific, but just a sample of what kind of
data can be extracted by social scientists interested in the
media of the time.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------

                       Report R5 - PROJECT 1947 - Canada

______________________________________________________________________

Roswell
______________________________________________________________________

EDMONTON JOURNAL   Edmonton, AB  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Disc Discovery Is Just Balloon
         601   CP  07091947  Wed      Canada
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

FISHERMAN'S ADVOCATE   Port Union, NF  Canada
 7/19/47 Sat   Another Flying Saucer Reported Have Been Found
         344   ??  07091947  Wed  Washington  DC  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

HALIFAX HERALD   Halifax, NS  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Flying Saucer Mystery Unsolved - New Clue Exploded By
               Expert - Short Period Of Excitement Ends When Disc
               Found A Weather Balloon
         956   CP  07091947  Wed
 7/10/47 Thu   Flying Saucer Search Still Unrewarded
        1028   BUP  07091947  Wed  Chicago  IL  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    2  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    2

KIRKLAND LAKE NORTHERN DAILY NEWS   Kirkland Lake, ON  Canada
 7/10/47 Thu   Story Of Disc So Much Wind
         163   AP  07101947  Thu  Fort Worth  TX  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

LA PRESSE   Montreal, QC  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Rapport De Soucoupe Explique - Le Curieux Objet Trouve
               Au N.-Mexique N'est Qu'un Ballon Atmospherique
        1231   BUP  07091947  Wed
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

LONDON EVENING FREE PRESS   London, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Captured Flying Saucer Only Weather Balloon
               [incomplete]
         765   CP  07091947  Wed      Canada
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

MONTREAL GAZETTE   Montreal, QC  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Flying Saucer Mystery Unsolved, Find In New Mexico
               Mere Balloon
         999   CP  07091947  Wed      Canada
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

NANAIMO DAILY FREE PRESS   Nanaimo, BC  Canada
 7/08/47 Tue   Flying Discs Reported In Many Countries Of World
         667   AP  07081947  Tue  Roswell  NM  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

NORTH BAY DAILY NUGGET   North Bay, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Grounded Flying Disc Just U.S. Weather Balloon
         142   AP  07091947  Wed  Ft. Worth  TX  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

PORT ARTHUR NEWS-CHRONICLE   Port Arthur, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Mystery Object Not A Disc - Just A Weather Balloon
         919   AP  07091947  Wed  Fort Worth  TX  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

SAULT ONTARIO DAILY STAR   Sault St. Marie, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Flying Disc Found In N.M.
         141   AP  07091947  Wed  Ft. Worth  TX  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

SYDNEY POST-RECORD   Sydney, NS  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Wind Target: Mysterious Object Found To Be Balloon
         722   AP  07091947  Wed  Fort Worth  TX  USA
 7/11/47 Fri   Not A Flying Disc
         747
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    2  articles   LOCAL:    1   WIRE:    1

TORONTO DAILY TRIBUNE   Toronto, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   And Still They See Those Elusive Saucers
         610   UP  07081947  Tue  Chicago  IL  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

TORONTO GLOBE AND MAIL   Toronto, ON  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Crashed Flying Saucer Just Weather Balloon
        1214
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    1   WIRE:    0

VANCOUVER NEWS HERALD   Vancouver, BC  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Captured Saucer Proves A Ballon
         414   AP  07091947  Wed  Ft. Worth  TX  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

VANCOUVER SUN   Vancouver, BC  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   One Answer To The Flying Disc Mystery
         190   AP  07081947  Tue  FT. Worth  TX  USA
 7/09/47 Wed   One Answer To The Flying Disc Mystery
        1091   AP  07091947  Wed
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    2  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    2

VICTORIA DAILY COLONIST   Victoria, BC  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Victoria Flying Saucer Said Only Part Of Clock
         208
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    1   WIRE:    0

WINNIPEG FREE PRESS   Winnipeg, MB  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Future Danger Stressed - Flying Disc Hysteria Warning
               Is Sounded
        1162   ??  07091947  Wed  New York  NY  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

WINNIPEG TRIBUNE   Winnipeg, MB  Canada
 7/09/47 Wed   Gromyko Vetoes Explanations Of Flying Disc
         563   AP  07091947  Wed  Lake Success  NY  USA
NEWSPAPER TOTAL:    1  articles   LOCAL:    0   WIRE:    1

  SUBJECT TOTAL:   22  articles   LOCAL:    3   WIRE:   19
__________________________________________________________

  SUMMARY TOTAL:   22  articles   LOCAL:    3   WIRE:   19
__________________________________________________________


                 Report R9 - PROJECT 1947 - CANADA
__________________________________________________________

Subject Categories          Articles          Column Lines
__________________________________________________________

Roswell                     22    1.88%      1149    1.54%
__________________________________________________________

Total # of Subjects: 30  Articles:   22   Col-Lines:  1149
__________________________________________________________


                 Report R7 - PROJECT 1947 - CANADA

______________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY      QUANTITY    TONE      FRAME    EVIDENCE       COL-LINES
______________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY  1    2   .17%  neutral    episodic anecdotal      153   .20%
CATEGORY  7    1   .09%  neutral    thematic photographic     5   .01%
CATEGORY  9   17  1.45%  skeptical  episodic anecdotal      903  1.21%
CATEGORY 14    1   .09%  skeptical  thematic none            82   .11%
CATEGORY 17    1   .09%  supportive episodic anecdotal        6   .01%
__________________________________________________________________________

NEWSCLIPPINGS 22                                           1149

     TONE          NEWSCLIPS              COL-LINES
      NEUTRAL       716                   46071
      SKEPTICAL     392                   24539
      SUPPORTIVE     61                    4146

     FRAME
      EPISODIC      832                   52839
      THEMATIC      337                   21917

     EVIDENCE
      ANECDOTAL     810                   52771
      NONE          323                   21083
      PHOTOGRAPHIC   12                     315
      PHYSICAL       24                     587

     TOTAL           22                    1149





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

              Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:44:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:11:40 -0400
Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes



>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 07:21:32 +0200
>Subject: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

>[List only]



This note serves only my opinion, folks.  But since the
application and use of use of Amateur Radio applies to me, I
find it difficult not to comment.

I've been a licensed amateur for (oy, it can't be _THAT_ long)
42 years! The Amateur Radio Service has been one of the few joys
in my life.  To me it is not only a hobby, but serves the public
interest and safety. Like most things which give pleasure (in my
opinion at least) it bears a good measure of responsibility.
And so I support as much public service as my time will allow.

But this issue of SETI is a bit bothersome to me.  It is not
that I deny it's level of importance to those amateurs engaged,
it is just that I see very little value in the project.  If we
were to pick up radio signals from space, it would likely be
from a race of entities not terribly far ahead of us in their
technology.

Meaning, it would take decades for us to establish a dialogue.
It would be great to learn of life elsewhere, but the intrinsic
value of such a contact would be limited to the knowledge of the
existence of life elsewhere.  Forgive me for using the common
modern expression indicative of mental illumination but....
_DUH!_

Intellectually, the belief in life elsewhere is becoming a
fundamental link to sanity to those other than the followers of
fundamental religious beliefs....

Concluding, in my opinion they (life) are out there.  I (again
my opine) do not require some micro micro micro volts of RF
energy to tell me that.  Indeed, I wait for them to come to
us... perhaps as they have been doing for millennia ... and
likely will continue until we all get our heads out of the sand.

So instead of helping to look for radio signals from the planet
Mongo, I shall attempt to work on the puzzle as it exists here,
on Earth, with the belief that any race of entities worth
contacting would largely and likely be able to transcend RF and
utilize a much more efficient method of communication than
radio.

Also, I feel that we have made such a racket with our own use
(or misuse) of the radio spectrum and misuse of energy for
purposes other than the good of our own kind, that we must by
now, have been noticed by other life forms.  Keeping that
thought in mind, if I were a sentient life form listening to us,
I would consider one of two objectives.

1) Pray the bastards don't make it into space until they reform

or

2) Spritz this solar system with a quick acting form of instant
death spray.  These guys are _dangerous_!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            Partial Roswell Index

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:38:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:55:15 -0400
Subject: Partial Roswell Index


I was asked to assist a reader on this mailing list with an index
to the literature on Roswell. I can only provide limited
assistance. Below are bibliographical indexes on the subject of
Roswell for the MUFON JOURNAL (to issue #340, 08/1996) and for
the JUST CAUSE Newsletter. Be sure to check other UFO periodicals
for information on the subject.

I do not have the time and cannot provide individual copies of
actual issues that may be of interest.

On a separate post, a bibliographical index of Roswell on
Canadian newspapers of 1947 with some short sample analyses at
the end.

Ed Stewart
----------

Roswell related articles in JUST CAUSE

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     New Roswell Data Surfaces.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 19
(89-03) pps. 4-4 -  (208)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Warning To All, A [Roswell] [Robert Todd].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES)
(V)  (N) 26 (90-12) pps. 1-2 4-4  (249)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Baptist 'Gossip' [News Clip].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 26
(90-12) pps. 2-2 -  (250)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Roswell Documents.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 26 (90-12)
pps. 6-6 -  (256)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     FBI Teletype 47/07/08 [Roswell Disc].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)
(N) 26 (90-12) pps. 7-7 -  (257)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Combined History 509th Bomb Group And Roswell Army Air Field
[47/07/01-31].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 26 (90-12) pps. 8-8 -
(258)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     UFO Crash At Roswell.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 30 (91-12)
pps. 8-8 -  (268)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     More On UFO Crash At Roswell.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 31
(92-03) pps. 1-4 -  (270)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     More On The Crashed Saucer Front (Re: Gerald Anderson).  JUST CAUSE
(NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 34 (92-12) pps. 7-7 -  (294)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Letter From Robert G. Todd To Col. Richard L. Weaver.  JUST CAUSE
(NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 40 (94-06) pps. 2-8 -  (329)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Altered Document Discovered In Roswell Debate [Robert Todd].  JUST
CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 41 (94-09) pps. 1-7 -     (333)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Air Force Roswell Report, The.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 42
(94-12) pps. 1-2 7-8  (336)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Summary Of HQ NAIC Research Into The Roswell Incident, Unidentified
Flying Saucers, And Project Blue Book.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N)
42 (94-12) pps. 3-4 -  (337)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Summary Of Research Conducted By The NAIC/HO At Maxwell Afb, 7-10
Mar 94.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 42 (94-12) pps. 5-6 -  (338)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Air Force: Roswell 'UFO' Probably A Military Device [News Clip].
JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 42 (94-12) pps. 6-6 -  (339)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     UFO Legend That Won't Fly Away [News Clip].  JUST CAUSE (NEW
SERIES) (V)  (N) 42 (94-12) pps. 6-6 -  (340)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Editorial [Roswell].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 43 (95-03)
pps. 1-1 -  (342)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Air Force Roswell Report - Part II.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)
(N) 43 (95-03) pps. 1-4 -  (343)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Proof Of Murphy's Law In Ufology [Re: Donald Schmitt].  JUST CAUSE
(NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 43 (95-03) pps. 4-7 -  (344)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Jack Anderson And Michael Binstein 'Roswell Incident Revisits Air
Force' [News Clip].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 43 (95-03) pps.
8-8 -  (346)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     GAO Roswell Report Released.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 44
(95-06) pps. 7-8 -  (351)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     A Clarification [Vandenberg's Desk Logs].  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES)
(V)  (N) 45 (95-09) pps. 1-1 -  (353)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Full Air Force Roswell Report Now Available.  JUST CAUSE (NEW
SERIES) (V)  (N) 45 (95-09) pps. 1-2 -  (354)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Air Force Report On Roswell Continued.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES)
(V)  (N) 51 (97-11) pps. 4-7 -  (405)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     July.  JUST CAUSE (NEW SERIES) (V)  (N) 51 (97-11) pps. 7-8 - (408)

Greenwood, Barry (ed.)
     Roswell Reversal?.  U.F.O. HISTORICAL REVUE (V)  (N) 1 (98-06) pps.
9-9 -  (414)

Roswell related articles in the MUFON JOURNAL up to #340, 08/1996

Gribble, Bob
     Looking Back - 1947/07 - [Roswell, New Mexico].  THE MUFON UFO
JOURNAL (V)  (N) 231 (87-07) pps. 16-16 -  (6285)

Stringfield, Leonard H.
     Roswell & The X-15: UFO Basics.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 259
(89-11) pps. 3-7 -  (7047)

Shandera, Jaime H.   Moore, William L.
     3 Hours That Shook The Press.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 269
(90-09) pps. 3-10 -  (7401)

Thomas, Joe Kirk
     Analyzing The Roswell Debris.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 273
(91-01) pps. 9-11 -  (7525)

Shandera, Jaime H.
     New Revelations About Roswell Wreckage: A General Speaks Up [BGen.
Thomas Jefferson DuBose].  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 273 (91-01)
pps. 12-18 -  (7526)

Clark, Jerome
     Open Letter To John Keel, An.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 274
(91-02) pps. 19-20 -  (7571)

Carpenter, John
     Hypnosis: Reliving July 5, 1947.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N)
275 (91-03) pps. 7-9 -  (7580)

Whiting, Fred
     News'n'Views - Roswell Update.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 275
(91-03) pps. 14-14 -  (7582)

Randle, Kevin D.   Schmitt, Donald R.
     Letter: [On Gen. DuBose Interview].  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N)
275 (91-03) pps. 21-21 -  (7598)

Schmitt, Donald R.   Randle, Kevin D.
     What Happened In Ramey's Office?.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N)
276 (91-04) pps. 3-9 -  (7601)

Shandera, Jaime H.
     Letter: [On Gen. DuBose].  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 278
(91-06) pps. 18-19 -  (7677)

Fischer, Paul
     Interview With Jesse Marcel, Jr., M.D..  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)
(N) 279 (91-07) pps. 8-9 -  (7684)

MacFie, Anne
     Return To Roswell.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 288 (92-04) pps.
3-7 -  (7909)

Randle, Kevin D.
     Letter: [On Roswell].  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 291 (92-07)
pps. 21-21 -  (8020)

Smith, James J.
     Letter: [On Roswell].  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 291 (92-07)
pps. 21-21 -  (8021)

Sider, Jean   Scott, Irena
     Roswell And Its Possible Consequences On American Policy.  THE
MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 296 (92-12) pps. 10-11 -      (8119)

Klass, Philip J.
     Letter: CIA Mission.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 298 (93-02)
pps. 20-20 -  (8194)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Roswell's Latest UFO Phenomenon - Any Crashed Saucer Is Long Gone,
But The Roswell UFO Museum Itself Is Still Worth A Stop.  THE MUFON UFO
JOURNAL (V)  (N) 310 (94-02) pps. 15-16 -  (8397)

Randle, Kevin D.   Schmitt, Donald R.
     UFO Crash At Roswell, The - New Research & New Witnesses Result In
New Roswell Book. Will It Finally Lay The Controversy To Rest?.  THE
MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 311 (94-03) pps. 8-10 -  (8410)

Jeffrey, Kent
     Taking The Offensive On Roswell - Forty-Seven Years After The Fact,
The Roswell Incident Continues To Generate Controversy & Cover-Up
Claims.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 312 (94-04) pps. 3-4 -  (8427)

Jeffrey, Kent
     Roswell Declaration 1994.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 312
(94-04) pps. 5-5 -  (8428)

Randle, Kevin D.
     Letter: Roswell.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 314 (94-06) pps.
18-19 -  (8465)

Todd, Robert G.
     LaPaz, Roswell & Green Fireballs - Dr. LaPaz Was Definitely Looking
For Something At Roswell. Was It A Flying Saucer Or A Green Fireball?.
THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 315 (94-07) pps. 3-5 -  (8470)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: Roswell Redux.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 315 (94-07)
pps. 19-20 -  (8484)

Randle, Kevin D.
     Letter: Roswell Revisited.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 317
(94-09) pps. 18-19 -  (8505)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: And Revisited.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 317 (94-09)
pps. 19-20 -  (8506)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     News & Views - Air Force On Roswell.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V) (N)
318 (94-10) pps. 13-13 -  (8513)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     News & Views - Air Force On Roswell - The Fund For UFO Research
Responds "Air Force Still Trivializes UFOs.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)
(N) 318 (94-10) pps. 13-13 -  (8514)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     News & Views - Air Force On Roswell - Schiff's Response.  THE MUFON
UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 318 (94-10) pps. 14-14 -      (8515)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: Roswell.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 318 (94-10) pps.
17-17 -  (8520)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     Roswell Declaration 1994.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 318
(94-10) pps. 20-21 -  (8526)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: Little Green Men.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 320
(94-12) pps. 19-19 -  (8559)

Johnson, Miller
     Roswell I-Beam Replica Project, The.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)
(N) 323 (95-03) pps. 12-14 -  (8605)

Randle, Kevin D.
     Letter: Mogul Balloon Update.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 323
(95-03) pps. 19-19 -  (8612)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: More On Mogul & Roswell.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N)
326 (95-06) pps. 19-19 23-23  (8660)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     News Release - July 28th, 1995 - Schiff Receives, Releases Roswell
Report.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 328 (95-08) pps. 23-23 -  (8686)

Pflock, Karl T.
     News & Views - Roswell, Radar Targets And All That.  THE MUFON UFO
JOURNAL (V)  (N) 329 (95-09) pps. 12-13 -  (8691)

Randle, Kevin D.
     Search For The Truty About The Roswell Crash, The.  THE MUFON UFO
JOURNAL (V)  (N) 330 (95-10) pps. 9-15 -  (8701)

Scott, Irena   Jones, William E.
     Wright-Patterson AFB Historian Investigates Roswell Saucer Crash
Story.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 331 (95-11) pps. 3-8 -  (8707)

Stacy, Dennis W.
     News & Views - Air Force Roswell Report.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL
(V)  (N) 331 (95-11) pps. 15-15 -  (8712)

Jeffrey, Kent
     Roswell Initiative Update.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 332
(95-12) pps. 17-18 -  (8730)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Letter: Roswell's Flying Wing.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 333
(96-01) pps. 20-20 -  (8755)

Berliner, Don
     News & Views - Historian Off-Base, An.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)
(N) 334 (96-02) pps. 15-16 -  (8768)

Stacy, Dennis W. (ed.)
     Roswell Debris Recovered?.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)  (N) 337
(96-05) pps. 9-9 -  (8807)

Johnson, Miller
     Roswell, The Metal Fragment Incident.  THE MUFON UFO JOURNAL (V)
(N) 338 (96-06) pps. 13-15 -  (8825)

Friedman, Stanton T.   Moore, William L.
     Roswell Incident, The: Beginning Of The Cosmic Watergate.  MUFON
1981 UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFOs: THE HIDDEN EVIDENCE (V)  (N)
(81-) pps. 130-153 -  (8964)

Moore, William L.
     Roswell Investigation, The: New Evidence In The Search For A
Crashed UFO.  MUFON 1982 UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFOs - CANADA: A
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE (V)  (N)  (82-) pps. 84-104 -  (8974)

Moore, William L.
     Crashed Saucers: Evidence In Search Of Proof.  MUFON 1985 UFO
SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFO: THE BURDEN OF PROOF (V)  (N)  (85-) pps.
130-179 -  (9013)

Schmitt, Donald R.
     New Revelations From Roswell.  MUFON 1990 INTERNATIONAL UFO
SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFOs: THE IMPACT OF E.T. CONTACT UPON SOCIETY
(V)  (N)  (90-) pps. 154-168 -  (9078)

Friedman, Stanton T.
     Update On Crashed Saucers In New Mexico.  MUFON 1991 INTERNATIONAL
UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFOs: THE BIG PICTURE (V)  (N)  (91-) pps.
268-282 -  (9093)

Pflock, Karl T.
     Roswell, A Cautionary Tale: Facts And Fantasies, Lessons And
Legacies.  MUFON 1995 INTERNATIONAL UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS: UFOLOGY:
A SCIENTIFIC PARADIGM (V)  (N)  (95-) pps. 63-84 -  (9148)

Friedman, Stanton T.
     Roswell Revisited.  MUFON 1995 INTERNATIONAL UFO SYMPOSIUM
PROCEEDINGS: UFOLOGY: A SCIENTIFIC PARADIGM (V)  (N)  (95-) pps. 243-264
-  (9156)

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:54:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:24:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>Date: Sun, Oct 17,1998 10:30 CET
>From: Joachim Koch <achimkoch@compuserve.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>They did not that. It was a rainy night and they'd intended to
>leave. All the cameras were stored away. There were four people
>sitting in two cars. Suddenly they saw something floating along
>the line where the Kenett-Avon-Canal is. The description of what
>they saw differs a bit according to whom you ask. Fact is that
>there was something in the air. Something "structured". But
>remember: it was raining and misty and dark and the object was
>nearly one mile away. And it floated along slowly.


Hi Joachim

Steven Greer and co. were in a crop circle earlier that evening
however, whether they were holding hands is another matter <g>
They were testing the predictions of a guy called Roy Dutton who
claims he can predict the times of likely UFO activity. On the
night in question he had predicted 1030, 12.30, and 01.30 as
time slots for UFOs. I believe CSETI did see strange lights at
10.28 but as you say, this was not the structured craft sighting
Roy mentioned earlier.

Tony





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                Re: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:15:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:06:37 -0400
Subject: Re: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down


>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:41:10 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:11:26 -0800
>>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down

>>>>Semi-"old timers" will know that we are fast coming up on the
>>>>20th anniversary of the disappearance of Frederich Valentich
>>>>who disappeared along with his small plane over the Bass Strait

>>>>Date: Oct. 21, 1978, 7:12:28 pm local time, just after he said
>>>>"...is hovering and it's not an aircraft...."
>
>>>>Fred had described a strange object traveling back and
>>>>forth over his aicraft:"It's got a green light and a sort of
>>>>metallic light. It's shiny on the outside."

>>>>Whym you may ask, dare I write quotes from a person who
>>>>disappeared (and hence was never "properly interviewed" about
>>>>his UFO sighting)?

>>>>Answer:  quote are abstracted from the AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
>>>>CENTER (Melbourne) audio tape of the incident.  Fred was in
>>>>communication with the radar, but, unfortunately, was below the
>>>>altitude at which the radar would detect him..... and the other
>>>>object.

>>>>Yes, the bones of many reside at the bottom of the ocean, but on
>>>>the other hand, there was no evidence of problems with
>>>>Valentich's plane and.... no residue, flotsam, jetsam, junk,
>>>>evidence of any kind was ever found, yet there should have been
>>>>had he "simply" crashed into the ocean.>

>>>>Fred was gone.....>

>>>>is gone......

>>>>RIP.

>>>>(A search of the Bass Strait was carried out for several days.
>>>>Nothing was ever found)

><snip>

>Has anyone in recent years tried to use newer underwater
>scanning techniques to do a new check for remains?

>Have never heard of any recent (within the last 10 year)
>searches. However, they had quite good sonar back in those days
>which could map the bottom (i believe about 600 ft deep).
>Usually if a plane crashes there will be pieces or oil slick or
>whatever. In this case the search commenced within a day....and
>nothing was ever found.

>I might mention that the complete lack of debris led some
>skeptics to suggest that Fred was... guess what .... alive!.
>Yes, it was all a hoax by Fred to cover up some smuggling
>activity and he flew the plane to xsome place in the center of
>Australia rather than to King Island. Probably there are still
>some people who assume Fred is alive and well...... somewhere.

>About 12 years ago Richard Haines published a book on this
>event, "Melbourne Episode", (L.D.A. Press, CA, 1987), with
>introduction written by Yours Truly....  This book contains more
>information than you'll ever want to know about it (unless you
>intend to carry out your own investigation).


Hello Bruce,

As I mentioned before this is a case that I think had/has four
things going for it that as far as I know, no other case has.
They are 1)the death of the witness 2)the possible death of a
witness while reporting the sighting 3) the possible death of a
witness while reporting the event to the authorities and 4) the
strong possibility that the witnesses death was directly
attributable to the presence of the UFO. All the other BS aside
re he faked the whole thing because there was some kind of a
drug deal in the offing is so rediculous as to be laughable.

I've looked into this sighting to some degree though not as
thoroughly as I would like but I've noted some holes in this
event that as a pilot bother me because they are likely to have
been missed because the investigators were not pilots.

Your mention, Bruce, of the book, 'Melbourne Episode' by Richard
Haines was news to me. I was unaware that it existed. Is it
still in print or avaiable somewhere? I'd like to obtain a copy.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                        Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:21:26 -0400
Subject: Crop Circles - More Thoughts


Dear Colleagues,

Its good to see, the debate about circles from all sides of the
fence.

I would simply say, that whatever these balls of light are the
military have certainly made sure they are brought to the
attention of all who bother to look past the man made hoaxes.

If these lights are not ET in origin the next question I would
ask is:Why do these lights seem to have enough intelligence to
recgonize when they are being chased.

What natural occuring phenomena is there, that any researcher on
the list skeptic or beleiver can tell me that will actually
acknowledge the approach of a helicopter/jet and then take
evasive action, so that it cannot be caught.

Would this kind of action suggest some kind of intelligent
control?

Are the military chasing St Elmos Fire?

Ponder on this one:

Could it be that Crop Circles are the product of Microwave Based
Technologies, which have been tested by the military over the
years or are they from an ET based technology which the Army
most certainly would like to keep under wraps at all costs.

As with some sightings of the flying triangle, witnesses have
described a singular white pulsing light which has been seen,
trailing behind the craft: Are these lights linked? What is the
trailing light behind the FT {Check Black Triangle over Silbury
Hill Article next issue of the ELUFON Magazine out in 2 weeks}

Just to say, that I do acknowledge the exsistence of Earth
lights, but I personally do not think these are Earth lights
that are being chased all over Wiltshire by Army Helicopters.

I would like to relate an experience I shared with some freinds,
whilst sitting in a crop circle in the early morning (between
2/3:30am )this season just gone.

Myself and some of the ELUFON staff decided to make our yearly
trip to Wiltshire, so that we could catch up on all the events,
relating to crop formations.As usual we met some of our other
freinds down there, and began to plan our skywatches. After
hearing some stories of where the balls of light had been seen,
we decided to pack up and head for the nearest field.

We eventually found a crop circle and settled in the formation
for the night.We then heard some voices, coming across the field
so we decided to take a look, and was surpised to find three
canadian ladies , camping in the adjascent field, which also
contained a formation.

We joined them, and were having a great time, when I began to
notice looking straight across the other field a single white
light, which every now and then would appear, to go up and down
the whole of the field.I initially kept this to myself and
quietly, began to observe the light, and then noticed it had
been joined by a multitude of lights.

Some of these lights were smaller and less bright, and seemed to
be playing a game of chase with each other. Little did I know
that two other friends who I had met there that day (One who is
very psyhcic) and the other had been involved with the cerealogy
subject for some years, and who had also witnessed unusaul
lights over the years) were also witnessing these lights.

I then calmly mentioned to the crowd of freinds, that I had been
observing lights in the adjascent field moving across the field
in different fashions. To my surprise two of the canadian ladies
as well as my two other freinds, also said they had been
watching these lights for some time, and were waiting for
someone to remark.

Not everyone there could see these lights, so could this suggest
a psyhcic connection?

I later found that one of the canadian ladies was native
american cherokee indian.And that she was also a healer, who
then went onto to describe the encounters of light , and how
this light has played a major part of the healing process, in a
wide variety of cases.

Maybe these lights are a form of the same light that these
healers refer to, or is that a big jump, thats if you beleive in
healing ?

I have heard another term for these lights, Nature Spirits are
they an exstension of us and what we are within the structure of
all things cosmic:

THE EVER EXPANDING UNIVERSE.

Who knows I'm not saying I have the anwser, maybe they are a
multitude of things, I do know they definetly warrant further
investigation, and as for myself I just cant wait for Wiltshire
next year, see ya there!!!


QUOTE OF THE NIGHT: People create their own questions because
they're afaid to look sraight. All you have to do is look
straight and see the road, and when you see it dont sit looking
at it-----walk.

               Ayn Rand (1905-1982)
               Russian-Born American Writer.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:19:28 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:35:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs


>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:13:18 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Ron Jorgenson <rjorgens@whidbey.com>
>Subject: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs


>Hi all,

>I was hoping to get some more information about a video clip I
>saw on the news the other night. I live just north of Seattle
>and was watching our FOX affiliate's 10 o'clock news about 2
>nights ago, and they showed about 10 seconds of a clip of three
>equally spaced orange fireballs going slowly across the daytime
>sky. Supposedly the sighting had happened that day, but I missed
>exactly where it happened. I think it was Ohio or somewhere in
>the Midwest.

As much as I hate to state the obvious, your best bet is to
contact the station. By all means, let us know what turns up,
sounds like an interesting one.

Greg






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:08:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:30:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


I had a thought about this whole UFO/crop circle relationship
business, and I proudly declare myself the originator of this
pointless speculation.

Since _some_ UFOs have been seen in close proximity to crop
circles, or the area in which one later appears, perhaps the
ufos are showing an interest in something that is unexplained to
them as well. We may be dealing with two completely separate
mysteries after all. Perhaps on board these craft, they have
crop circle posters on the walls with "Where do they come from?"
as a caption. OK..got carried away, buy you never know.

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                         Re: Threats Within Ufology

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:16:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:02:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology



>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:42:36 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com
>Subject: Threats Within Ufology
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net


Sue Lawrense wrote:

<snip>

>Recently I have heard of various people within ufology,
>including some on this List, who have received threats related
>to their UFO research.

<snip>

Sue, Please correct me if I am wrong, a while ago were you
telephoned by a man who claimed he was part of the. ufology
scene. during your long telephone conversation, he turned
unpleasant and became an un welcome caller.

Could you elaborate, on this for me?

What sort of things this man said or implied for example?
Do you know the identity of this man?
If you believe he gave a false name, what name did he use?
What do you believe the motiv may have been for this outrage?
Do you feel that you have met this man previous to your bad
experience?

Did you recieve any direct message as to why you had been
targeted for this, attack.

Would you know his voice again?

Did you report this to the police?

If you did not report it to the police could you describe some
of the choices you had and made after this caller, rather than
call the
police?

Why were you reluctant to do so?

<snip>

>These threats have varied from verbal threats from other ufologists.

<snip>

If the person who is alleged to have done the threat is known to
you it is very unlikely that anything promised would ever take
place, the truth of the matter is that in times of temper and
dummy spitting, the person who is making all the noise, is
simply trying to put there point across, and due to man's
inability to communicate during raised blood pressure situations
he will blurt out some macho Hollywood hook line from a film.

I used to have a dog that barked a lot, but it never took a bite
out of anyone.

I am more concerned about the non ego threat, precise and
delivered for a purpose type threats, which i believe you may
have recieved.. Its time to out these incidents and maybe with
all the keen ufologists fine tuned investigate skills, you never
know we might expose these people, who act like long distance
muggers. and that would have to be good for ufology.

<snip>

>How do we combat those who are making these threats?

Again with the recent specualtion over Art Bell etc. can anyone
offer any advice on how these different types of threats should
be handled?

<snip>

It is time to bring this cast of characters who are a menace to
the right of all individuals to express there right to freedom
of speech, and to gather together others of same ideas and
concepts, to discuss this subject.freely.

But _be_sure_you _really_have_been_threatened, and it is not
just a bit of in-house foot stomping and difference of opinion,
you know what I mean? My sister used to say she was going to
"brain" me whatever that meant, but it never happened.. but she
said it.

That you believe that the threat you recieved was insideous and
planned, and that there was another agenda being played out
here, and that the threats made you believe that this may
actually happen, if that is the case the police should be
informed a.s.a.p..

>Would it be beneficial to 'go public' and announce that threats
>have been made?

That is a decision that you must judge to best assist you in the
direction if any you may wish to proceed along, regarding
threats.

This may deter the threats being carried out especially if the
initiator of the threats is known.

If you recieve a threat from a known person to you, really have
not had a serious threat as it would be the same as robbing a
bank and leaving your name and address with the bank teller..
more than likely it was just another raised blood pressure type
paranormal scenario, why do men's systems crash and they lose
the ability to communicate with people when the temper is
raised.

On most occassions this is just the dog barking what ever
restores its normal persona, and it is highly unlikely that the
dog would ever bite you, barks a lot though..

>But what if the threats are from an unknown source, is there
>any safeguard against the threats being carried out?

<snip

There are safegurds for phone answering, and the bottom line is
that if you feel that the threat is a real, you must get the
police involved as this behaviour is not acceptable under any
circumstances and must be dealt with.

Beware the wolf in sheeps clothing

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 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                         Re: Threats Within Ufology

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:55:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:06:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology


>From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Threats Within Ufology
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:47:22 +1000

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:42:36 -0400
>>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: Threats Within Ufology
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Following recent speculation over Art Bell's resignation  I
>>thought it was an opportune time to bring up the subject of
>>threats within ufology.

>>Recently I have heard of various people within ufology,
>>including some on this List, who have received threats related
>>to their UFO research. These threats have varied from anonymous
>>phone calls to verbal threats from other ufologists.
>>How do we combat those who are making these threats?

><snip>

>There is one thing you can do to combat threats if you get it by
>e-mail, send it to all your friends, I did and I still do, if
>they call by telephone put the answering machine on and let it
>take the message and turn the sound down, they do record :>).
>You will find a wimp never wants to talk to a recorded message
>:>)

>I myself have had threats, but I'm lucky because I'm just one
>small brick in a big brick wall and all the other bricks
>surround me. Its what I call a solid foundation (Mate -Ship )
>thanks guys. Art Bell will need all his mates to rally around
>him, there ( is ) strength in numbers. In  the states the  UFO
>Phenomena  is big business, with plenty of people trying to make
>big bucks, so there is always going to be infighting & Egos, but
>if you stand together it's harder to knock down that brick wall

<snip>

>>Would it be beneficial to 'go public' and announce that threats
>>have been made? This may deter the threats being carried out
>>especially if the initiator of the threats is known. But what if
>>the threats are from an unknown source, is there any safeguard
>>against the threats being carried out?

><snip>

>If the threats are from an unknown source, you just have to
>watch your back, I think. One could walk down the road and get
>run over by a truck, but as one would say, one would never stand
>infront of a moving truck now would one, so what can you do?.

<snip>

Diane, Sue and List;

After reporting a sighting to MUFON, two people who I trust on
the Internet and my family, I started receiving threatening
phone calls. The contact was never on the Internet and messages
were never left on my answering system.  They were made if the
phone was answered by me or by my wife.

I take threats very seriously, especially since I occasionally
become involved in some sensitive business as a result of my
profession.  But I am not at all concerned about me, just my
ability to provide for and protect my family.  So I decided to
take a back seat and live my life as a paranoid professional.

No longer.  I still take threats seriously.  But after some very
serious dialog with my dad who recently turned 86, and on his
best recommendations, I am no longer hiding what is.  So I
decided to investigate the source of these threatening calls by
using some of my contacts within law enforcement.

I was surprised to learn the source.  I can tell you that if
anyone is receiving threats under any circumstances, it is
important to use whatever devices or people are available in
order to learn the identities of the cowards.  Having this
knowledge places strength on your side.  Knowing who they are
enables you to deliver a preemptive strike or at the very least,
report them to your attorneys, the authorities or even notify
those threatening you of your knowledge.

The subject of aliens and UFO's elicit strange reactions from
some terribly unexpected agencies.  Having learned this only
recently merely exacerbates my sense that a lot more knowledge
exists within the government than I thought, on the subject of
UFO's and alien visitations.  I would like to thank those who
made those threats for alerting me to their far greater
knowledge and intent in this matter.

At age 55, I have made the decision to retire from active
consulting. I'll keep one or two accounts (which I have already
notified of my experiences).  One of them decided I was no
longer the maven they thought I was and dumped me.  They even
allowed me to retain my retainer.  The other said, "So what?!?"

Which is OK by me.  Having made the decision to retire allows me
to spend a lot more time researching this subject, something
that I have wanted to do for years.

So in my case, threats had an effect opposite to the intended
one. Illigitimum non carborundum.

Jim Mortellaro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 18

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:44:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:12:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Condon and Menzel both worked hard to protest even the slightest
>attention to UFOs by responsible groups, going so far as to
>attempt to disrupt the AIAA plans for a subcommittee to study
>the subject. Jerry Clark has documented Klass' attempts to
>prevent a conference from being held at a university. I do not
>believe these are isolated incidents.

This was slightly in error due to my faulty memory. Condon
attempted to prevent the AAAS symposium on UFOs, not the AIAA
subcommittee.

Menzel attempted to influence colleagues at the IAU and made a
variety of attacks on James McDonald.

... too many "A"s ...

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:13:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:14:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Reply-To: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:15:09 -0400

>According to a recent film on the Discovery channel, circle
>hoaxers are also hoaxing UFOs. The hoaxers offered a pretty
>disgusting rationale for their efforts to make a difficult
>problem more difficult.

>Some of the hoaxers are floating large helium balloons with
>biolumes; others use more elaborate systems with flashing lights
>in the balloons.
>Obviously these lead to some fairly convincing UFOs.
>------
>Mark Cashman,


Yup, but there is one thing that could likely give the hoaxes
away - the angle in the sky.

My first sighting, almost two years ago now, was a large light.
I am in the country, but the road near us has street lights
visible from our yard. And there is nothing else all that high.
The angle of the light ball I saw, was too high for anything
from earth, relative to its size at least. It was higher than
even the planes in the sky - we are on a landing route to a
major ailrport. And the light was certainly bigger than any
planes headlights I have ever seen, and I see them regularly,
nightly in fact.

Of course, one thing no large helium ballon could do is suddenly
split into four equal pieces on a horizontal line, which then
move upwards, together and disappear!

Would love to know how that was hoaxed!

Second sighting, pretty much the same thing, night sky again,
and this time two balls of light - but, admittedly, not as high
in the sky as the first months before! By this time, later
winter of 97, there were regular sightings of the same balls of
light. But this time, for me, neither broke up, just finally
disappeared as a plane flew just under them!

Would be interested if anyone could correct me that the higher
in the sky the light, the less likely it is to be a hoax!
During the same time period as my second sighting, apparently
there was a rash of much the same from the witnesses
descriptions I have read, in the US and I believe it was New
Zealand! Maybe teams of hoaxers!??

Lesley --

Lesley Cluff,
Ontario, Canada
manitou@fox.nstn.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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Kathleen Andersen <KAnder6444@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:44:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:50:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation
>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

>Now, what did a so-called guided missile look like in
>those days?

>Could it be a "flying saucer" of this type Arnold
>observed? The readers of The List must judge for
>themselves.

Not sure you were a part of the last Arnold debate. I brought up
some points at that time about "being here" to understand the
perceptions of Mt. Rainier and the surrounding area.

Greg Long, author of the Yakima Earthlight Theory lives here in
Seattle and was the last person to interview Arnold before his
death.  I talked with him about your message and this is his
reply.

"Kenneth Arnold told the Pendleton Newspaper that the objects he
saw "flew as if you took a saucer and skipped it across the
water." He never used the term "flying saucer" on June 24, 1947,
or the weeks thereafter. The term flying saucer was developed,
apparently collectively, by news people of the time. The objects
that Arnold saw were not even saucer shaped."

Greg also noted that when Arnold landed in Yakima, someone, he
believes Sonny Robinson suggested that what he saw were guided
missiles from Moses Lake, Washington. Greg continued by saying
"no one to my knowledge, has researched this possibility.
However, why would the military launch 9 missiles, a technology
that was in its experimental and early development stages, to
fly over the Cascade mountains toward some unknown destination."
"Surely by now, some researcher could demonstrate that 9 flying
wings were based somewhere in Washington or nearby states and
were flown on June 24, 1947."

I have to agree with Greg. Mt. Rainier and the surrounding area
is isolated and remote (or at least back then it was!) If the
government was testing, why risk sending your prototype (and its
obvious research and development costs attached) to an area that
was almost impossible for retrieval if your test failed. I think
there is also another logic that needs to be mentioned. Mt.
Rainier is a volcano. I can think of many other places in the
U.S. for testing.

In the 40 some odd years after Kenneth Arnold's sighting and his
death, he had plenty of time to research aviation developments
to make a comparison. I mentioned the last debate that I got to
look at Ken Arnold's scrape books at Greg's house. Arnold never
found the answer to what he saw in 1947.

Give me a call if you are ever in Seattle and I'll take you to
Mt. Rainier!

Kathleen Andersen
MUFON State Section Director
Seattle, Washington






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:40:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:48:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:14:29 -0400
>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Crop Circles/Balls of light A point to ponder on?
>>To: updates@globalserve.net


>Just what did Steven Alexandra film at Milk Hill Wiltshire? What
>was the Helicopter hovering over, in the famous Colin Andrews
>Alton Barnes Harassment case?

>Whatever these objects are, do they offer any evidence that they
>are responsible for the creation of crop circles?

Mr Spurrier, What is your opinion? Have you studied in detail
the possible options available for the origin of the phenomena?

Do you offer any evidence that the lights in question are not
involved in the creation of some of the crop circles that appear
around the UK and the rest of the World?

If you answered no to the previous question, then these lights
as a possible cause should not be discounted and the data should
stand with all data regarding all peoples idea's and opinion's
about the origin of the crop circle enigma and the possible
connection to the strange lights which seem to be in attendance
when a lot of the circles appear, untill proven otherwise the
hypoth is as valid as the next man's.

>What exactly did Matthew Williams film in Wiltshire this year,
>which received quite a bit of 'air' time in the Barge Inn
>Wiltshire.

>Does having UFO footage aired in a pub "quite a bit",
>constitute >proof that UFOs create crop formations?


I believe you and I both know that, what was being infered was
that the gathering of people with an interest, seemed to
consider the footage worth a viewing.

Have you seen the above mentioned footage?

What is your opinion if you have seen the Williams footage?

>Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth
>Lights or even optical illusions?

>Probably not.

Guess again, not according to the Colin Andrews helicopter
footage as seen on the US program Sightings.. to which the UK
military even denied that they had any helicopters in the area
that day..

The footage tells a different story.

>If these balls of light, are earth lights or so called fairy
>lights why has the military have such an interest in them?

>This does not mean the lights are of extraterrestrial origin and
>are responsible for the creation of crop formations.

Steady Tony,the question was:
Why has the military have such an interest in them?

You answered with:

>This does not mean the lights are of extraterrestrial origin and
>are responsible for the creation of crop formations.

How did you get to that answer from a simple open question, in
an open discussion, I believe the question was put to the list:

Why has the military have such an interest in them?

Due to the Colin Andrews crop circle, orb's military helicopter
video, which confirms that not only did the military lie about
there involvement, and that they were right on point zero,
during the whole incident. I ask you?

What do you believe the military interest would be to the point
that they felt that they needed to deny, and to maintain
plausable denial. with regard to when they were exposed to these
lights.?

What is your opinion?

>And why do the military always seem to know when and where these
>balls of light seem to appear?

>Perhaps they know more about these lights than we do.

Mr Spurrier, what do you think is going on, regarding these
light formations?


>If so what is the point in intercepting a natural occurring
>phenomena?

>Research maybe, or they know the origin of the lights but again
>does this offer evidence that these lights are responsible for
>crop formations and are of extraterrestrial origin.

Do you offer evidence that these lights are not responsible for
crop formations and are not of extraterrestrial origin.?

>If even these so called "Circle Makers" have seen these lights
>while they have been busy hoaxing circles, does that rule out
>all crop circles are hoaxed?

>No, man-made formations are genuine, perhaps those allegedly
>made by anomalous balls of lights should be considered hoaxed,
>if it can be proved they have actually created a formation..

So what you are saying is that if evidence surfaces that prooves
that, some circles may have been created by the balls of light.
You will move to call the thing hoaxed, if it can be prooved
that the balls of light have actually created a formation..

Well that's hardly the comment of a sceptic even, at least true
sceptics the likes of Andy Denne. are always willing to look at
any evidence, and simply decide what the evidence shows, you
however are saying that if the balls of light can be shown to
have created the pattern, then its a
hoax.

What would you do ignore the evidence?
Why is this your stance?

>Flashes of lights have allegedly been reported by circle makers
>but these have not been proved to be extraterrestrial crafts
>making formations elsewhere.


It has not been disproved either.

>If all the circles are man made, why does audio equipment,
>watches, etc go wild in some crop circles?

>Probably the same reason healing occurs in some formations and
>headaches etc. in others.

Could you please elaborate on your previous answer,
What is the same reason?

>Does this mean that the so called circle makers are statically
>charged and are spreading this across the wheat?

>No, perhaps you should investigate why and where the formations
>are created rather than speculate on guesses of other wordly
>explanantions.

I believe that the comment above was sarcasm, and you must have
seen that, but that is the whole thing Mr Spurrier, Roy hale and
others like him are investigating and reporting to updates,
placing the info in the domain of the public and other
researchers from around the World to perhaps comment and maybe
assist in the subject matter..may be forthcoming from those with
a genuine interest in the subject

However I do believe that on some of your supposed research
expo's to Sizewell in search of the large black so called Flying
Triangle, ufology seemed to all of a sudden been left on the
back seat so to speak.

While you took up your new study coarse, Human Biology and
mating practices, And with some more dilligent police work, you
may well of ended up explaining your behaviour during your sky
watch to the local magistrate...

>Isn't it just a fact that at the end of the day, despite
>skeptics claiming this a solved mystery, like the UFO phenomena,
>a mystery it still is?

>Crop formations should not be now classified as an enigma, but
>there is still alot of mileage yet to do on UFOs before they can
>be dismissed entirely.

Why do UFOs need to be dismissed?

A far better option would be the answers to if any of the UFOs
are being controlled by some non Human intelligence..?

Are any of the reports of abduction true?

What do the goverment know about these visitors?

Why if the reports of some abductions are true real time events
in peoples lives, and if the goverment knows about it what the
deal?

If any and why are they allowing this to continue?

Just for a start.

>I prefer to keep away from classifying researchers as sceptics
>or believers, there are some who prefer to view these phenomenon
>objectively and are not trying to prove a theory either way, but
>just find answers to the questions.

And there are some like yourself who are not objective and seem
to want to proove any theory you can as long as it is a mundane
explanation. mundane is OK as long as it is the correct answer.

>There are some who prefer to view these phenomenon
>objectively and are not trying to prove a theory either way, but
>just find answers to the questions.

But you have already said that if evidence comes to light that
the Balls of light may be involved or creating some of the
circles that appear, then these are your words Mr Spurrier:

>Those allegedly made by anomalous balls of lights should be
>considered hoaxed, if it can be proved they have actually
>created a formation..

Well there is no need to go on any further Mr Spurrier, another
Mundane moaning minny, who has got into ufology because off the
top of your own head you have decided to force upon others of
different thoughts, your hypothesis.


The Mundane Rap:

Party people in the place, lets see you all moving your hands
in the air, but wave them like you just dont care.
(In a kind of mundane fashion at least)
Its a plane or a kite or the weather, or venus plasma my granny
my dog, im mundane man with my mundane rap

Chorus:

I'm mundane man with mundane crap, but I can rap,
I can rap.i keep coming out with the same old crap,
Swamp gas, bin lid chinese kid, Roswell, Ramey every ones
talking about the mundane rap, its crap..
Im mundane man with a mundane rap, I'll protect you from
the truth, the truth might make you leep about the roof.
Its the Rap the mundane rap, I'll keep spouting off the mundane rap
To dream to die to sleep, my lord my god my nob,


So perhaps you can show us some of your sterling research, and
keep off the back of those those who simply wish to put the
information in the public domain, and simply allow the public to
make there own minds up..

Another agenda driven power mad mundane man in our midst that
his right as an individual, so this is a warning.

Watch out watch out the mundane men are about

>Are we really going to give the credit to hoaxers, for the deep
>and meaningful and historic symbology of crop circles?

>Yes, because that is the what's happening.

Pray tell Mr Spurrier, can you show us this evidence that
although we all know that some circles are hoaxes, you can now
proove through that all the cirlcles are hoaxes..

In no more than twenty words, can you give a brief but mundane
explanation, as to the origin of the whole thing?

To where we have to look to read all about this evidence to back
up your claims? Pperhaps the weBsite address should be:

Http//www.mundane/mundane/

I am sure that there are good rational mundane answers to some
things that happen in and around our lives, but not all of them,
however what ever the correct origin of the ball lighting crop
mystery is. Even if the true answer is mundane as long as it is
the truth then it will do for me..

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                  Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 05:50:23 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:05:28 -0400
Subject: Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

Source:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/skywatch/msg03524.shtml

Stig

*******

Skywatch Mailing List

(Skyopen) FW: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

From: "Skywatch International"
Subject: (Skyopen) FW: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 07:00:56 -0500

-----Original Message-----
From: gerry [mailto:gerry@farshore.force9.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 1998 6:42 AM
To: Skywatch International
Subject: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

Source: The People [London]
Date: October 18 1998
Header: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

WORRIED Winston Churchill ordered a top-level probe into UFOs
when he was Premier, it was revealed yesterday.

The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, revealed the investigation as
he admitted the Government is holding at least 33 top-secret
files on UFOs.

The classified documents are held under lock and key at the
Public Record Office in Kew, West London, and Lord Irvine says
there may be more in other Government departments.

But the information contained is so sensitive it cannot be
released with the other 23 files reporting sightings between
1943 and 1967 which have already been made public.

Churchill asked his air minister Lord Cherwell to investigate in
1952, writing: "What does all this stuff about flying saucers
amount to? What can it mean? What is the truth?"

He was told 12 days later there was no evidence flying saucers
existed.

Yet official documents show the War Office received reports that
flying saucers were spotted by the RAF's 115 Squadron on bombing
raids over Germany in 1943.

And in the year Churchill asked for his investigation, another
two sightings had been reported to the War Office.

Lord Irvine's statement follows questioning by Lord Hill-Norton,
Chief of the Defence Staff in the 1970s, who says UFO evidence
is being concealed.

::: end :::

||||||||||||||> via <||||||||||||||
Gerry @ Far Shores Web Site
http://www.farshore.force9.co.uk
||||||||||||||> FAR NEWS --- Ride the Wave <||||||||||||||
                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


***************************
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL INC.
(A Non-Profit Organization)

Administrative:                 Membership:
Postings/Mailing
PO Box 900393                   PO Box 801
PO Box 2154
Palmdale, CA 93590-0393         Leander, TX 78646-0801
Elk City, OK 73648
USA                             USA
USA

Skywatch International Inc. and this list service are not
responsible for content or authenticity of posts.

Skywatch International, Inc. endorses no political
candidate for office due to the organization's status as a
non-profit corporation."

"What could be stranger than the truth?"

To post send your message to skypost@unix.ltlb.com

Next Message | Previous Message | List Surrounding Messages

This archive of mailing list messages is provided as a free
public courtesy. It is maintained automatically. The
webmaster has no control over content, does not review
these messages and accepts no liability for the accuracy of
information contained herein. Responsibility for this
material rests solely with the author and mailing list
moderator (if any).

Note: This is a temporary archive only; this message will
be deleted eventually. See main page for more info.

Mailing lists archived on this server*
***
*****
*******
*********
This site is supported by the Research Center
Bookstore.
Please visit our catalog if you appreciate our free web
services.

Created: Sun Oct 18 08:47:23 EDT 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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:58:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:33:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:00:42 -0400
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>The 'estimate' is an alleged document that no one alive has ever
>>seen, no one has ever found and that can only be discussed
>>through second and third hand references. It is an alleged
>>document without provenance. It was never alleged to be a
>>scientific document, but a top secret intelligence document
>>produced to give the best intelligence estimate of then present
>>situation. As such, its value was tied to the time it was
>>allegedly produced and only as accurate and good as the
>>intelligence of the moment subject to change at a moment's
>>notice. But a turning point for ufology in relation to science?
>>You're comparing apples and oranges.

>Ed I think you are either being intentionally misleading here or
>unaware of the following because Loren E. Gross in his UFOs: A
>History Volume 2:1948 pp. 51. states the following:

>"Supporting testimony of the documents existence (Project Sign's
>Estimate of the Situation) later came from Dr. J. Allen Hynek
>who told West Coast journalist Robert B. Klinn and David Branch
>in 1972 did not only did he know about the document, but that he
>even had read. Keyhoe, evidently using the influence he had with
>Dewey Fournet, got a peek at a three-page summary of the
>"estimate" due to a sympathetic colonel in Air Force
>intelligence."

I am aware that both Fournet and Ruppelt have claimed to have
seen it. Fournet, by the way, is still alive. Hynek is claimed
to have said, "I read it" in the above Klinn & Branch article. I
have all of Branch and Klinn articles in the Santa Ana Register.
It is five columns wide and that is the only thing it quotes
Hynek on. Nothing else. Except for the claim that Hynek said "I
read it" directly to the authors, the entire article is about
Keyhoe talking about the 'estimate'. Nothing about how Hynek saw
it, when he saw it, who showed to him, what the document
allegedly said, what he thought the implication was, nothing
except that he allegedly told both writers: "I read it". David
Jacobs in "The UFO Controversy In America" also claims that
Hynek "...verified its existance", but he never gives us the
source of this extraordinary claim. When we check Hynek's books,
he makes no reference to personally having seen it, much less
having read it. As a matter of fact, he addressed it in the
third person by saying "the historic 'estimate of the
situation'" in "The UFO Experience", page 173, published the
same year he is alleged to be on record as confirming it.

The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
ordered destroyed in 1948. Hynek, of course, was hired in 1948
to consult for Project Sign, but he wasn't even cleared to read
the final report of Project Sign which he had contributed to
until it was declassified in 1964 (Vallee, Frontiers of
Science). It is apparent that if he did read the alleged
'estimate of the situation', it was after his Project Sign days.
After Project SIGN, Hynek was out of the picture as an Air Force
consultant until 1952. Fournet and Ruppelt did not come onto the
picture until 1952. If they saw the alleged document somebody
didn't destroy all copies of the top secret document as
allegedly ordered by the Chief. In other words, a major breach
of security. A copy of the document would of had to survive for
at least four years for Ruppelt, Fournet and Hynek to have read
it. Even if all copies had been destroyed, Top Secret documents
have control numbers and thus control registers with said
numbers identifying the documents. No linkage has been found to
any control register of Top Secret documents establishing that
the 'estimate' once existed. That doesn't mean the document
never existed. It simply means that provenance has never been
confirmed and independently verified.

>What clever wording you are using,"alleged document that no one
>alive has ever seen", did you tutor Bill Clinton? or do these
>wordings come from watching too many X-Files episodes?

No, I assist Loren Gross in providing, as he mentions it in his
acknowledgements to his 'UFOs, A History' series of booklets,
advice on his manuscripts among other things I have helped him
with. I already corrected myself that Fournet is still alive. I
spoke to Loren on this issue. He does not know of any
confirmation anywhere substantiating the claim of Klinn and
Branch about Hynek having read the 'estimate'. Next opportunity
I have to speak to either Jacques Vallee or Fred Beckman, I will
ask them if Hynek ever said anything to either of them whether
he had read and seen the 'estimate'.

By the way, a Branch and Klinn story "Ex-Consultant Rips USAF
Deception On UFOs" about Hynek and quoting him extensively on
Project SIGN ran 5/30/73 also in The Register, Santa Ana, CA. It
quotes Hynek talking about his days at Project SIGN and there is
not one word about the 'estimate of the situation' for whatever
it is worth.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:48:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:10:58 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>Ufology's problem is internal to itself. Debunking only works on
>>bunk.

>So...let me get this straight. A case pops up (Phoenix) in which
>a large scale sighting has occured. There can be no denial that
>something was seen due to (rare) media coverage and a large
>number of witnesses. The debunkers determine that flares were
>responsible for the lights seen, and proceed to rest comfortably
>in the chairs from which the determination was made. The media
>reports that flares were the cause. Meanwhile ufologists, not
>having the luxury of blanket explanations, continue plugging
>away and discover that the lights reported and videotaped share
>precisely NONE of the behavioral or physical characteristics of
f>lares. The media, having already heard a reasonable sounding
>explanation, yawns and turns away from the ufologists. What >
>remains is an unexplained sighting worthy of note not being
>"noted" any more by the public. Not "bunk" at all, yet the
>effect of the debunkers has been damage to an interesting case.

>I concede to your ramblings only to the extent that ufologists
>in America had a unique opportunity in the above case to mount a
>major PR campaign, and blew it. Some fantastic work was done,
>but no one seems to know it except those already more than
>casually interested in the subject. At least all the major
>media outlets covered the story when it first broke.>


The Phoenix Case (March 13, 1997) is not a good one to tout as
an example of either exemplary UFO research or exemplary
UFOs..... unless you specify the events between 8 and 9 PM.

If you include the sightings and videotapes from 10 PM you are
including, with high probability, very distant bright
illumination flares.

Triangulations I carried out several months ago showed that the
lights were about 70 miles from Phoenix, based on widely
separated videotapes (Krzyston, Rairdon).

I estimate that Tom King's video also points in the direction of
the position specified by the K and R videos.

See:

www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html

(Doc Barry) for the most compete analysis of the 10 PM Phoenix
lights.

Immediately after the sightings the media picked up on' the 8-9
PM sightings which had many witnesses as well as the 10 PM
sightings.

The 10 PM sightings were emphasized because

(a) there were multiple-videos which made _great_ TV (especialy
    Mike Krzyston's video which shows an arc of lights forming),

(b) the witnesses were certain the lights must have been close,
    i.e., over Phoenix, because they were so bright, and

(c) the Air Force stated it had nothing up at the time.

The idea of flares was first proposed by the investigating
ufologists but when the AF denied dropping flares the ufologists
began to think... UFOs.

Also, the 10 PM events were connected with the 8-9 PM events.

The 8-9 PM events involved sightings of what appaered to be a
large object from 50 miles or so north of Phoenix southward
nearly to Tucson..and then perhaps back north.

It was proposed that the bright lights seen at 10 PM were either
lights created by the 8-9 PM "craft" or were actually attached
to it.

Anyway, in the press reporting and UFO analysis, the sightings
got mixed up so that when the Army Nation Guard admitted in July
1997 that they had, in fact dropped flares at high altitude at
about 10 PM that night, it was assumed by many that flares
explained everything.

The witnesses did not believe that..... some still don't.....
but in my opinion flares are 'it' for 10 PM






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                           Fall 98 UFO*BC Magazine

From: UFO*BC - David Pengilly <david_pengilly@dccnet.com>
Date: 18 Oct 1998 21:44:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:27:07 -0400
Subject: Fall 98 UFO*BC Magazine


 NEW UFO*BC QUARTERLY MAGAZINE IS READY!!

Our Fall 98 issue has just rolled off the presses and it looks
good! We have improved the quality of the paper and the text,
this issue is actually printed instead of being photocopied!

This issue contains:
- "Crop Formation at Vanderhoof" by Chad Deetken
- "Buffalo Mutilation Incident" by Don Vanden Hoorn
- "Just Passing Through" by Graham Conway
- "West Vancouver and Beyond" by Bill Oliver
- "Seven UFOs Photographed over Tagish Lake" by Martin Jasek
- plus Sightings, Historical cases, and more!!!

Just $5 an issue, or $20 for a yearly subscription. You will
love it! If anyone is interested in a subscription, but would
like to see a sample first, just e-mail your mailing address
and I will send you a free copy - no obligation.

********************************************************
UFO*BC is always eager to hear about unusual B.C. sightings,
both past and present. Please contact us if you have a story
to tell, or come across one in an old magazine or newspaper.
Our e-mail address is contactus@ufobc.org and our Hotline
number is 604-878-6511.
********************************************************

If you have comments please e-mail me at:
david@ufobc.org

Thank you,
Dave Pengilly,
UFO*BC






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:42:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:41:15 PDT

>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these
>>are some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the
>>Summary Report of the Scientific Review Panel:

>>      "On the other hand, the review panel was not convinced that
>>any of the evidence involved currently unknown physical
>>processes or pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial
>>intelligence."

>Of course that was not the panel's intention. It was making
>judgments from the limited number of cases it looked at. It
>found those cases impressive and worthy of further scientific
>inquiry, at the end of which - presumably a long process - it
>would be possible to come to a far more firm judgment about
>the nature and origin of UFO phenomena.

The above is a pure fabrication by Jerome Clark. We all know
where the report is online. The quotes come from the part of the
report directly attributed to the Scientific Review Panel, not
Peter Sturrock's rendition. The viewpoints of the Scientific
Review Panel are the only ones relevant of consideration, not
the paid home team announcer's.

>But haven't we gone through this before?

Yes we have. It is known as intellectual dishonesty on your
part. Give a specific chapter and quote to support your
allegation that the review panel was impressed with the cases
and they were worthy of further study? You can't quote the
scientific review panel because they said just the opposite.
Section 14 was written and credited to Peter Sturrock. He is not
a member of the review panel. All the sections up to 13 were
written by Sturrock and his team which includes partials
attributed to the review panel and those parts in essence
reflect the summaries they are credited as writers of - exactly
the section I quoted from online - the only part of the entire
report that is directly credited to the scientific review panel
and not Peter Sturrock or his team.

>Or are we to be subjected to yet more special pleading - and
>quotations out of sense or context - from would-be debunkers.
>The Ed Stewarts of the world, alas, seem only to want to
>snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Those who want a
>more honest and realistic picture of the panel than Stewart
>provides ought to go to the SSE website and read the whole
>report.

Absolutely, but the only part that is independent is the Review
Panel's conclusions, not Peter Sturrock's who was hired by LR to
organize the whole thing, irrespective of Jerome Clark's
interpretation of what the Sturrock Panel is alleged to
represent.

>Meantime, the rest of us can scratch our heads at
>the strange things Ed wants us to believe: that a report
>attacked, sometimes virulently, by skeptics and debunkers
>is a report that validates the skeptic/debunker position.

There is no virulent attack. There is simple quoting exact
conclusions from the review panel. Nothing else is needed, not
Jerome Clark's pitch, or Peter Sturrock's pitch in attempt to
salvage an otherwise weak, disappointing and pathetic showing.
The review panel confirmed what I have been arguing online, what
Oberg said over twenty years ago. It is that simple. Read the
scientific review panel conclusions and stop making up things
that the scientific review panel has never said.

>Ed's reading of the Sturrock panel is bizarre, but much of what
>we hear from this man, as we have seen, answers to that
>adjective.

It is apparent that you have no respect for accuracy in quoting
and attribution. My quoting of the Scientific Review Panel must
have been seen as bizarre to you since it does not reflect your
intellectual dishonesty which you use to color just about
everything you write on this subject. Read the scientific review
panel comments and weep. You can't change them. And you can't
attribute Peter Sturrock's attempt to salvage a dismal review by
the scientific panel to the scientific panel members.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
_---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:13:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:03:54 PDT

<snip>

>>As is pointed out somewhere, probably in "The UFO Book",
>>debunkers continually use the anecdotal accounts in their
>>attempts at explanations - and when either debunkers or the
>>honestly skeptical / honest ufologist succeed in identifying a
>>mundane cause it is due to the accuracy of the testimony. But
>>when equally or more complete testimony leads to an
>>unidentifiable case, with the potential to provide scientific
>>information on the phenomenon, the debunker has no room for the
>>observations of the witness.

><snip>

>Do we (the UFO research community) have any example/s of where a
>debunker has accepted the evidence of a witness _against_ a UFO
>explanation yet not accepted the very same person's evidence
>_for_ a UFO explanation?>

>Or even the same scenario but two debunkers - one disbelieving
>their _for_evidence and anothe believing their _against_
>evidence?

I don't know about the second case you suggest, but for the
first case I can cite that of Pilot Terauchi of the Japan
Airlines flight 1628:


Nov. 1986; crew of jumbo jet flying over Alaska sees objects,
etc, communicate with air traffic control, some radar evidence
as well, was invesigated by the FAA in early 1987; CSICOP first
says they misidentified planets; then changed explanation to
moonlight reflected from clouds; long story.... I can send
text-only version to interested people.


Captain Terauchi claimed to have seen UFOs during his Nov. 16
flight. Skeptics disbelieved (of course).

In early 1987 Terauchi reported another sighting..... which he
this time identified immediately as (if I recall correctly) "city
lights reflected from clouds."

Skeptics believed (of course)...... but then used the fact that
he reported this sighting as evidence that he was ..... perhaps
a little bit off for thinking at first that the reflections were
UFOs.

Oh, well. you can't win with skeptics..... at least of the
debunker variety,

In case you don't know, the chief UFO analyst (and disc-washer)
for CSIPCOP is none other than the "K" man himself.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                     Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs

From: Ron Jorgenson <rjorgens@whidbey.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 01:49:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:17:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:19:28 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Film Clip Of 3 Orange Fireballs

>As much as I hate to state the obvious, your best bet is to
>contact the station. By all means, let us know what turns up,
>sounds like an interesting one.

>Greg


Greg,

I've been in touch with Larry Clark and Joseph Trainor, please
refer to the upcoming issue of UFO Roundup. Not much more info
than what I gave.

It was a Cleveland FOX station that got the clip over the lake.

These things tend to disappear from sight after a brief showing
in the local news.

I repeat that they looked like bolides or space junk to me, but
according to the story they were in sight for too long. the clip
wasn't long enough to say.

I would like to know who the "local astronomer" was that said
"they were much too slow to be meteors".

The video caught my eye mainly because it was a daylight video,
and the background (trees and power lines/poles) gave a good
frame of reference, lending the clip a sense of reality.


Thanks for the support,

Ron







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts?

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 04:51:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:22:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts?


>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Crop Circles - More Thoughts?
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Ponder on this one:

Are we allowed to ask questions without the threat of legal
retort?

>Could it be that Crop Circles are the product of Microwave Based
>Technologies, which have been tested by the military over the
>years or are they from an ET based technology which the Army
>most certainly would like to keep under wraps at all costs.

Considering your theory first, don't you think they would have
scrapped the testing a long time ago, as crop formations haven't
really developed tremendously since the 80's. Also what would
the purpose of the technology be other than to flatten crop?

Why are technological advances continually credited to et's, man
over the centuries has managed well enough. I suppose the
argument to that is "the et's have helped us", but then why the
need for crop formations with hidden messages?

Again you consider ufologists as either  believers or sceptics,
when there are those who investigate and discuss the overall
subject without a one sided view. It seems to me that the circle
makers have proved they can create formations, complex
formations at that, and complete this at night, so why is there
a continuing effort to look for other worldly explanations?

So other than BOL and theories of advanced et microwave
technology, what evidence is there that proves crop formations
are made other than by humans? If I can ask again, what tests do
you carry out to ascertain the so called genuine et formations
from the man-made ones? Perhaps physical trace evidence will
help close the matter on whether crop formations are man-made or
not.

>QUOTE OF THE NIGHT: People create their own questions because
>they're afaid to look sraight. All you have to do is look
>straight and see the road, and when you see it dont sit looking
>at it-----walk.

>               Ayn Rand (1905-1982)
>               Russian-Born American Writer.

Absolutely, my point entirely.

Tony





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                         Re: Threats Within Ufology

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:37:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:53:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology


Threats communicated via the Internet should be treated the same
as those recieved via telephone or through snail-mail. If you
actually feel threatened and believe that you (and/or your
family) are in danger, contact the police.

The Internet is merely a new form of (nearly) instantaneous
communication that has accelerated the ability to communicate
with (or perhaps threaten) those with whom you don't agree. The
problems we're defining here are certainly not new, but the
"net" has made it easier in some respects.

As far as Art Bell is concerned, I believe that he will make a
statement tonight during the first hour of his regular time slot
and perhaps that will alleviate some of the conspiratorial
thinking that has erupted around his departure (which is
apparently temporary). A post last evening of a statement by
Richard Hoagland indicated that he had spoken with Art, and
indicated that Art's decision wasn't the result of some grand
conspiracy:

>I will not divulge details, except to say that his (to many of
>his friends) completely enigmatic actions are sincere; they are
>NOT mere "hype" for "Coast-to-Coast"; they are NOT "positioning"
>for some mysterious, behind-the-scenes contract negotiations
>with Premiere (his parent network). They are simply rooted in a
>complex family problem, which has been building to a crisis for
>a year ... and which climaxed so "messily" on Monday night.

This does not sound like Art's problems are the result of his
involvement in investigating this (or any other) genre. This
sounds like a very personal matter that Art must deal with
alone, and I'm not sure that idle speculation regarding the
conspiratorial overtones of it are warranted or in his best
interest.

I trust that Art will be back on the air soon, and that will be
the best time to lend our support for his difficulties.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:57:37 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:00:24 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:47:46 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:19:26 -0500

>>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>>>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>>>Hi Errol and list,

>>>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>>>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>>>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>>>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>>>opinions.

>>Okay

>>>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>>>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>>>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>>>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>>>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>>>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>>>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>>>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>>>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>>>pilots saw.

>>>What your take on this? Looking for input.

>>I agree totally. I set up the F-16 in the far east. I was with
>>the bed-down cadre in Okinawa and Korea in 1980 assigned to the
>>6100 LSS at Kadena AFB. It is an F-16, and that is a UFO, and
>>damned excellent evidence.

>>I don't usually comment, but I just had to respond to your post.

>>Best wishes.

>>>From the author of: Alien Rapture - The Chosen,

>>Edgar Fouche


>Damn. . . Guys! Admittedly not having the best copy, I reviewed
>the segment very carefully and could detect the definitive pilot
>head movement described -- But! Why has no one mentioned the
>very definite shadow the UFO casts as it drops into the clouds!
>Now _that_ was a dazzler, easily seen in even my bad copy!

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com


We're just creating more modern mythology here. I looked at the
segment repeatedly over the weekend and I am convinced that the
head movement mentioned is a figment of someone's imagination.
I just do not see any such thing.

Yes, the shadow is a nice touch. Easily done with a number of
computer image programs.

This could be real film, but considering that the bulk of the
program was a deliberate hoax I'd be wary of giving it too much
consideration.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:15:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:38:29 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:59:46 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>That all sounds impressive, Ed. And I'm sure you're providing a
>service that will prove invaluable. What I don't understand is
>why you spent the last couple months beating up on many of the
>people who created this information in the first place, claiming
>that none of it was done in a proper manner and was therefore
>worthless.

I don't beat up on the people that report UFOs. But, I have
always strongly objected to people that try to present their
belief systems disguised and shrouded as if UFO reports offered
evidential proof of those belief systems. Second, I don't recall
ever arguing that the evidence is worthless. I have argued that
it is not proof of alien cruiser traffic jams over or heads and
that it is worthless as proof of any hypothesis because no one
has ever been able to provide linkage to the evidence. If you
have a bunch of data points that are are not linked you have no
signal, just a bunch of noise.

>Now, you collect it, rearrange it to your liking and
>proclaim it ready for redistribution. What gives? Are you going
>to call it the "Bunkless Database According to Ed"?

If you ever read any of my published indexes, two things will
stand out. 1) the index is complete and not discriminatory in
any way, plus its accuracy can be independently verified. In
other words, every article and every author is indexed. I don't
just index authors I like or happen to agree with 2) I don't use
my published works to try to convince anyone of the validity or
lack of validity of any hypothesis related to the UFO problem.
In other words, I simply don't know what the UFO problem is all
about and I have no vested interest where the evidence might
ultimately lead to. My published works are completely devoid of
any claim whatsoever. It makes for very dull reading. My books
are not quite as exciting to read as dictionaries are.

>Please accept my apology for my dog-alongside-the-car analogy.

No problem. I respect dogs more than I do most ufologists.

>Ed, all the stuff you've collected has been there there all
>along. Access to the data has never been the issue. Interest in
>the data has. I have no wish to discourage you, but do you
>really think your collection will garner interest where none has
>existed so far?

I am afraid that access is a problem. For example, there is only
one place in the US outside of private hands that has a complete
run of FSR, The Library of Congress. Many of the important
accumlulations have disappeared after the individual died.
Surviving relatives don't necessarily have an interest and
dispose of all the case data and relevant correspondence that
was gathered over the years with no provisions having been made
as to the disposition of the research material. Fires and floods
destroys important collections each year. There has been a
concerted effort over the past few years among a few select
researchers to duplicate UFO research holdings and have it at
diversified locations to insure the chances of its survivability
for future generations. It is getting harder and harder to
access UFO data from the past because of all of these factors.

My collection is not relevant. It is only a resource used by me
to build research tools for serious researchers, and I am
looking 100, 200 years from now. Someone will ask 'Now, what was
that all about at the end of the 20th Century?' They are not
going to find out by reading Jerry Clark's Encyclopedia. From
that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective. To find out
actual relevancy, they will need to independently research the
subject and use whatever resources have survived. If the
literature is not indexed, future researchers won't ever know
what might be out there for them to find, read and study, as
well as research in a timely manner. For example, are you aware
of Loren Gross's UFOs: A History ongoing series of booklets?
Over 3,000 pages already published spread over 30 volumes
discussing the chronological history of UFOs up to 1959. Not
many people are. Loren Gross is a true serious asset to ufology
because he does not allow his belief system to interfere with
his self-chosen task of historian and does not attempt to use
his pen to influence others. He is not afraid to write a genuine
history. He doesn't ignore or distort relevant events because he
doesn't like the person or because the event goes against his
belief system. One reason why Robert Todd's contributions have
been so relevant to our understanding and interpretations of
ufology and government involvement is that he has found out what
government documents have been out there and shared those
discoveries with other UFO researchers who then knew what
government documents there were to study and research further.
He is one person that has successfully cracked a large portion
of the bureaucratic walls around this subject and consequently
provided a better vision for all of us of what is/is not part of
the UFO problem.

>In addition, it's my understanding that Mr.
>Clark has been working along the same lines, so why loose your
>venom on him? Because he goes out on a limb to add personal
>insight (the nerve of some people!) to the data?

Please, don't confuse the two of us. The differences are
insurmountable. Interpretations that are not supported by the
data are nothing but fabrications at worse and wishful thinking
at best. He doesn't just add 'personal insight'. He manipulates,
adds meanings that are not supported by the data and creastes
interpretations when data is not even present. He has done all
those things right here on this mailing list. He is
intellectually dishonest and not to be trusted as a historian.

Ufology is filled with people that already know what the UFO
problem is all about and are more interested in convincing other
people of their belief and agenda than what the data might
actually lead to. That leads them to the use of selective data.
If it doesn't support their belief, ignore it and maybe the
other person won't find out about it. Case in point: Lorenzo
Kimball, Roswell medical supply officer. He was interviewed by
pro-Roswell ufo investigators years ago, but no mention was ever
made by them of even his existance until Dennis Stacy on this
list made an issue of it. His testimony is very relevant.
Unfortunately, he doesn't support the Roswell scenario that
promoters would like everyone to accept.

By the way, do you know why we have Project Blue Book files
today archived and available for research? The answer may well
surprise you.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 07:39:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:16:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts


>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:21:26 -0400
>Subject: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

Roy,

>Not everyone there could see these lights, so could this suggest
>a psyhcic connection?

I think that this is a possible explanation. Earth energies and
spirit phenomena can be seen by natural psychics and likewise
earth energies can be sensed by anyone who has a psychic gift.
These balls of light have been seen by psychics while on an
outdoor meditation, they put them down to earth energies
generated by themselves and natural earth energies - nothing
extraterrestrial. If these lights are only visible to psychics,
then it is more likely than not that they can be controlled
using the psychic's mind. Let me explain - if you see a light in
a crop field, being both a psychic and a UFO investigator, you
will automatically assume that this light may have something to
do with the extraterrestrial/crop circle phenomenon. Although
you may not consciously believe this, it may be that your
subconscious mind associates a simple earth energy with an ET
crop circle creator. It would be then possible for you to
_think_ the light to move in what looks like intelligent
manoeuvers, espescially if there are more than one psychic in
the group. Could you tell me if everyone described the same
movements of the light?

Looking at crop circles and lights from another angle, is it not
possible that the circle makers themselves dowse a corn field
first to find the earth energies etc to create the circle on?
This could also explain why many of the circle makers have seen
the lights themselves but due to their outlook on the phenomena
of crop circles, they could look at the lights more objectively
and claim that although the lights were there, they were not
under intelligent control (not saying the circle makers aren't
intelligent <g>)

>I later found that one of the canadian ladies was native
>american cherokee indian.And that she was also a healer, who
>then went onto to describe the encounters of light , and how
>this light has played a major part of the healing process, in a
>wide variety of cases.

This is a common occurence with healers. Some see lights while
others see blocks of colour.

>I have heard another term for these lights, Nature Spirits are
>they an exstension of us and what we are within the structure of
>all things cosmic:

From my understanding, nature spirits are viewed as small
independant balls of light that tend to concentrate on the
surroundings of natural things.

>People create their own questions because
>they're afaid to look sraight.

Why look for a paranormal explanation to everything then?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version Of

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:07:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:25:27 -0400
Subject: Re: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version Of


>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 21:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: The Walthamstow Sightings: The Full Version Of Events
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Roy

Recently I have been investigating satellites and satellite
looking objects. Given the approx. times of the sightings on the
11th October and long/latitude of Walthamstow you will find that
there were satellites heading north and north east as your
investigator states. However, also in the vicinity was a low
orbit satellite which are often misidentified as UFOs, the NORAD
tracking id number for the object on the Sunday is 24968.

On the following evening there is another low orbit satellite
identical to the one seen on the Sunday, the path taken by this
and its optimum magnitude occurs in the almost the exact same
area as the one the previous evening. The NORAD id number for
this object is 24969.

I hope this is of help to your investigation into the
Walthamstow sightings.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 04:18:55 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:28:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 98 17:05:17 PDT

>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
>>From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Sagan, however, stacked the deck with skeptical
>scientists, most of whom (e.g., Philip Morrison, whose own
>knowledge, such as it was, was based, by his own admission, on
>occasional casual reading of the UFO literature) had little or
>no investigative experience and were largely unfamiliar with the
>evidence.

Typical Jerome Clark distortion we have come to experience on
this mailing list. The title of Philip Morrison's presentation
was 'The Nature of Scientific Evidence: A Summary'. Dr. Steven
J. Dick, a reference recommended by Jerome Clark on a previous
post for his observations on "Edward U. Condon, UFOs and the
Various Cultures of Science" describes Morrison's contribution
to the conference thusly in his book 'The Biological Universe',
page 306 - from a chapter in the book which according to Steven
J. Dick was directly based from his notes of his previously
cited paper by Jerome Clark.


        "Philip Morrison, with his penchant for zeroing in on
the significant issues, argued that the debate came down to the
nature of scientific evidence. 'Reproducibility' was not enough,
for one could not reproduce an aurora or eclipse, nor was 'hard
evidence' enough (or Darwin would have been in trouble). The
prime requirement for responsible evidence, he held, drawing a
parallel with the nineteenth-century acceptance of meteorites as
extraterrestrial, was 'independant and multiple chains of
evidence, each capable of satisfying a link-by-link test of
meaning.' Neither the extraterrestrial hypothesis nor any other
explanation of UFOs had multiple chains of evidence or a
link-by-link test."


A physicist arguing that reproducibility was not the smoking gun
data! In other words, you don't have to duplicate a flying
saucer or a UFO sighting in a test tube. A physicist argueing
that hard evidence was not the smoking gun data! In other words,
soft data (such as anecdotal) is permissible evidence and human
beings can be in that chain of evidence. This paper is probably
one of the most important papers for ufology because it
dispenses with some of the arguements made against ufological
evidence by some skeptics and it places the nature of evidence
in its proper perspective. It is critical reading for ufologists
because Philip Morrison outlines what ufology needs to do to
advance any of its hypothesis in the world of science and he
shows ufology that it is attainable. Wow!!! Carl Sagan sure
stacked the deck against ufology on this conference by inviting
Philip Morrison to participate.

>After that Sagan allied himself with hard-line debunkers and
>wrote ill-informed attacks on UFOs and other heresies, refusing
>to investigate cases personally

In other words, back in 1969 Philip Morrison, at Carl Sagan's
invitation, explained the nature of evidence to ufology and
since then ufology hasn't done anything with it making Carl
Sagan wonder if ufology ever had any worthwhile evidence to
start with.

>If this is tolerance, ignorance is strength, war is peace, and I am
>emperor of the moon.

>>Please, it is not necessary to demonize a respected man and a
>>wonderful communicator ('Cosmos' probably brought many people
>>into the mind frame necessary to think about UFOs etc) just
>>because he disagrees with you and may actually have good arguing
>>points, just as you most likely do to support your position.

>Interesting that our correspondent here uses the verb
>"demonize." Sagan, as his 'Demon-Haunted World' book makes
>clear, charged, and may have even believed on some level, that
>people who hold views about controversial anomalies different
>from his are little better than superstition-crazed
>demonologists. Sagan's role in ufology is not, to be fair, so
>uniformly dismal as Donald Menzel's was,

Just a minor point on Menzel. We have all been told how demon
Menzel's debunking of UFOs was so devastating to ufology that to
this date he still exerts an influence even though buried in his
grave for a quarter century. Interesting that while alive he
wasn't able to convince the Air Force of his debunking
explanations. He must of been some kind of influence to
accomplish from the grave what the Air Force refused to listen
to while he was alive! On another note, it was Sagan's stacked
deck of skeptical scientists, including Menzel, that lobbied the
Air Force to preserve intact the Project Blue Book files for
future generations to be able to study and research.

>but it was not among
>his better or more admiral moments as a scientist, and it is
>foolish - and blind to unhappy reality - to praise it.

Jerome Clark also took issue with an obituary that Barry
Greenwood wrote in JUST CAUSE praising Carl Sagan's
contributions and wrote a typical Jerome Clark letter for which
Barry Greenwood rebutted in the following issue, JUST CAUSE #50,
03/97, pages 4-6. The rebuttal is too lengthy to re-type here in
its entirety. Suffice to say that Jerry Clark's pettiness and
obsession with a dead exobiologist did not go unanswered. The
initial paragraph of Barry Greenwood's response should be enough
to make its point:


        "I am sorry that my memory of Carl Sagan's influence on
not just my own interest in the search for extraterrestrial life
but on science's as well has bothered you. It is however
precisely what I had expected from a good chunk of the UFO
community. Sagan was critical of the notion that aliens are
visiting the earth. He did not deny that UFO reports should be
investigated. In fact in his essay from 'UFOs: A Scientific
Debate' (ed. Sagan and Page, 1972), Sagan argued for judgement to
be withheld on UFOs, that "there isn't enough data....and that
an open mind should be kept." [Remember now this is the same
conference that Jerome Clark claims Sagan "stacked the deck"
with the likes of Philip Morrison] After that scientific
symposium was held, 25 years passed. Making a pro-ET judgement
on UFOs is contingent upon whether evidence is provided by
researchers to support such a conclusion. For Sagan to make a
statement favoring UFOs as extraterrestrial he would have to
have proof. Anything less would be dabbling in probabilities,
possibilities, educated guesswork, just plain guesswork, or
personal beliefs. If Sagan were off base in his negative views
on alien visitation, then one case, only one example need be
provided to prove so. Which one is it? Or several? Do you care
to put yourself on the line on this matter?


Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                         Re: Threats Within Ufology

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:02:43 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:29:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:16:51 EDT
>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:02:57 -0400
>Subject: Re: Threats Within Ufology

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:42:36 -0400
>>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com
>>Subject: Threats Within Ufology
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net

Earlier Sue Lawrence wrote:

><snip>

>>Recently I have heard of various people within ufology,
>>including some on this List, who have received threats related
>>to their UFO research.


Max Burns response was:

>Sue, Please correct me if I am wrong, a while ago were you
>telephoned by a man who claimed he was part of the. ufology
>scene. during your long telephone conversation, he turned
>unpleasant and became an un welcome caller.

<snip>

>There are safegurds for phone answering, and the bottom line is
>that if you feel that the threat is a real, you must get the
>police involved as this behaviour is not acceptable under any
>circumstances and must be dealt with.

Absolutely!

If it isn't already obvious, at the very least, anyone in this
position should get caller I.D. and call waiting I.D. It's cheap
and doesn't allow the caller to get his/her "foot in the door".
Personally, I never pick up the phone if it reads "anonymous" or
"unavailable" or "no data sent". Some of my friends that have
unlisted numbers find this a bit annoying, but I find it well
worth the inconvenience. In addition, for very little, one can
get a 'personalized ring' as a second, unlisted number. It comes
in on the same phone line so it's cheaper than a second line.
Only give it to people you know. Beyond that, there are
inexpensive 'lock-out' devices and services where your phone
won't even ring unless the people calling know the access code.
Lastly, there's call block and call trace, both very cheap and
very effective.

And, contrary to popular belief, it is totally legal to record
phone calls coming into your house for your own reference or as
evidence if your life or property is threatened. You do not have
to notify the other person. The only catch is that you can't
play the tapes for anyone else other than a judge or someone in
law enforcement or your lawyer. Playing the tapes for anyone
else is considered an invasion of the other person's right to
expected privacy and you can get sued, even if they were in the
wrong.

Of course, none of this will prevent someone from doing real
harm, if that is their intention. On the other hand, threats are
generally designed to create a particular response. If they
can't get the message through, then the effort for them might
become more trouble than it's worth. Cowards that make phoned in
threats are scared to confront their intended victim in person.
In addition, they fear getting caught. If they can't phone the
victim, then they must try sending something in writing. This is
usually their downfall. Letters or other correspondence becomes
hard evidence linking them to the crime. Either they realize
this and back off or they send the letters and eventually get
caught. In any case, never hesitate to call the police. Despite
the "X-Files" paranoia that many believe to be true, the police
(for better or for worse) are the only legal "enforcement"
avenue open to individuals that feel their liberty and life are
being threatened.

Take care, all.

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                             Alms For The Poor?

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:25:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:37:17 -0400
Subject: Alms For The Poor?


In another thread (The failure of /'Obergian Debunking),
Mr.Mortellaro offered this very good insight:

>My two cents used to buy a seltzer and a pretzel. That was about
>the same time I became interested in UFOlogy and astronomy. The
>statement above (debunking only works on bunk) is revealing. The
>culpably ignorant (debunkers as a rule) have not been successful
>at being credible. Not to this writer anyway. Most of the
>criticism I've heard, most of the explanations I've heard from
>debunkers has had less credibility than the events which they
>attempt to debunk.

>I do, however, agree that much of UfoLogy's problems stem from
>it's inability to agree one with the other, internally. But
>properly handled, and it appears to be so in this venue, this
>can be healthy.

I feel the same.

But more to the point, inability to agree is not something that
is unique to Ufology, as many would like to believe. The 'real'
scientific world of medicine, physics, electronics and many
others is full of instances where conflict of opinion is the
rule of the day. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that many
fields thrive on the competition created by opposing views. It
becomes a driving force behind the need for grants and/or
commercial funding for research, whether the end goal be a cure
for cancer or a new micro-chip.

And, I think, that this is the real catch.

'Real' science has the advantage of funding to support research.
'Non-Science' (Ufology) has only good intentions and deep beliefs.

When debunkers want to shoot down the dismal results of Ufology,
they find as easy a target as rich kids making fun of their more
poorly dressed classmates. All kids are the same; only money
makes them look different. So it's a cheap shot.

Now, this is not to say that all scientific research has all the
funding it needs, but relatively speaking, 'real science'
operates on an open checkbook compared to the limited resources
available to UFO researchers.

So what does a debunker expect?

If examining sightings, close encounters, abductions, lights in
the sky etc. held the obvious promise of exposing a new,
marketable technology, real government scientists would be
trampled to death by the frenzied private corporations racing to
develope such a product. But more importantly, the fact that we
don't have first hand knowledge of corporations doing such
doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, already. Relatively
speaking, our government and military are amatures at keeping
technical secrets compared to the corporations that dominate the
financial and technological landscape.

(As an aside, I was never personally worried that the Soviet
Union would take over the United States. Communism would be the
end of big business! Before Congress could even decide to
declare a state of war, corporations like Sperry Univac and
Xerox would have mobilized their own troops and kicked some
serious Soviet butt!)

But I digress...

In short, most everything in the world (or the U.S. anyway) is
motivated by money and not knowledge. If the opposite were true,
then our teachers would be paid more than sit-on-their-duffs
CEOs. Knowledge is only considered 'valuable' when its end
result can be packed and shipped. Such an event will only occur
after the corporate bean counters conclude that research and
development costs will be offset by sales of the end product as
dictated by public demand.

To be fair, despite my own avid interest and belief in UFOs, I
would be hard pressed to invest a dime in pursuit of information
about sightings and or visitations for the sake of information
only. And even if someone showed me evidence that a new
technology might be derived from such information; given a
choice between investing in that and, say, Microsoft, I'd go
with a sure bet before I'd risk my money and the financial
welfare of my family on a 'belief', no matter how fascinating
the prospect of that technology might be.

Can we really expect anything more from debunkers or financially
motivated corporations and research groups?

So, to all you whiners and debunkers out there, complaining
about the sorry state of ufology, remember that you get out of
something only as much as you put in. Considering the miserable
lack of resources, I'm surprised that Ufology has anything to
show for itself at all; and I say that with pride.

Show me the money and I'll show you an alien.

Later,

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:14:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:47:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:19 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net

>In case you don't know, the chief UFO analyst (and disc-washer)
>for CSIPCOP is none other than the "K" man himself.

For those that might be interested, Phil Klass also writes a
bi-monthly newsletter called the Skeptics UFO Newsletter, or SUN
for short. Subscription rate for six issues is $15/year for
US/Canada and the overseas airmail rate is $20/year. Newsletters
are 8 pages long filled with quotes and claims from your
favorite ufologists, many of whom are subscribers themselves.
Check/money order should be made payable to:

                Philip J. Klass
                404 "N" St.  SW
                Washington, DC  20024

Phil Klass claims that all members of MJ-12 and the 'aviary' subscribe
to his newsletter.  Shouldn't you?

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
 ---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Whole Life Expo/Budd Hopkins, NY Oct/24

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:04:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:04:51 -0400
Subject: Whole Life Expo/Budd Hopkins, NY Oct/24


Hello All,

On Saturday Oct 24th the New York Whole Life Expo will feature a
workshop with Budd Hopkins, and a panel on the UFO/abduction
phenomenon.

The Whole Life Expo will be held at:

The Pennsylvania Hotel located on 7th Avenue between 32nd and
33rd streets in Manhattan.

Budds' workshop begins at 4pm and will be held in Room 2.
Tickets for the workshop can be purchased at the Expo.

From 1pm to 2pm a panel consisting of Peter Robbins, (co-author
of 'Left At Eastgate') Greg Sandow, (Journalist, UFO/abduction
researcher) and myself, John Velez, (abduction
experiencer/webmaster IF-AIC) will make a brief presentation and
answer questions.

I especially look forward to meeting folks from the UpDates list
and members of IF-AIC. Please be sure to introduce yourself if
you attend. The panel discussion will be held in (Room 8)
beginning at 1pm sharp.

The panel discusion is _free_ and included in the price of
admission to the Expo.

If you are in, or you are going to be in, the New York area on
Saturday, (Oct. 24th)I look forward to seeing you there.

Please forward to anyone in the New York city area that may be
interested in attending!

Peace,

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:57:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:00:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:13:06 -0400
>Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:14:13 -0400
>Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Reply-To: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:15:09 -0400

Previously, Mark wrote:

>>According to a recent film on the Discovery channel, circle
>>hoaxers are also hoaxing UFOs. The hoaxers offered a pretty
>>disgusting rationale for their efforts to make a difficult
>>problem more difficult.

>>Some of the hoaxers are floating large helium balloons with
>>biolumes; others use more elaborate systems with flashing lights
>>in the balloons.
>>Obviously these lead to some fairly convincing UFOs.

Lesley Cluff's comment:

>Yup, but there is one thing that could likely give the hoaxes
>away - the angle in the sky.

<snip>

>Would be interested if anyone could correct me that the higher
>in the sky the light, the less likely it is to be a hoax!

<snip>

From a technical stand point, it makes no difference, in my
opinion. When I was a kid, we used to pool our pennies to buy
all the string we could get to fly balloons and kites beyond the
range of sight. The local airport got pissed off and track us
down after the umpteenth time that an aircraft came too close
for comfort. Boy, did we get in trouble!

How high were we? Well, we probably went through several dozen
rolls of string, if I remember. Each was at least 100 feet! My
next door neighbor's mom owned a specialty shop and had tanks of
helium and jumbo kites. We were in heaven.

Anyway, the fact is that the farther away the object, the easier
it is to hide it's scale. This is because we lose all sense of
"3-D" pretty much beyond 30 to 40 feet. Our eyes are only about
2 1/2 inches apart and depend on that separation to see "around"
objects for the sensation of depth, which is essential to
judging scale. When something is close, like on your nose, then
the sense of depth is hyper 3-D; you have to go cross-eyed to
see the object. The further away the object, the less your eyes
have to converge. Beyond 30 - 40 feet (infinity), your eyes are
pretty much looking straight ahead and not really converging;
hence the loss of depth perception (someone with one eye has no
depth perception). Something 100 feet in diameter at a distance
of 1000 yards will look about the same as something 50 feet in
diameter at 500 yards, etc, whether you have one eye or two eyes
or even three eyes!

Having made that point, it should be noted that the best thing
one can do to judge the size and distance of an object is to
move laterally or parrallel to the sighted object. Take note of
other buildings, trees, mountains and the such and see if the
object "follows" their perspective path. That is to say, if the
object looks big and far away and you start moving and the
object stays put in the sky (like mountains in the distance
while driving down the road), then it means it truly is far
away; how far can be determined by what other landmarks it seems
to line up with. If, on the other hand, you start to move left
and the object appears to move right as a result, then it is
much closer and, therefore, not as big. This holds true with
moving objects as well as stationary ones.

Because perspective and depth perception are affected by
movement, one of the things that would help researchers would be
for witnesses shooting video footage of a UFO to do the
following:

1) Don't shoot too telephoto (particularly hand held) and try to
   include other landmarks in the frame for reference.

2) Note the focal length and _stay_ at that focal length; don't
   zoom in and out.

3) Continue shooting out of someones car or the back of a pickup
   truck and begin to drive parallel, if possible, to the UFO.

4) Note the speed of the car and _stay_ at that speed, if
   possible.

These four things, if noted properly, can provide a wealth of
information to a video analyst to help determine the size,
distance and speed of the UFO being videotaped.

5) Lastly, close the iris down a bit, if your camera allows,
because most amateur camera's auto exposure tries to expose for
the night sky and tend to over expose, leading to washed out
images of otherwise great UFOs!

Obviously, working in pairs would be the best. One person could
shoot from a stationary tripod while the other "travels" for
scale/distance information from the moving car.

If one is shooting stills, the rules regarding focal length and
exposure still apply. However, the best thing to do would be to
take two pictures, if time allows, separated by a noted distance
of, say, 10 feet or more parallel to the object (assuming the
object is stationary). Again, the difference in the two angles
will provide tons of information to a photo analyst. Obviously,
two cameras would be ideal. Don't forget to note the focal
length and include those landmarks in both shots!

If a camera isn't available of any kind, then simply move side
to side, parallel to the object, within a distance of 20 feet or
so. Note the landmarks it lines up with as you do. And finally,
if there are several of you, then separate into equally spaced
distances along a line parallel to the object. Each make a note
of landmarks as mentioned above and, also, make a mental
estimate of the distance based on that information. By averaging
everyones' estimates, you'll come up with a pretty good idea of
how far away the object was and, therefore, how big it was.

In short, the further away something is, the less effect this
technique has on judging a UFOs authenticity/size/scale. So, in
answer to Lesley Cuff's question; the higher in the sky, the
further away it is. The further away it is, the easier to fool
the eye (or the camera). Of course, something really big, really
far away be a sight to behold. Using the above techniques should
make that determination more accurate.

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas

www.cyberjunkie.com/moviestuff





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 14:28:03 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:12:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:58:26 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:00:42 -0400
>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>I am aware that both Fournet and Ruppelt have claimed to have
>seen it [the pro-ETH 1948 Estimate of the Situation].

>The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
>ordered destroyed in 1948.

It is clear that one or more copies were not destroyed. Ruppelt,
who evidently saw one, describes its contents thus, in three
paragraphs in the original manuscript of his 'Report on
Unidentified Flying Objects' (they were edited out of the
published version):


"It concluded that UFOs were interplanetary. As documented
proof, many unexplained sightings were quoted. The original UFO
sighting by Kenneth Arnold; the series of sightings from the
secret Air Force Test Center, Muroc AFB; the F-51 pilot's
observation of a formation of spheres near Lake Mead; the report
of an F-80 pilot who saw two round objects diving toward the
ground near the Grand Canyon; and a report by the pilot of an
Idaho National Guard T-6 trainer, who saw a violently
maneuvering black object.

"As further documentation, the report quoted an interview with
an Air Force major from Rapid City AFB who saw twelve UFOs
flying a tight diamond formation. When he first saw them they
were high but soon they went into a fantastically high speed
dive, leveled out, made a perfect formation turn, and climbed
at a 30 to 40 degree angle, accelerating all the time. The UFOs
were oval-shaped and brilliant yellowish-white.

"Also included was one of the reports from the AEC's
Los Alamos Laboratory. The incident occurred at 9:40 a.m.
on September 23, 1948. A group of people were waiting for an
airplane at the landing strip in Los Alamos when one of them
noticed something glint in the sun. The appearance and
relative size was [sic] the same as a dime held edgewise
and slightly tipped, about 50 feet away."


Two excellent articles on the estimate and its impact appear in
IUR, both by Michael D. Swords: 'The Lost Words of Edward
Ruppelt' (March/April 1995) and 'The McCoy Letter'
(Spring 1997).

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:34:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:18:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:38 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:10:58 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:01:55 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>>>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:40:59 EDT
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Ufology's problem is internal to itself. Debunking only works on
>>>bunk.

<snip>

Bruce writes:

>The witnesses did not believe that..... some still don't.....
>but in my opinion flares are 'it' for 10 PM

>The 8-9 PM sightings remain _unexplained_!

Hi Bruce, Greg, All,

On several occasions I have asked about the report that a
_commercial pilot_ taking off from the airport in Phoenix (which
is centrally located) called on to the tower because he had an
object overhead and needed instructions.

This was reported on two seperate newscasts that I have on
videotape. No further mention of this valuable/credible witness
has ever been made. The pilots identity nor the name of the
airline was revealed during the newscasts.

Has this report been verified?

Has the pilot been identified?

Has anyone interviewed the pilot?

Until the testimony of a key witness such as this is figured
into the equation all 'conclusions' should be put on hold. There
had to be more than one person in that cockpit if it was a
'commercial flight'. Phoenix tower should be contacted again and
information secured as the veracity of the report that a pilot
had a 'close encounter' with something up there (over Pheonix)

I'd appreciate any info about this particular aspect of the
case.

Peace,

John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:08:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


>From: Kathleen Andersen <KAnder6444@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:44:45 EDT
>Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:50:36 -0400
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

Previously, Kathleen Andersen wrote:

>"Kenneth Arnold told the Pendleton Newspaper that the objects he
>saw "flew as if you took a saucer and skipped it across the
>water." He never used the term "flying saucer" on June 24, 1947,
>or the weeks thereafter. The term flying saucer was developed,
>apparently collectively, by news people of the time. The objects
>that Arnold saw were not even saucer shaped."

<snip>

>Greg also noted that when Arnold landed in Yakima, someone, he
>believes Sonny Robinson suggested that what he saw were guided
>missiles from Moses Lake, Washington. Greg continued by saying
>"no one to my knowledge, has researched this possibility.
>However, why would the military launch 9 missiles, a technology
>that was in its experimental and early development stages, to
>fly over the Cascade mountains toward some unknown destination."

<snip>

>I have to agree with Greg. Mt. Rainier and the surrounding area
>is isolated and remote (or at least back then it was!) If the
>government was testing, why risk sending your prototype (and its
>obvious research and development costs attached) to an area that
>was almost impossible for retrieval if your test failed. I think
>there is also another logic that needs to be mentioned. Mt.
>Rainier is a volcano. I can think of many other places in the
>U.S. for testing.

I don't know. They say the best place to hide a tree is in the
forest. Perhaps, if Mt. Rainier was as desolate a volcano as you
describe, it would have been THE ideal place to test the
accuracy and impact characteristics of missles. After all,
there'd be hardly anyone around to notice; even if they did, the
explosions could be attributed to volcanic activity!

As far as it being the only prototype; not likely. The military
always makes more weapons of destruction than it needs. After
all, there were 9 of them, weren't there? If they were missles,
I'm sure there were plenty more where they came from. Just look
what happend after the prototype test at Los Alamos! (And they
didn't even try to hide it.)

Boom!

Later,

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                Re: Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:18:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:34:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Winston Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>Subject: Lord Chancellor: UK Withholds At Least 33 Top Secret UFO Files
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 05:50:23 +0200

>Source:

>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/skywatch/msg03524.shtml

>Stig

>*******

<snip>

>From: gerry [mailto:gerry@farshore.force9.co.uk]
>Sent: Sunday, October 18, 1998 6:42 AM
>To: Skywatch International
>Subject: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

>Source: The People [London]
>Date: October 18 1998
>Header: Churchill's Fears of UFO Invasion

>WORRIED Winston Churchill ordered a top-level probe into UFOs
>when he was Premier, it was revealed yesterday.

<snip>

>But the information contained is so sensitive it cannot be
>released with the other 23 files reporting sightings between
>1943 and 1967 which have already been made public.

What is meant by "so sensitive" National security? Maybe
something that would profoundly effect all of humanity? Shame
is, we'll probably never get to know in our lifetimes.

Poor Brit sods! Turns out they're in the same boat that we're in
on this side of the pond. Government is a rats nest no matter
what shore you're on. At least your boys are telling you how
many documents exist and where. Our guys are spending thousands
concocting explanations for alien crash victims (The _late_
dummies that fell from the sky near Roswell) and telling us that
nothing exists in government files anywhere! Dealing with 'our
boys' is like dealing with Bart Simpson. All you get out of them
is, "I don't know! I didn't do it!"

One day, (maybe) our grandchildren or great grandchildren will
learn the truth. As for us, given the current atmosphere, our
chances of finding out what is so "sensitive" about UFOs are
_slim and none_!

The "Final Solution"

Maybe every hundred years or so every power-weilding, cigar
smoking, fat cat, old man in 'Amerika' should be rounded up and
summarily executed without trial. That way we're sure to get
_all_ the bastards who think they have a right to make decisions
for the rest of us! <EG> A centennial ritual overthrowing of the
'aristocracy.'

"Have a revolution, have a revolution!"
(Jefferson Airplane <G>)

Peace,

John Velez,
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

              Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:18:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:24:23 -0400
Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes


>From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:44:30 EDT
>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:11:40 -0400
>Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

Previously, Mr. Martello offered:

>But this issue of SETI is a bit bothersome to me.  It is not
>that I deny it's level of importance to those amateurs engaged,
>it is just that I see very little value in the project.  If we
>were to pick up radio signals from space, it would likely be
>from a race of entities not terribly far ahead of us in their
>technology.

<snip>

>So instead of helping to look for radio signals from the planet
>Mongo, I shall attempt to work on the puzzle as it exists here,
>on Earth, with the belief that any race of entities worth
>contacting would largely and likely be able to transcend RF and
>utilize a much more efficient method of communication than
>radio.


I agree. There probably isn't much to be gained, from a
technical standpoint, by communication with a race that still
uses RF. They'd, no doubt, be a loooong way away. (would
continuous communication even be possible?)

On the other hand, I do believe there are several things that
should be considered:

First, just because they try to contact us via RF doesn't mean
that's what they normally use, themselves. They might simply
recognize that RF is what WE normally use. (let's hope they're
not techno-snobs!)

It would be much like going into the jungle to communicate with
a primative tribe; we would teach ourselves their language
before we tried to teach them ours, since ours is more
sophisticated. Even in Europe, English is taught to school
children because of its superior ability to convey complex and
conceptual ideas; something vital, even in a world as
'primative' as ours.

Second, what would you do if you were alone in the desert and
finally approached by smiling people with outstretched hands?
Would you turn them away just because they didn't speak your
language?

Of course not.

You'd be happy to know that you were not alone, after all.

I think that's worth a few micro volts of RF, don't you?


Take care...

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                   Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:45:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:38 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

>The Phoenix Case (March 13, 1997) is not a good one to tout as
>an example of either exemplary UFO research or exemplary
>UFOs..... unless you specify the events between 8 and 9 PM.

>If you include the sightings and videotapes from 10 PM you are
>including, with high probability, very distant bright
>illumination flares.

>Triangulations I carried out several months ago showed that the
>lights were about 70 miles from Phoenix, based on widely
>separated videotapes (Krzyston, Rairdon).

Bruce,

Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
or more.

What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
parachute would fall that much faster.

   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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:59:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:01:09 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:57:37 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:47:46 -0500
>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment
>>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:19:26 -0500

>>>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>>>>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>>>>Hi Errol and list,

>>>>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>>>>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>>>>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>>>>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>>>>opinions.

>>>Okay

>>>>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>>>>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>>>>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>>>>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>>>>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>>>>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>>>>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>>>>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>>>>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>>>>pilots saw.

>>>>What your take on this? Looking for input.

>>>I agree totally. I set up the F-16 in the far east. I was with
>>>the bed-down cadre in Okinawa and Korea in 1980 assigned to the
>>>6100 LSS at Kadena AFB. It is an F-16, and that is a UFO, and
>>>damned excellent evidence.

>>>I don't usually comment, but I just had to respond to your post.

>>>Best wishes.

>>>>From the author of: Alien Rapture - The Chosen,

>>>Edgar Fouche

>>Damn. . . Guys! Admittedly not having the best copy, I reviewed
>>the segment very carefully and could detect the definitive pilot
>>head movement described -- But! Why has no one mentioned the
>>very definite shadow the UFO casts as it drops into the clouds!
>>Now _that_ was a dazzler, easily seen in even my bad copy!

>>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>We're just creating more modern mythology here. I looked at the
>segment repeatedly over the weekend and I am convinced that the
>head movement mentioned is a figment of someone's imagination.
>I just do not see any such thing.

>Yes, the shadow is a nice touch. Easily done with a number of
>computer image programs.

>This could be real film, but considering that the bulk of the
>program was a deliberate hoax I'd be wary of giving it too much
>consideration.

Great suffering ZOT!

I reviewed my post and where it read "Admittedly not having the
best copy, I reviewed the segment very carefully and could
detect the definitive pilot head movement described -- " .....

Should read "could _not_ detect the definitive pilot head
movement described - "I am sore ashamed..... <g>

Regarding the shadow, I thought the mechanics of a _real_ shadow
was extremely _hard_ to fake. That's what I understood from Dr.
Maccabee's treatment of concurrent shadows. This is incorrect
then, Bob?

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 18:50:31 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:54:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:38:29 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:59:46 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>apology for my dog-alongside-the-car analogy.

>No problem. I respect dogs more than I do most ufologists.

That being the case, Ed, why aren't you in some other business?
Raising dogs, for example? You are clearly incapable, given your
overwhelming commitment to an emotion-driven approach to
ufology, of rendering serious, objective judgments. Such
judgments are not necessary in dog-raising. Give it some serious
thought, since you clearly haven't given serious thought to the
complex and ambiguous issues with which serious ufologists
grapple. I also suspect that if you got out of this business,
you'd be happier. Why surround yourself with people who make you
miserable and enraged?.

>My collection is not relevant. It is only a resource used by me
>to build research tools for serious researchers, and I am
>looking 100, 200 years from now. Someone will ask 'Now, what was
>that all about at the end of the 20th Century?' They are not
>going to find out by reading Jerry Clark's Encyclopedia. From
>that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
>were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective.

Hey, that's not what a single reviewer -- from the UFO press to
the academic, library, and scientific journals -- have said
about my encyclopedia. But keep in mind, folks, that we are
dealing with Ed Stewart, who has confused mean-spiritedness with
the spirit of inquiry.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 16:32:11 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:38:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:41:15 PDT

>>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these
>>>are some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the
>>>Summary Report of the Scientific Review Panel:

>>>   "On the other hand, the review panel was not convinced that
>>>any of the evidence involved currently unknown physical
>>>processes or pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial
>>>intelligence."

>>Of course that was not the panel's intention. It was making
>>judgments from the limited number of cases it looked at. It
>>found those cases impressive and worthy of further scientific
>>inquiry, at the end of which - presumably a long process - it
>>would be possible to come to a far more firm judgment about
>>the nature and origin of UFO phenomena.

>The above is a pure fabrication by Jerome Clark. We all know
>where the report is online. The quotes come from the part of the
>report directly attributed to the Scientific Review Panel, not
>Peter Sturrock's rendition. The viewpoints of the Scientific
>Review Panel are the only ones relevant of consideration, not
>the paid home team announcer's.

If Ed Stewart wants to believe -- the evidence of the English
language and the hostile reaction of skeptics and debunkers to
the contrary -- that the Sturrock report was a defeat for
serious UFO research, hell, go for it, guy. Meantime, I've got
some real estate on the moon I'd like to talk to you about.

>>Or are we to be subjected to yet more special pleading - and
>>quotations out of sense or context - from would-be debunkers.
>>The Ed Stewarts of the world, alas, seem only to want to
>>snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Those who want a
>>more honest and realistic picture of the panel than Stewart
>>provides ought to go to the SSE website and read the whole
>>report.

>Absolutely, but the only part that is independent is the Review
>Panel's conclusions, not Peter Sturrock's who was hired by LR to
>organize the whole thing, irrespective of Jerome Clark's
>interpretation of what the Sturrock Panel is alleged to
>represent.

Interesting that Ed thinks this is "Jerome Clark's
interpretation" as opposed, say, to the interpretation of the
Washington Post, the New York Times, press wires, panel
participants (and their post- panel comments in national media
such as National Public Radio), and just about the whole rest of
the human race who read the report.

>There is no virulent attack. There is simple quoting exact
>conclusions from the review panel. Nothing else is needed, not
>Jerome Clark's pitch, or Peter Sturrock's pitch in attempt to
>salvage an otherwise weak, disappointing and pathetic showing.
>The review panel confirmed what I have been arguing online, what
>Oberg said over twenty years ago. It is that simple. Read the
>scientific review panel conclusions and stop making up things
>that the scientific review panel has never said.

Wow. You are one strange dude, guy. I'm afraid the only one
"making up things" is you, and you are marvelously consistent
at it. You haven't said anything about me, for example, that you
didn't make up out of whole cloth.  Your reading of the Sturrock
panel, I fear, is only to be expected: truly bizarre and not
remotely true.

>>Ed's reading of the Sturrock panel is bizarre, but much of what
>>we hear from this man, as we have seen, answers to that
>>adjective.

>It is apparent that you have no respect for accuracy in quoting
>and attribution. My quoting of the Scientific Review Panel must
>have been seen as bizarre to you since it does not reflect your
>intellectual dishonesty which you use to color just about
>everything you write on this subject. Read the scientific review
>panel comments and weep. You can't change them. And you can't
>attribute Peter Sturrock's attempt to salvage a dismal review by
>the scientific panel to the scientific panel members.

What I don't understand, my friend, is why -- if you hate this
field and just about everybody in it and find it and them fit
only for the rankest vilification -- you spend most of your
waking hours doing UFO work, nearly all of it, I gather,
bibliographical. In other words, cataloging the worthless
writings of worthless people of whom you cannot speak badly
enough, all addressing a subject that is about nothing.

I also don't understand (or, frankly, care to) the sources of
your bitterness and anger, which seem, well, not a little, er
(I'm trying to be kind), excessive. (The unkind would say nuts.)
You can't seem to mount a consistent or reasonable argument or
convincingly refute counterarguments; instead of rational
discourse, you just get louder and meaner. Ah, well. I think
I'll bow out of this, having -- as you seem not to have -- a
life to lead. Maybe you should spend a little more time with
your family. I find that family life has a hugely mellowing
effect.

Finally, one more time, for an excellent insider's account of
what the panel _really_ was about, as opposed to the imaginative
reconstructive with which Ed provides us, read the Swords and
Rodeghier article in the current IUR. It's fascinating. Ed will
be the only one of you who will weep as he reads. I think the
rest of you will feel pretty good.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:41:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:42:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:40:59 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>Mr Spurrier, What is your opinion? Have you studied in detail
>the possible options available for the origin of the phenomena?

I have no immediate opinion on the BOL but have deduced from the
evidence that the circle makers have presented that they are not
directly responsible for the creation of crop formations. Any
evidence to the contrary is gratefully appreciated.

>Do you offer any evidence that the lights in question are not
>involved in the creation of some of the crop circles that appear
>around the UK and the rest of the World?

Only that like many other things such as a Zanussi
fridge/freezer, Citroen Xantia, and the Starship Enterprise etc.
as they have never been witnessed making one, however, circle
makers have.

>If you answered no to the previous question, then these lights
>as a possible cause should not be discounted and the data should
>stand with all data regarding all peoples idea's and opinion's
>about the origin of the crop circle enigma

Why? circle makers actually creating formations is a reality.

>I believe you and I both know that, what was being infered was
>that the gathering of people with an interest, seemed to
>consider the footage worth a viewing.

Crop circle investigators gather in Wiltshire attempting to
prove that et's are behind the creation of formations. UFO
footage in the area do not constitute proof that they are
responsible for creating crop formations. I find some of the UFO
footage in the area quite compelling, but still lack to find a
direct link those and crop formations. If UFOs are responsible
for crop formations then why aren't there as many in Gulf Breeze
as there are in Wiltshire. Or should I be looking for et created
"sand castles" or sand castles created by advanced microwave
technology?

Roy said
>Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth
>Lights or even optical illusions?

I said
>Probably not.

 you said
>Guess again, not according to the Colin Andrews helicopter
>footage as seen on the US program Sightings.. to which the UK
>military even denied that they had any helicopters in the area
>that day..

You are saying they are they are earth lights or optical
illusions, no?

>Steady Tony,the question was:
>Why has the military have such an interest in them?

Well my point was that the BOL were not responsible for crop
formations, I do infact agree that BOL are an anomalous
phenomenon. So the military may have an interest also, but I
still lack evidence from you and Roy that these are responsible
for crop formations.

>I ask you?

No, I ask you, where is the evidence that BOL are responsible
for crop formations, after all that was the original discussion
point not whether BOL actually exist.

>Mr Spurrier, what do you think is going on, regarding these
>light formations?

What I think is irrelevant. There is proof that circle makers
can and do create crop formations. Roy, I mean Max, I don't have
a problem with BOL being anomalous unidentified objects but I do
with crop formations being promoted as messages from other
worlds.

>So what you are saying is that if evidence surfaces that prooves
>that, some circles may have been created by the balls of light.
>You will move to call the thing hoaxed, if it can be prooved
>that the balls of light have actually created a formation..

The optimum points here are that you say " may have been created
by the balls of light", of course many things could in theory
have made them BUT circles makers have proved that they can and
do make these formations.

>Well that's hardly the comment of a sceptic even, at least true
>sceptics the likes of Andy Denne. are always willing to look at
>any evidence, and simply decide what the evidence shows, you
>however are saying that if the balls of light can be shown to
>have created the pattern, then its a hoax.

Provide evidence that BOL do make the formations and I will
consider it, but to date no evidence is forthcoming.

>What would you do ignore the evidence?

No, I have conversed with some circle makers and they would
likely agree that I have looked at the phenomenon from a neutral
stand point.

>Why is this your stance?

Because I don't personally get upset if the answers don't go my
way, it appears others do.

>Could you please elaborate on your previous answer,
>What is the same reason?

Healings and headaches have been experienced in known man-made
formations, if these can occur then anomalies with watches etc.
also appear to be possible. Circle makers reportedly dowse
fields prior to creating formations to locate earth energies,
with the formations being created over these points, those
entering the formation may experience different affects, how/why
etc. is open to specualtion.

>I believe that the comment above was sarcasm

Roy's, yes.

>However I do believe that on some of your supposed research
>expo's to Sizewell in search of the large black so called Flying
>Triangle, ufology seemed to all of a sudden been left on the
>back seat so to speak.

You've only heard about the sky watches at Sizewell, perhaps Roy
should investigate your answers better for you, or whatever.

>While you took up your new study coarse, Human Biology and
>mating practices, And with some more dilligent police work, you
>may well of ended up explaining your behaviour during your sky
>watch to the local magistrate...

The only time I have dealt with the police recently were in
regard to the threats Roy Hale made via a telephone call with
David Whitmore, or are you refering to something else?

>mundane is OK as long as it is the correct answer.

Yes, or are you just looking for a paranormal escape to life?

>But you have already said that if evidence comes to light that
>the Balls of light may be involved or creating some of the
>circles that appear, then these are your words Mr Spurrier:

Since the 80's there has not been any evidence that BOL are
responsible for crop formations, however, if evidence does
surface then it should be considered but over this period of
time it seems unlikely that it ever will.

>Pray tell Mr Spurrier, can you show us this evidence that
>although we all know that some circles are hoaxes, you can now
>proove through that all the cirlcles are hoaxes..

All of them can't be hoaxes, or they'd be genuine. Perhaps
you're better off talking to the circle makers themselves,
that's where I drew my conclusions so maybe they can burst your
paranormal bubble for you Roy, I mean Max.

>In no more than twenty words, can you give a brief but mundane
>explanation, as to the origin of the whole thing?

If you mean ufology then no, can you?

Max I think you have both over stepped the mark on your sarcasm,
you seem to think I have a problem with ufology which is
completely untrue. However, I do feel that there is a mundane,
as you put it,
answer to crop formations.

Tony
Proof by procrastination
Watch the BBC test card





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:09:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:14:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>>Date: Sun, Oct 17,1998 10:30 CET
>>From: Joachim Koch <achimkoch@compuserve.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>>They did not that. It was a rainy night and they'd intended to
>>leave. All the cameras were stored away. There were four people
>>sitting in two cars. Suddenly they saw something floating along
>>the line where the Kenett-Avon-Canal is. The description of what
>>they saw differs a bit according to whom you ask. Fact is that
>>there was something in the air. Something "structured". But
>>remember: it was raining and misty and dark and the object was
>>nearly one mile away. And it floated along slowly.

<snip>

Joachim & List,

Were there any water run-offs from the UFO (like an umbrella) or
did the rain appear to 'pass through' the UFO?

Has either of these conditions been reported before in other
cases.

regards,
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 >
   Oct > Oct 19

              Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:59:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:11:26 -0400
Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:18:53 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

>>From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:44:30 EDT
>>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:11:40 -0400
>>Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

>Previously, Mr. Martello offered:

>>But this issue of SETI is a bit bothersome to me. It is not
>>that I deny it's level of importance to those amateurs engaged,
>>it is just that I see very little value in the project. If we
>>were to pick up radio signals from space, it would likely be
>>from a race of entities not terribly far ahead of us in their
>>technology.

><snip>

>>So instead of helping to look for radio signals from the planet
>>Mongo, I shall attempt to work on the puzzle as it exists here,
>>on Earth, with the belief that any race of entities worth
>>contacting would largely and likely be able to transcend RF and
>>utilize a much more efficient method of communication than
>>radio.

>I agree. There probably isn't much to be gained, from a
>technical standpoint, by communication with a race that still
>uses RF. They'd, no doubt, be a loooong way away. (would
>continuous communication even be possible?)

>On the other hand, I do believe there are several things that
>should be considered:

>First, just because they try to contact us via RF doesn't mean
>that's what they normally use, themselves. They might simply
>recognize that RF is what WE normally use. (let's hope they're
>not techno-snobs!)

>It would be much like going into the jungle to communicate with
>a primative tribe; we would teach ourselves their language
>before we tried to teach them ours, since ours is more
>sophisticated. Even in Europe, English is taught to school
>children because of its superior ability to convey complex and
>conceptual ideas; something vital, even in a world as
>'primative' as ours.

>Second, what would you do if you were alone in the desert and
>finally approached by smiling people with outstretched hands?
>Would you turn them away just because they didn't speak your
>language?

>Of course not.

>You'd be happy to know that you were not alone, after all.

>I think that's worth a few micro volts of RF, don't you?

We are in agreement. My point was that it is my choice as a Ham
not to participate for the reasons given. Actually, some of my
associates in Ham Radio are participants. The hobby has such a
wide variety of applications that there is room for divers
interests.

Your point is well taken.

It is worth the efforts of those interested just to attempt
finding life out there. But there is another issue here which I
firmly believe would be in evidence just as soon as a signal is
answered by the inhabitants of planet Mongo.

SETI gets a response. There will be so many skeptics out there
denying it, calling it a hoax, the work of the devil and Lord
knows what all else that I wouldn't touch the project with a ten
foot pole.

I can see the headlines, "Contact! But Klass says it's swamp
gas!"

What do you think Roger?

Jim Mortellaro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                            UFO On Football Game

From: Dave Bauer <Xxyyxx@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:50:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:07:19 -0400
Subject: UFO On Football Game

Did anyone else see the UFO on Channel 3 KYW (CBS). Philadelphia
and Channel 4 WNBC (CBS) New York, shown during the college
football game between Syracuse Orangemen at Boston College
Eagles?

Replayed at end of game. Saturday Oct 17, 1998
Air time 3:30 pm to 7:00 pm.

This was seen by my 11 year old.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                 Data Recording Starts For Hyperlink Mail To

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:27:23 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:17:05 -0400
Subject: Data Recording Starts For Hyperlink Mail To


Source: Business Wire.

Stig

*******

October 19, 1998 13:57

Paramount Pictures and the Planetary Society Search for
Extraterrestrial Life

HOLLYWOOD--(ENTERTAINMENT WIRE)--Oct. 19, 1998--

For the First Time in "Star Trek" History Planet Earth is
Invited to Help the Crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise in a Real
Search to Seek Out

New Life and New Civilizations!

On October 19, 1998, Paramount Pictures' motion picture "Star
Trek: Insurrection," in cooperation with The Planetary Society
and SETI@home, will invite people from all over the planet to
help in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence.

"To seek out new life and new civilizations" has been one of the
primary objectives of the U.S.S. Enterprise since the beginning
of the Star Trek phenomenon. This is the first time in motion
picture history that the public will have an opportunity to
participate in an authentic search for life elsewhere in the
universe. Those signing up to participate in this historic
search will be able to do so from any corner of the globe by
accessing the Internet. SETI@home is an innovative screen saver,
developed at U.C. Berkeley by David Anderson and Dan Werthimer,
which can be downloaded and used to analyze data scanned from
the sky - which may contain a potential signal from an
extraterrestrial civilization.

The SETI@home program will be analyzing data collected by
SERENDIP IV (SERENDIP is an acronym for "Search for
Extraterrestrial Radio Emissions from Nearby Developed
Intelligent Populations" and it is the fourth in the series).

"Star Trek: Insurrection's" Director and Co-star, Jonathan
Frakes, will pull the switch to start data recording for
hyperlink mail to: SETI@home. The event will be televised on
CNN.

SERENDIP IV operates at Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The
300 meter instrument is the world's largest single-dish radio
telescope. Like a cosmic hitchhiker, SERENDIP piggybacks onto
the observing runs of many astronomers. Typically, the Arecibo
dish scans all of the sky visible to it once every six months,
providing the SETI program a thorough survey of that region of
our galaxy.

SETI@home is an innovative screen saver program that will
harness the spare power of hundreds of thousands of
Internet-connected home computers around the world to crunch
data from SERENDIP IV 21 cm. Thanks to the sponsorship by
Paramount Pictures' "Star Trek: Insurrection" and The Planetary
Society, the software will be available free to anyone wishing
to participate in the program.

"With SETI@home, each person who uses the program has the chance
to become the first human being to detect the whisper of an
extraterrestrial civilization on an alien world," said Louis
Friedman, Executive Director of the Planetary Society.

For over three decades, Paramount Pictures' popular Star Trek
television series and motion pictures have had a mission "to
seek out and explore...new life and new civilizations."
SETI@home offers the public, worldwide, the chance to directly
participate in the scientific search for life elsewhere.
Paramount Pictures will promote SETI@home in conjunction with
the December 11 opening of the newest Star Trek film, "Star
Trek: Insurrection."

Those interested in becoming participants in the SETI@home
project can sign up at any of the participating websites,
including seti.planetary.org, planetary.org, startrek.com and
setiathome@ssl.Berkeley.edu.

More exciting science...

Although SERENDIP has been in operation since 1976, the SERENDIP
IV 21 cm sky survey will open a whole new range of possibilities
when it searches for alien signals at what radio astronomers
have nicknamed the "water hole."

Between the natural background radio noise of the galaxy and the
radio absorption of our planet's atmosphere, is a low noise
region of the radio spectrum, which scientists speculate might
attract interstellar communication. Falling in this relatively
quiet frequency range are the natural radio frequencies of
hydrogen (H) and hydroxyl radical (OH). When these two molecules
are combined on Earth they form H2O -- water, an essential
element for life.

"Just as, for millennia, human villagers have gathered to gossip
at the communal well, we hope that far-flung alien species might
choose to communicate across the vast reaches of space at this
intergalactic water hole," said Friedman.

Carl Sagan, Bruce Murray and Louis Friedman founded the The
Planetary Society in 1980 to advance the exploration of the
solar system and to continue the search for extraterrestrial
life. With 100,000 members in over 100 countries, the Society is
the largest space interest group in the world.

"Star Trek: Insurrection," the third motion picture featuring
the cast of the Emmy-winning television series "Star Trek: The
Next Generation," created by Gene Roddenberry, is produced by
Rick Berman and directed by Jonathan Frakes. The screenplay for
"Star Trek: Insurrection" was written by Michael Piller, from a
story by Rick Berman and Michael Piller. Marty Hornstein serves
as executive producer. Peter Lauritson serves as co-producer,
and Patrick Stewart is associate producer for "Star Trek:
Insurrection."

"Star Trek: Insurrection" opens in theatres throughout the U.S.
and Canada on December 11, 1998.

Paramount Pictures is part of the entertainment operations of
Viacom Inc.


CONTACT:  Paramount Pictures, Hollywood
Cece Karz, 323/956-5588


Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:04:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: <naclip@fgc.newsalert.com>
To: "1974" <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Subject: News Story
Message-Id: <199810200204.WAA15775@iad1-p.newsalert.com>


            Search for other documents from or mentioning: seti |





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:27:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:01:24 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42


    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 42
October 19, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

CHUPACABRA PHOTOGRAPH
TAKEN IN SOUTHERN BRAZIL

     On Monday, October 12, 1998, Leandro da Silva,
a Brazilian speleologist and two companions decided
to explore a cave in the Serra do Espinhaco mountains
just east of Baldim, a small city in the state of Minas
Gerais in southern Brazil.
     By 7 a.m., the trio had penetrated 150 meters into
the limestone cave, which is reputed to extend for
several kilometers underground.  Da Silva had his
Kodak digital camera close at hand.
     Just then, Marcelo, one of the companions, "stared
at a very strange and ugly animal, the size of a man."
     Marcelo shouted in astonishment.  Turning, Leandro
saw the creature and shouted, as well.  The startled
creature backed away toward the cavern wall and
disappeared through a fissure in the limestone.  But
not before Leandro snapped two photographs with
his digital camera.
     According to researcher Lydia Ribeiro, the
cave creature "is very similar to the Chupacabra"
reported last year in Sao Paulo state.
     On Tuesday, October 13, ufologist Vittorio
Paccacini, author of INCIDENTE EM VARGINHA,
interviewed the da Silva group and left for Baldim
to conduct an on-site investigation.
    "They didn't seem to be inventing this story,"
Paccacini said, following the telephone interview.
"Therefore I've decided to investigate.  I'm going
to Baldim early in the morning.  I want to be inside
the cave at 7 a.m."
     Baldim is on the Rio das Velhas in Minas
Gerais, approximately 110 kilometers (66 miles)
north of Belo Horizonte, the state capital.  (Muito
obrigado a Vittorio Paccacini e Lydia Ribeiro por
eso caso.)
(Editor's Comment:  October is turning into
Creature Feature month here at UFO Roundup.
Check out the following story.)

MOUNTAIN CLIMBER SEES
TWO YETI ON MT. EVEREST

     On Thursday, September 17, 1998, Craig
Calonica, a mountain climber from the USA, was
descending from a high-altitude campsite on
Mount Everest in the Himalayas when he spotted
two Yeti lumbering through the snow.
     On Tuesday, October 13, "the 45-year-old skier
and mountain climber" told Reuters that he "was on
his way down to base camp at 17,000 feet (5,200
meters) from a camp at 21,300 feet (6,500 meters)
when he saw the creatures."
     "He said they had thick, shiny, black fur and
walked like humans except a little hunched over at
the shoulders."
     "'My point was that I saw something and what I
saw was not human, that was not a gorilla, not a bear,
not a goat, and it was not a deer,' Calonica told Reuters.
'Their arms were very long, and their heads were very
big.'"
     Calonica was with his Nepali cook when the
Yeti passed them by.  The sighting took place on
the north face of Mount Everest, about 56 kilometers
(35 miles) southeast of Dinggye, Tibet.  (Many thanks
to Erik Beckjord of the Sasquatch Research Project
for forwarding the Reuters article.)
(Editor's Note:  Calonica's description of the two Yeti
is identical to that given by Lt. Col. C.K. Howard-Bury
during his Mount Everest reconnaissance expedition
of 1921.  The term Yeti is a corruption of the Sherpa
phrase mehteh kangmi meaning '"snow creature.")

ART BELL MYSTERY HAS
FANS EVERYWHERE PUZZLED

     The words came over the air during the early
morning hours of Tuesday, October 13, 1998,
stunning millions of fans.
     "What you are listening to is my final broadcast,"
Art Bell, 51, host of the popular Coast to Coast radio
talk show, told listeners, "I told you that there was
an event, a threatening terrible event occurred to my
family, which I could not tell you about.  Because
of that event, and a succession of other events,
what you're listening to right now is my final
broadcast on the air."
     "Bell, whose show was broadcast from his home
in" Pahrump, Nevada, a "desert farming community
west of Las Vegas, said he couldn't discuss the
matter with his listeners 'for the protection of my
family.'"
     "Covington, Ky (Kentucky--J.T.)-based radio giant
Jacor Communications, Inc., which distributes Bell's
show, referred telephone inquiries to its Los Angeles
syndication arm, Premiere Radio Network."
     "'We will be playing 'best-of' shows until further
notice until we find out what's going on,' Premiere
spokeswoman Mir Hendrickson said."
     "The popular host hasn't received any criminal
threats, Nye County Sheriff Wade Lieseke said."
(See the Providence, R.I. Journal for October 15,
1998, "Popular radio talk-show host quits under
cloud of mystery," page A-2)
     The mystery deepened when a mysterious
letter appeared on an Internet site used by fans.
     "Art Bell--the spooky all-night talk radio host
who quit on-air Tuesday--told his fans yesterday
(Thursday, October 15) he quit after a mysterious
'man from the future' told him he and his wife
were in danger."
     "According to the letter, a man from the future
Bell calls Single Seven contacted told him that a
terrible tragedy was going to befall Bell's wife,
Ramona."
     "The letter also said that if certain events take
place, Bell will return to the airwaves soon."
     "Officials at Premiere, which syndicates Bell's
show on 400 stations around the country, had
refused to answer questions about the letter's
authenticity."
     "Repeated calls to Jacor, the radio company that
owns the show, were not returned last night."
     "According to Bell's letter: 'Single Seven...told me
he had gone back (to the future) and researched me
and said there had been a terrible tragedy that
happened to Ramona and me.  I lived but Ramona
did not.'"
     "The letter says Single Seven first contacted
Bell about a year ago and predicted several events
that would happen.  It did not specify what they were."
(See the New York Post for October 16, 1998,
"Art Bell sends fans mysterious message," page 114.)
     Again authorities reiterated that they did not
believe Bell to be in any personal danger.  "Sheriff
Wade Lieseke of Pahrump, Nevada, where Bell
broadcasts his show about the paranormal from his
home, said that he had spoken to Bell and that he
believed Bell to be in no immediate danger."  (See
the New York Post for October 17, 1998, "Radio
man Bell to stay alienated from UFO show," page 85)
     However, many of Bell's fans and colleagues are
concerned about him.
     "'It's possible that he stumbled onto something
the government doesn't want the rest of us to know
about,' said Mike Taylor, a former construction worker
who, like many residents, retired early to Pahrump.
'I'm open to the fact that there's stuff going on around
here, big stuff, hush-hush stuff.'"
     "'Everyone in this town knows,' said electrician
Mark Rogers, pointing toward the Sierra Nevada
mountains, 'that things go on over that mountain that
they aren't supposed to talk about.'"
     Ron Bales of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, leader
of an Art Bell fan club, alleged "'that some Bill Clinton
supporters might have threatened Bell to draw
attention away from the president's troubles.'"
     Richard C. Hoagland "agreed that Bell must be in
danger to cut himself off so completely.  He said that
'rogue elements' working for the government but not
officially claimed by any agency may have threatened
Bell's wife in an attempt to force Bell to rein in his
guests and prescreen callers."
     "'Art Bell would rather do radio than anything else
on this planet.  He's at the top of his game, No. 1 in his
time slot and he walks away from all this in 30 seconds,'
said Hoagland, a former NASA consultant and frequent
guest on Bell's show.  'Something has to be terribly
wrong...There are people in these federal agencies that
make Rambo look like a Sunday School picnic.'"  (See
the Boston, Mass. Globe for October 17, 1998, "For
whom the Bell mystery tolls," page A-01.)
     Bell is scheduled to make a brief statement to
his listeners during the first hour of Coast to Coast
during the Monday, October 19 show.

THREE ORANGE FIREBALLS
VIDEOTAPED IN CLEVELAND

     On Friday afternoon, October 10, 1998, people
walking along the lakeshore in Cleveland, Ohio
(population 503,000) were startled to see three
bright orange fireballs moving slowly through
the blue sky over Lake Erie.
     A cameraman for WJBK-TV in Cleveland,
Channel 2 Fox News, went outdoors and videotaped
the UFOs' overflight.
     The video shows two orange fireballs proceeding
across the sky at a slow pace, above telephone poles
and treetops, with a third UFO in the lower right-hand
corner, barely visible.
     Channel 2 aired the video on its news broadcast
with this voiceover commentary: "Now look at this and
judge for yourself.  What do you think?  You can see
three streaks of light, the third you can barely spot
in the right-hand corner moving into the trees...Witnesses
said the lights were visible for half an hour."
     After seeing a rebroadcast on a Detroit TV station,
Rev. John E.L. Tenney of Michigan Anomalous
Information Network (MAIN) telephoned Channel 2 in
Cleveland to learn more about the sighting.
     "The news director that I spoke to in Cleveland
said that the local weather crew eventually determined
the lights to be a plane," he reported, adding skeptically,
"Three planes?  Three planes moving so slowly?"
(Many thanks to Rev. John E.L. Tenney for this report.)

FIFTEEN UFOs CAVORT OVER
NOWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

     On Monday, October 12, 1998, just before 11 p.m.,
a 31-year-old housewife went outdoors at her home
about 6 kilometers (3 miles) from Nowra, New South
Wales, Australia and spotted a group of UFOs "in
tight formation flying low toward the south."
     The house is in a rural area "with only one dirt
road from Nowra to Sassafras and on to Braidwood."
Nowra is on Australia's east coast about 180 kilometers
(108 miles) south of Sydney.
     The UFOs "appeared to be at 35 degrees elevation
and hovered there before moving south again."  The
witness "said they only had a visible shape when using
the binocs (binoculars--J.T.) but appeared to be as
large as a 5-cent piece at arm's length when using them.
They were bell-shaped with a white or bluish-white light
at the top, quite steady.  They appeared 'translucent,'
'like a jellyfish' and displayed multi-coloured flashing
lights around the sides in no recognisable pattern.
Central underneath was a steady bluish glow."
     "When they came back" toward the farm, "they
wove about" in the sky "about 6 to 8 kilometers
southwest of her property, where they stayed for
about twenty minutes and appeared to be flying
erratically, 'like a conductor's baton or a ballet
dance.'  Just after 11:30 p.m., they flickered off
to the west-northwest, dipping behind some trees."
     The case was investigated by Brad Mildern of
Paradox UFO Group, which covers sightings
in New South Wales between Wollongong,
Shorehaven and Batemans Bay.
     Commenting on the Nowra UFOs, ufologist
Diane Harrison said, "Description reminds me of
the photos from Gulf Breeze."  (Many thanks to
Brad Mildern of Paradox UFO Group for this story.)

SPHERICAL UFOs SEEN IN
WALTHAMSTOW, UK

     On Sunday, October 11, 1998, at 7 p.m.,
ufologist Tony Colbourn of the Essex and London
UFO Network (ELUFON) was working in his
back garden at his home in Walthamstow, a
suburb north of East London.
     "At approximately 1900 hours, I spotted what
I could only describe as a gold orb traveling in a
north easterly direction at an approximate altitude
of 2,000 feet," he reported, "It is usual to see
aircraft stacking above my house, as it is located
in one of the main flight paths for Heathrow Airport.
Whilst observing this object, I also noticed a
satellite going over, which due to the visible differences,
convinced me that this was not a satellite because
(for example) it was brighter, bolder and moving a lot
faster."
     "A few minutes later, I noticed two additional orbs,
white in colour, traveling northward.  As they approached
me, the one on the right turned in a north easterly
direction and the other continued straight on north."
     Colbourn rushed into the house to grab his
videocamera.  But when he returned to the garden,
"all (UFO) activity had ceased."
     The next night, Monday, October 12, at 6:45 p.m.,
"I noticed that the gold orb had returned, traveling the
same route.  I rushed in and grabbed my camcorder,
called Roy (Hale of ELUFON) on the phone and went
back to the garden.  I then noticed another white orb
which whilst traveling became brighter.  The size was
similar to the end of a pencil but gradually expanded
to the size of a tennis ball and then seemed to
implode inward and disappear altogether."
     Colbourn then telephoned ELUFON member
Brian Jessop, who quickly hopped into his car and
drove to Walthamstow.  On his way there, at 6:55 p.m.,
Jessop spotted a strange light in the sky.  "As it got
closer, he realized it was a triangle-shaped object."
     ELUFON is investigating these and other reported
UFO sightings in Walthamstow.  (Many thanks to
Tony Colbourn and Roy Hale of ELUFON and to
Errol Bruce-Knapp for forwarding these reports.)

STUDENTS SIGHT A UFO
IN SORMANO, ITALY

     The evening of September 12, 1998, a group of
college students gathered at the observatory in
Sormano, Italy to do some skywatching as part of
their astronomy course lab work.
     "We were going to spend the night observing
the stars and at first noticed nothing out of the
ordinary," Giancarlo S. reported.  "Then, at about
11 p.m., we saw over the mountain a big sphere
like the full moon.  At first it stopped, then it
moved very quickly behind the mountain.  For a
moment, I saw this object suspended above
the peak."
     Unable to keep their big telescope fixed on
the object, the group reached for their binoculars.
     "Having grabbed our binoculars to better
observe it, we watched as it moved steadily in a
westerly direction away from the mountain until
it could no longer be seen."
     This case is being investigated by Italy's
Centro Ufologici Nazionale.  (Grazie a Marco
Guarisco di CUN Como per questo rapporto.)

GLOWING UFOs REPORTED
NEAR PUERTO VALLARTA

     On Saturday, September 26, 1998, at 9 p.m.,
three luminous white UFOs appeared at an
elevation of 30 degrees above the western
horizon just south of Las Varas, in Nayarit state,
Mexico, about 40 kilometers (25 miles) north
of the popular Pacific Ocean resort city of
Puerto Vallarta.
     The UFOs were described as "three bright
white lights...the lights, except for a few brief
seconds of flashing, were otherwise non-blinking
and stationary for nearly 35 minutes before
flying away."
     "On leaving, they moved laterally with the
Mexican coastline for about five minutes and
then moved out of sight.  Within a few seconds,
the three lights 'streaked' back to near where
they had originally been seen...Local newspapers
have had two articles on the phenomenon.  The
Mexican lights are capable of great speeds and
hover for long periods of time."  (See Filer's Files #41
for 1998, item copyright by John C. Thompson.
Many thanks to George A. Filer of MUFON for
this news story.)

MORE CROP CIRCLES ARE
FOUND IN SASKATCHEWAN

     Two more crop circles were found in Canada's
Saskatchewan province during September.
     According to Paul Anderson of Circles
Phenomenon Research-Canada, the circles were
originally made "in late August or early September"
but were not found until the wheat fields began to
be harvested later in the month.
     On September 14, 1998, residents found a
counterclockwise circle measuring 11 feet
(3.3 meters) in diameter, with a tight spiral lay
of the stems, in a wheat field on the outskirts
of Wapello, Sask. (population 429), a town on
Provincial Highway 601 about 112 miles
(179 kilometers) southeast of Regina.
     A week later, on September 21, 1998,
residents discovered a circle with a ring in a
wheat field near Spy Hill, Sask.  The circle
measured 24 feet (7 meters) in diameter, was
counterclockwise and also had a tight spiral
lay.  Spy Hill is on Highway 8 near the Manitoba
border, about 130 miles (208 kilometers) east
of Regina.  (Many thanks to Paul Anderson of
Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada for
these reports.)

NEAR ON LAST LAP OF
ASTEROID RENDEZVOUS

     One of the unsung Earth spacecraft cruising the
depths of our solar system is NEAR, the Near
Earth Asteroid Rendezvous satellite.  Looking
like an inverted, four-bladed ceiling fan, NEAR
was launched from Earth in 1996 and "is just
weeks from becoming the first man-made object
to be placed into the orbit of a distant asteroid."
     "The Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous
spacecraft will fire rockets on Dec. 20 to settle
into an orbit of an asteroid called Eros that is
streaking across space about 163 million miles
(261 million kilometers) from Earth."
     "The satellite will start orbiting the asteroid
on Jan. 10, 1999."
     "During months of circling the asteroid, the
craft will be slowly lowered until its orbit is just
21 miles (33 kilometers) above the space rock.
The craft will give the first prolonged up-close
look at an asteroid, which are minor planets
in space."
     "Six instruments aboard NEAR will analyze
the composition, magnetic field and mass of the
asteroid, sending the data back to Earth by
radio."
     "Eros is something of a mystery.  The rock is
24 miles (long) by 8 miles (wide).  Scientists
don't know if the rock is solid or if it is a highly
porous body with empty cavities or chunks
of ice...What isn't known is whether Eros was
once part of a bigger planet or if it formed
independently."
     According to Andy Cheng, a Johns Hopkins
researcher and the project scientist for NEAR,
the spacecraft may try for a soft landing on Eros.
"After months in orbit of Eros, researchers may
attempt to put the craft onto the surface of the
asteroid.  Cheng said the spacecraft was not
designed to land but that is one option the
researchers are considering.  The density of
Eros is unknown, but the asteroid is so small
that its gravity force will be only a fraction of
Earth's, making landing there less violent."
(See USA Today for October 13, 1998,
"Satellite is moving into orbit of asteroid.")

from the UFO Files...

1978: DELTA SIERRA JULIET

     Twenty years ago, on October 21, 1978, at
6:10 p.m., Frederick M. Valentich, 21, began his
pre-flight checklist, walking around and inspecting
his blue-and-white Cessna 182.
     Nine minutes later, at approximately 6:19 p.m.,
Fred eased the Cessna off the tarmac at Moorabbin
Airport in Melbourne, Victoria state, Australia,
heading south over the Bass Strait on what was
supposed to be a routine flight to Tasmania.
    At 7:06 p.m., Fred, whose radio call letters were
Delta Sierra Juliet (DSJ) sent an urgent call to
Flight Service (FS) in Melbourne.  Here is the
actual transcript of that conversation.
     DSJ: "Melbourne, this is Delta Sierra Juliet,
is there any known traffic below five thousand (feet)?"
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, no known traffic."
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  I am--seems to be a
large aircraft below five thousand."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, what kind of aircraft
is it?"
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  I cannot confirm.
It is four bright...it seems to me like landing lights."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, roger. and it is a large
aircraft, confirmed?"
     DSJ: "Er--unknown, due to the speed it's
travelling.  Is there any air force activity in this
vicinity?"
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, no known aircraft
in the vicinity."
     DSJ: "Melbourne, it's approaching now from
due east towards me."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet."
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  It seems to me
that he's playing some sort of game.  He's
flying over me two, three times at speeds I
could not identify."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, roger.  What is
your actual level?"
     DSJ: "My level is four and a half thousand,
four five zero zero."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, and you confirm
that you cannot identify the aircraft?"
     DSJ: "Affirmative."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, roger.  Stand by."
     DSJ: "Melbourne, Delta Sierra Juliet,
it's not an aircraft.  It is (static)"
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, can you describe
the...er...aircraft?"
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  As it's flying past,
it's a long shape (static) cannot identify more than
it has such speed (static)  It's before me right
now, Melbourne."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, roger, and how large
would the...er...object be?"
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  Melbourne, it seems
like it's stationary.  What I'm doing right now is
orbiting, and the thing in orbiting on top of me also.
It's got a green light and sort of metallic like.  It's
all shiny on the outside."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet."
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet (static) It's just
vanished."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet."
     DSJ: "Melbourne, would you know what kind of
aircraft I've got?  Is it a military aircraft?"
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, confirm the...er...
aircraft just vanished?"
     DSJ: "Say again."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, is the aircraft still
with you?"
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet, it's (static) now
approaching from the southwest."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet."
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  The engine is rough
idling.  I've got it set at twenty-three, twenty-four
(2300 to 2400 RPM--J.T.), and the thing is coughing."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet, what are your
intentions?"
     DSJ: "My intentions are...ah...to go to King
Island...ah...Melbourne.  That strange aircraft is
hovering on top of me again. (static) It is hovering,
and it's not an aircraft."
     FS: "Delta Sierra Juliet."
     DSJ: "Delta Sierra Juliet.  Melbourne (static
burst for 17 seconds)"
     The burst faded, and the frequency fell silent.
An air-and-sea rescue was launched.  But the
searchers found no trace of Fred Valentich or
his blue-and-white Cessna.
     The Royal Australian Air Force report on
the Valentich case contains the following:
     "Degrees of injury - Presumed fatal."
     "Opinion as to cause -  The reason for the
disappearance of the aircraft has not been
determined."  (See the book WORLD ATLAS OF
UFOs by John Spencer, Smithmark Publishers
Inc., New York, NY 1991, pages 169 to 172.)

     Tomorrow marks the birthday of British
physicist Sir James Chadwick.  Born on October
20, 1891, he won the Nobel Prize for physics in
1935 for his discovery of the neutron.  Sir James
passed away on July 24, 1974.

     We'll be back next week with more saucer
news from around the planet, brought to you by
"the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
See you then.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:05:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:12:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>If you ever read any of my published indexes, two things will
>stand out. 1) the index is complete and not discriminatory in
>any way, plus its accuracy can be independently verified. In
>other words, every article and every author is indexed. I don't
>just index authors I like or happen to agree with 2) I don't use
>my published works to try to convince anyone of the validity or
>lack of validity of any hypothesis related to the UFO problem.
>In other words, I simply don't know what the UFO problem is all
>about and I have no vested interest where the evidence might
>ultimately lead to. My published works are completely devoid of
>any claim whatsoever. It makes for very dull reading. My books
>are not quite as exciting to read as dictionaries are.  ]

<snip>

>I am afraid that access is a problem. For example, there is only
>one place in the US outside of private hands that has a complete
>run of FSR, The Library of Congress. Many of the important
>accumlulations have disappeared after the individual died.
>Surviving relatives don't necessarily have an interest and
>dispose of all the case data and relevant correspondence that
>was gathered over the years with no provisions having been made
>as to the disposition of the research material. Fires and floods
>destroys important collections each year. There has been a
>concerted effort over the past few years among a few select
>researchers to duplicate UFO research holdings and have it at
>diversified locations to insure the chances of its survivability
>for future generations. It is getting harder and harder to
>access UFO data from the past because of all of these factors.

Don't fret too much Ed, new sightings accumulate every day. The
subject is far fom being past-tense.

>My collection is not relevant. It is only a resource used by me
>to build research tools for serious researchers, and I am
>looking 100, 200 years from now. Someone will ask 'Now, what was
>that all about at the end of the 20th Century?' They are not
>going to find out by reading Jerry Clark's Encyclopedia. From
>that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
>were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective. To find out
>actual relevancy, they will need to independently research the
>subject and use whatever resources have survived. If the
>literature is not indexed, future researchers won't ever know
>what might be out there for them to find, read and study, as
>well as research in a timely manner. For example, are you aware
>of Loren Gross's UFOs: A History ongoing series of booklets?
>Over 3,000 pages already published spread over 30 volumes
>discussing the chronological history of UFOs up to 1959. Not
>many people are. Loren Gross is a true serious asset to ufology
>because he does not allow his belief system to interfere with
>his self-chosen task of historian and does not attempt to use
>his pen to influence others. He is not afraid to write a genuine
>history. He doesn't ignore or distort relevant events because he
>doesn't like the person or because the event goes against his
>belief system. One reason why Robert Todd's contributions have
>been so relevant to our understanding and interpretations of
>ufology and government involvement is that he has found out what
>government documents have been out there and shared those
>discoveries with other UFO researchers who then knew what
>government documents there were to study and research further.
>He is one person that has successfully cracked a large portion
>of the bureaucratic walls around this subject and consequently
>provided a better vision for all of us of what is/is not part of
>the UFO problem..

<snip>

>>In addition, it's my understanding that Mr.
>>Clark has been working along the same lines, so why loose your
>>venom on him? Because he goes out on a limb to add personal
>>insight (the nerve of some people!) to the data?

>Please, don't confuse the two of us. The differences are
>insurmountable. Interpretations that are not supported by the
>data are nothing but fabrications at worse and wishful thinking
>at best. He doesn't just add 'personal insight'. He manipulates,
>adds meanings that are not supported by the data and creastes
>interpretations when data is not even present. He has done all
>those things right here on this mailing list. He is
>intellectually dishonest and not to be trusted as a historian.

Your use of "intellectually dishonest" is really awkward. Is
there any other kind of dishonesty? Too polite to call someone a
liar I suppose?

Tell me something - do you release or plan to release your
indices or collections with the provision that no reader may at
any time form any sort of opinion or hypothesis based on the
information therein?

You clearly are expecting wiser folks to come along and sift
through all the same old data at some point. My God, what if
they start speculating? Or worse, what if they reach the same
general conclusions as Mr. Clark? Will you accuse them of
"intellectual dishonesty" as well?

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:09:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]


>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>or more.

>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>parachute would fall that much faster.

>Jim Deardorff

Hi Jim,

As I read your post, several things occurred to me.

First of all, if indeed flares were released at that altitude,
they weren't released by anything from the nearby base. To my
knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are capable of
flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there.

Also, using the distance information supplied by Dr. Maccabee of
the lights in the videos, the distances between "flares" would
have to be measured on the order of scores of miles I would
think. Using this, some reckoning of the speed of the aircraft
should be available using the angular spacing of the lights
(known factor) and their ignition sequences.

In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would have
to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
released in the manner shown in the videos? This information
might be pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very
least.

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:36:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:23:20 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:57:37 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>We're just creating more modern mythology here. I looked at the
>segment repeatedly over the weekend and I am convinced that the
>head movement mentioned is a figment of someone's imagination.
>I just do not see any such thing.

>Yes, the shadow is a nice touch. Easily done with a number of
>computer image programs.

>This could be real film, but considering that the bulk of the
>program was a deliberate hoax I'd be wary of giving it too much
>consideration.


Hi Bob, Errol and list,

I have been reviewing that segment again. Has anyone noticed
that perhaps three objects are seen the first 50 or so
frames(*);

1 - At 12 frames, an object is above and to the left of the F16

2 - At frame 30 you can see the an object ahead and to the left
of the F16 then disappearing behind the clouds. At frame 37 the
object in question moves out of the clouds then back in.

3 - At frame 46 another object appears ahead and below on the
left side of the F16.

I just wonder if anyone has really looked at this footage? Is it
film? No one in the show (KGB Files...) seemed to know that
those objects were there. It wasn't spoken about in the show.


* - Not sure but a frame on video 1/32 of a second? I think it
is.

[Nope - 30 fps - 60 cycles actually allows each frame to consist
 of _two_ frames interlaced on alternate scan-lines..... uh,
 I think I'll just leave it at that..... bag o' dirt time at
 Errol's - damn fall-type flu..... --ebk]


Casual observer,
DonnieS

PS I don't want a crusade on this. My point is that when someone
researches, UFOs, Newspaper and footage to make a tv show, they
gather what marterial they can to make a point. I wouldn't want
to rule out that the researchers for KGB Files..... may have
gathered good and bad footage for the show. Not knowing what
they have.

Good day.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                      Bell's 10/19/98 On-Air Statement

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:51:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:51:21 -0400
Subject: Bell's 10/19/98 On-Air Statement




Source: http://artbell.com/artquits.html


Keith Rowland, Webmaster, posts:

UPDATE 10/19/98 - Art gives us an update on the situation which
was played from tape on Monday nights program, which was hosted
by Hilly Rose. He says:


"Greetings to you from the Kingdom of Nye. Tuesday morning
October 13th without prior notice to anybody without being
advised or pressured by anyone, I resigned my position as host
of this program. I did it for the reasons I gave then, because
of a terrible life-threatening event which occured to my family
about a year ago, as well as events subsequent to it. Although
there is, (and I want to be sure you understand this), no
immediate danger to my family. What did occur then, absolutely
requires my full-time attention now. And to not give it right
now, would surely be negligent and neglectful of those I love.
Also to disclose details of what did occur, would have a rather
immediate negative affect on my family and I will not do that.

Several news organizations, broadcast and print media, have
uncovered what went on. So far, perhaps because of legal
ramifications or one might hope ethical behavior on their part,
they've chosen not to proceed with the story. For this I'm very
thankful. Of course as soon as I can, if the story breaks, and I
will not be the one to break it, I will discuss it with you,
I'll tell you all about it.

You know developing this program, over the past 14 years, has
been one of the great joys of my life. And you should know I
miss it terribly. I'd like to sincerely thank everybody who has
sent their heartfelt support to me. And there are many of you.

Since my resignation, my network has been doing their very best
to help resolve the situation, frankly I on the night I
resigned, I thought it could not be resolved. Now, I hope it
can. Allowing me to return to what I love doing so much! But I
need more time. While I can't discuss what in fact did occur, I
can say this -- It certainly was not a publicity stunt or
contract ploy as rumored by my competitors and detractors. It is
real and serious. This should become self-evident to you when
you know, and you will know.

I believe personally in the power of prayer, if you do, for now,
that's how you can help. Goodnight."


Listen To The Sound Clip Of This Announcement:

http://artbell.com/sound.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 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:05:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:54:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

>>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

<snip>

>The speed was 607 mph. (977 km/h), and the wing-span approx. 55
>ft. (17 m), i.e., within the speeds and dimensions as estimated
>by Arnold.

>But, note that this jet is manned with 1 pilot. (However, this
>is not a problem at all - but Arnold didn't know that.)

Arnold's speed estimate was much higher. Even allowing for error
he estimated 1200 mph. Actually the calculated speed (distance
between Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams divided by the measured time =
50 miles/103 seconds) was about 1700 mph. No jet was going that
fast in 1947 (Chuck Yeager 'broke' the sound 'barrier' in
October 1947 at about 750 mph).





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                       Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:05:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: In Defense of Michael Wolf


>From: authority@webtv.net (Doc Barry)
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:27:28 -0700 (MST)
>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: In Defense of Michael Wolf

>>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: In Defense of Michael Wolf
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:04:10 -0500

>>As Posted On Amazon.com.

>>Read

>>"A Defense of Michael Wolf: The Catchers of Heaven: A Trilogy
>>by Michael Wolf

>></exec/obidos/Author=Wolf%2C%20Michael/002-0519692-1911631>

><snip>

>Michael Wolf, according to his defenders has many degrees,
>Ph.D.s, M.D., law degree, was a flight surgeon with the US Air
>Force, and an insider consultant to the National Security
>Council.

When I saw just how prolific "DR Michael had been" I just
knew.....

I just knew...

I just knew.......

I just knew......

it was time to break out the bullexcrement repellant!
I had enough trouble getting 1 Ph,D.

No time for captain in Air Force,, Surgeon, law, etc.

'Dr. Wllf' is a genius.... in his own mind....

I wonder if Wolf also has a degree in Hot Tub Therapy?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:06:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:10:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 19:27:48 PDT

>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:12:31 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <104744.2543@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>>


>Bruce,

>It is more and more apparent that the extraordinary claims are
>being made by debunkers and their apologists inside and outside
>ufology. When the history of this sad episode (the UFO
>phenomenon and the refusal of those who ought to have known
>better to confront it honestly) is written, I do not doubt that
>it will be cautious, sensible ufologists who are judged the
>conservatives in the debate, the debunkers the wild-eyed cranks.

>I just hope we live long enough to see this thing through. If
>not, we can go to our rest certain of one thing: we were right,
>and they were wrong.

>Cheers,

Thanks for the comment.

and.....

"bottoms up!"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                   Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:05:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:02:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:40:12 +0100
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media Misinterpretation

>>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:03:47 +0100
>>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media
>>Misinterpretation

<snip>

>What Mr. Arnold tried to describe, was - most likely - the
>DISTANCE between the outermost engines, as he says, "on each
>side of the fuselage." (Thanks to Pat McCartney here!)

>By looking at the DC-4 Skymaster, the distance between these
>engines must be be something lower than the total wingspan of,>

>117' (36 m);

>maybe something in-between 15-20 meters?


Yes. However, he estimated the plane distance at 15 miles.

The UFOs were about 20 miles away. Hence there is a scale up
factor of 20/15 times the spacing between the engines. If Arnold
overestimated the distance to the DC-4, then the scale-up factor
to account for the different distances will be larger.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

               Re: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:06:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:39:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation


>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:15:50 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down


>>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:41:10 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: Re: Tasmania: King Island UFO Investigation Turned Down


>>About 12 years ago Richard Haines published a book on this
>>event, "Melbourne Episode", (L.D.A. Press, CA, 1987), with
>>introduction written by Yours Truly....  This book contains more
>>>intend to carry out your own investigation).


>Hello Bruce,

>As I mentioned before this is a case that I think had/has four
>things going for it that as far as I know, no other case has.
>They are 1)the death of the witness 2)the possible death of a
>witness while reporting the sighting 3) the possible death of a
>witness while reporting the event to the authorities and 4) the
>strong possibility that the witnesses death was directly
>attributable to the presence of the UFO. All the other BS aside
>re he faked the whole thing because there was some kind of a
>drug deal in the offing is so rediculous as to be laughable.

>I've looked into this sighting to some degree though not as
>thoroughly as I would like but I've noted some holes in this
>event that as a pilot bother me because they are likely to have
>been missed because the investigators were not pilots. >

>Your mention, Bruce, of the book, 'Melbourne Episode' by Richard
>Haines was news to me. I was unaware that it existed. Is it
>still in print or avaiable somewhere? I'd like to obtain a copy.


You would have to contact Richard Haines directly to find out
about the availability of the book (a "must have" for anyone





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:52:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:41:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:14:54 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:19 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net

>>In case you don't know, the chief UFO analyst (and disc-washer)
>>for CSIPCOP is none other than the "K" man himself.

>Phil Klass claims that all members of MJ-12 and the 'aviary' subscribe
>to his newsletter.  Shouldn't you?

>Ed Stewart


If that is the case is Phil Klass's mailing list available for
sale? ;-)

Acquiring it might solve the whole UFO problem in one fell
swoop!


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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                      Re: Psychic Predictions for 1999

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:06:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:36:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Psychic Predictions for 1999


>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:21:16 -0600
>From: Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research <iufor@frii.com>
>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>,
>Subject: Psychic Predictions for 1999 [Humor].

>While in the supermarket checkout line, a tabloid newspaper
>article caught my eye: "Psychic Predictions for 1999". Upon
>browsing through the article, it became clear to me that I was
>fully as psychic as the author. To prove it, I offer my own
>psychic predictions for 1999, and I fearlessly go on public
>record with them, so that they can be verified as predicted
>events transpire.

I have only one thing to say in the face of these amazing
predictions...


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha

(etc.)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                   -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:15:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:30:31 -0400
Subject: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

This afternoon I received an email from Ohio researcher Don Keating,
who advised that there is no FOX Channel 2 TV station in Cleveland.
Keating added that the only FOX station in Cleveland is WJW Fox Channel
8, located at 5800 S. Marginal Road, right across from Lake Erie just
east of downtown.

Further, a Jamie-Andrea Yanak from Cleveland, Ohio, claiming to be
employed in a local news-media capacity, also stated that there was
no WJBK Fox-Channel 2 in Cleveland.

The following announcement by Yanak was located on an internet
'newsgroup'
in response to the "UFO ROUNDUP" article concerning the October 10
event:

        Unfortunately you have been misled.

        First of all there is no channel 2 in Cleveland, or any
        WJBK. VHF broadcasters have only 3 letters in their FCC
        call signs, not 4. Our FOX affiliate here is WJW channel
        8.  They carried no such story on October 10, or any
        other recent date.

        Working in the local news media myself, I can further
        state that no other reports of this object where made
        by any other TV or radio station in the northeast Ohio
        area, nor carried on the AP wire.

        You've been hoaxed, be more carefull and PERSONALLY
        check your info next time.

        Jamie-Andrea Yanak
        Cleveland, Ohio

In response to the earlier alert from researcher Don Keating, a
message was forwarded to Rev. John E. L. Tenney of the Michigan
Anomalous Information Network (MAIN) requesting clarification of
this issue. Tenney replied as follows:

        The FOX "channel 2" is my station in Detroit. It would only
        make sense that the FOX affilate in Cleveland mentioned in
        our friend's e-mail is the right one since the news reporter
        here, (in Detroit) said that the lights were seen over lake
        Erie.

        As to the footage and my opinion, they are very "unidentified"
        but they seem to be moving extremely slow. I would write them
        off as clouds if it wasn't for the fact that they are very
        defined shapes, (ovals on an angle) and that they are in a
        straight, line to each other. I have a friend that is a
        weathercaster for another local station that I intend on
        showing the videotape to, hopefully he can shed some light on
        the objects.

        Also in the videotape you can see multiple cars driving on a
        road in front of the person who is (obviously standing near
        the road)filming, it seems like someone else should have seen
        what was going on.

        Rev. John

In his earlier message, Tenney stated: "The news director that I spoke
with in Cleveland said that the local weather team eventually declared
the sighting to be a plane." Further, the news director of the Cleveland
station informed Tenney that the videographer who shot the footage was
'a freelancer.' In addition, the newscaster on the Detroit station
announced that the video was recorded above Cleveland, as transcribed
from the videotape retained by Rev. John Tenney. This establishes a
Cleveland-connection to the story, despite our having very little
information available from the specific TV station involved, presumably
a FOX affiliate based in Cleveland.

If a videotape is truly retained by Rev. Tenney, indicating the
broadcast of this suspected UFO video recording, we can conclude that
the suspicions of Jamie-Andrea Yanak are misplaced. Simply because
a suspected UFO videotape is not reported in AP or other local news
media outlets does not mean the event or video-recording never existed.
In fact, Yanak should be advised that the majority of UFO reports or
videotapes which are filtered to the news media rarely -if ever-
acquire widespread reportage or mention. One can argue that this
'lack' of mention is quite routine.

One example of a similar case from Porter, Indiana is located at:

        http://home.fuse.net/task/PORTER_Indiana.htm

in which a suspected UFO videotape was given fleeting coverage in a
few select TV markets and subsequently dismissed by an unspecified
astronomer, only to be forgotten afterward.

We will hope Tenney can have the videotape indepently evaluated and
make the recording -or images from it- available, perhaps on the
internet, when he is capable of doing so. I would also be curious to
learn why the videographer responsible for the recordings decided to
shoot video of objects in the air to begin with: what was it that
made him suspect this to be out of the ordinary? And who was this
person at the weather department that would later discount the video
as airplanes?

October 21, 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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:45:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:50:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

>I don't know. They say the best place to hide a tree is in the
>forest. Perhaps, if Mt. Rainier was as desolate a volcano as you
>describe, it would have been THE ideal place to test the
>accuracy and impact characteristics of missles. After all,
>there'd be hardly anyone around to notice; even if they did, the
>explosions could be attributed to volcanic activity!

Good point Rog. Mt. Rainier is only isolated by her sudden
altitude climb from sea level to her crest (over 14,000 ft.) She
can be seen from Oregon to the Candian Border. If one of those
missiles were the least bit off track, they could have possibly
killed  (only estimates for 1947), over 50,000 people in Yakima
which is only 30 mintues away, 100,000 people in Tacoma which is
only 30 minutes away to the west or/and 250,000 plus in Seattle
which is less than 60 minutes away.

I could be wrong. I am not a military expert. I do know
Vandenberg in California which test missles is very close to
major populations. Anything is a possibility but again I ask how
could it be that in the 40 years after his sighting, he could
not find anything that looked like it or a logical answer to
what he had seen? The man kept scape books on news items and
aviation news from all over the world. He was a good researcher
and keen on news. He would have looked for the obvious.

Not sure what Boeing was up to back then. I do know someone who
worked there in the 40s and will ask his opinion. We did have an
incident in Seattle around the late 50's I believe, where some
men from the power company witnessed a saucer shaped craft
flying out of a hanger at Boeing Field and crashing into a hill.
Seattle Times
reported the incident but no conclusion.

Sincerely,
Kath in Seattle





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:06:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:34:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>In responding to my comments on this thread, Ed snips the most
>important part of my argument - that "ufology" lacks the
>infrastructure to do what he insists is important - "clean up
>its act<

<snip>


Stated with typical Cashman clarity and brevity of thought!
Bravo!

I would like to comment only on the suggestion by Stewart in an
earlier post that the rejection of the Estimate was unimportant
for the acceptance by science of UFO reality (whatever that
means). Cashman's method of turning the argument around (imagine
what would have happened in science if Vandenburg had accepted
it) is good. I approach it another way.

During the investigation by the Project Sign officers and
scientists (yes, scientists; aeronautical engineers, etc.) there
were initially no restrictions on the options for identiication
of reported objects (flying saucers)

a) misidentification (birds, planes, supermen,unusual
   natural phenomena, etc.)

b) mental effects (hallucinations, etc.)

c) hoaxes (outright intentional fabrication)

d) flying craft not made on earth.

Many of the reports (I believe Sign had analyzed about 180 in
depth by the time of the Estimate) included explicit
descriptions of objects or lights (at night) which looked unlike
manmade aircraft and/or did things (maneuvers) which manmade
aircraft could not do.

The analysts at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, the Air
Technical Intelligence Center of the Air Materiel Command, were
very very smart people. As I have pointed out in my book, The
FBI/UFO Connection, they were experts in their fields and they
used their best reasoning to arrive at the logical conclusion
that these were (a) craft not made on earth and (b) were either
remotely controlled or piloted by non-human intelligences.

The result of their analysis and reasoning was placed into the
Estimate which was then, according to Ruppelt, passed up the
chain of command to Vandenburg. He rejected it. The men from
ATIC visited the General. He told them, in essence, sorry wrong
answer! The Estimate was later ordered to be destroyed. (One of
the people who has claimed to have seen it, Dewey Fournet, may
still be alive......).

Anyway, one can imagine the ATIC analysts going "home" with
their tails between their legs, feeling chastised. They had used
their best reasoning and had arrived at a logical answer to the
saucers and had been told by the General... "sorry wrong answer"
or something like that.

The net result of the rejection is that (d) was removed from the
list of options. Now all reports had to be shoehorned (forced)
into categories a,b, and c. Hence we have the final project Sign
report (a last gasp of the ET proponents) admitting that not all
sghtings had been explained, but saying that Project Saucer (the
public version) was working hard to explain all reports... and
then Project Grudge, which fulfilled that promise (which
included offering hokey explanations for the 50 toughest cases).

To the outside world, then it appeared that everything was being
explained. There was no support by the Air Force for
further research into the saucer problem and the "propaganda"
(which is what it was) statements by th Air Force served to
dampen the interest. (Ironically, this worked counter to the
desires of AF intelligence to collect more data. The chief of
AF intel had to send out requests for further data after each
major public statement by the AF about how the saucer problem
was solved, or uninteresting or whatever).

The point here is that Vandenburg set a policy.. ET craft are not
an acceptable explanation
....which had a "trickle down" effect of dampening scientific
interest in the UFO problem. The ATIC researchers were moved
out of Project Sign and Grudge to other locations. The quality
of investigation dropped
(why be serious if the seemingly logical answer was not allowed
to be used?)

By the early 1950'2 the TRADITION had been set.... UFOs/saucers
are nothing but mistakes and hoaxes, etc., there is nothing new
or interesting to scientists there, so forget them. Menzel, with
his high level of credibiliy, enforced this TRADITION by
presenting supposed explanations for all the sightings he listed
in his first book. He was the first scientist to publish a book
on the subject and he set the tone for generations of scientists
to come! (Menzel deceived the people.... see my papers on Arnold
and the CB Moore sighting).

TRADITION is so important here that you could have a portly
gentleman dancing around and singing about it (Fiddler on the
Roof).

Like an albatross, that TRADITION still hangs around our necks.
It is reinforced by the SELF-COVER UP of scientists and the
press/newsmedia people who don't wish for various reasons to
come to grips with this phenomenon. As long as UFOs don't kick
too many people in the rear ends the subject will remain at the
periphery of the radar screens of most people and scientists in
particular.... barely detected out at the furthest range of
observation. However, if either a major, major landing event (or
something similar) or else a major infux of
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.00 which would allow scientists to be
supported while doing real, actual, legitimate, unbelievable
research into UFO sightings, etc., .. were to occur, you could
see a switch around occur almost "overnight" If neither of these
happen, then we will continue "Slouching Toward..... not
Gamorrah (I hope) but Recognition....

Yes, folks, there will be a critical mass when EVERYONE
(or almost everyone) is a witness. Suddenly
a "little boy" will cry
out....
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES, MOMMY...
and everyone will say..

Yes, we knew it all along.......





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

               1980 Close Encounter Near Fort Sill Army Base,

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:47:51 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:46:01 -0400
Subject: 1980 Close Encounter Near Fort Sill Army Base,


Source: "alt.alien.visitors", October 4.

Stig

*******

From: daydisk@webtv.net (charles stuart)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: EXCLUSIVE! 1980 Close Encounter Near Military Base!
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 20:35:22 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: WebTV Subscriber


The following story I believe to be true. Knowing the alleged
witness rather well and all of the circumstances involved, I
cannot help but come to this conclusion. IF true, it means one
of two things: 1) either some branch of our government has
possessed very exotic technology since AT LEAST 1980 or 2)
"someone else" does and can go wherever they please with
complete impunity. Hopefully, this case will comprise a chapter
of the book I've been periodically working on for some time...

Kelly K. was, at the time of this writing, 35 years old, had
(has) a B.S. in math and was the manager of a large, local
hospital.

It was at a Superbowl party in January of 1995 that I was made
aware of the fact that she had told a few friends about a UFO
she said she had seen some years ago near the Texas-Oklahoma
border. My brother, Bill, gave me the scantiest of details and
suggested that I ask her about it. The next time she walked into
the room, I took her aside and did just that.

"Well, yes, I saw a UFO but it wasn't around here and it was a
long time ago," she responded.

I had known Kelly for several years and knew her well enough to
know that she was not a "ufo groupie" simply because the subject
had never even come up. As it was to turn out, she had never
seen a UFO before the incident in question, nor since. This,
along with the fact that she was honest, level-headed and had
never lied to me makes her an excellent witness, in my opinion.
At my suggestion,she accompanied me to the kitchen where there
were fewer distractions. Then, while the television blared in
the other room amid shouts, jeers and beers, she let her story
unfold.

It had happened on a Friday in mid-late October of 1980 and
involved driving directly under a craft shaped like a rounded
disk with a curved indentation in the front which apparently
scanned her boyfriend (at the time) and her with an orange-red
beam of light which Kelly said "went through my files." (Her
mind). She told me that she got a good look at the bottom of the
craft and that it featured a "grid-work of grey or black metal
fins going in all directions." Additonally, it was divided into
four quadrants by a cross of even darker material, solid and
smooth in appearance. Here, then, are her exact words as written
in a report form which she so graciously took about an hour
filling out in great detail:

"I and a friend (boyfriend) were moving from Lawton, Okl. to
Austin, Tex. -- he drove a U-Haul, I drove our car behind him.
As we left Lawton (10p.m.), we traveled south on HE Bailey
Turnpike. (Rt.44). About 6 miles out of town we saw two bright
lights above the road. I thought they were street lights --
although it seemed weird that there would be such lights THERE.
I knew it was not an airplane; the lights were perfectly still
and very bright. I thought it might be a helicopter but as we
got closer I knew that it was another kind of aircraft. It was
70 feet above the highway, about 50 feet wide directly over the
southbound lane of the highway. I could very clearly see the
craft. As we drove under it, an orange/red light came on,
filling the air with an orange color. I did not seem to be still
driving --- I felt as if the car were slowing down but the
speedometer was steady---this seemed to be something that I
'observed' but had little control over. We pulled over one-half
mile after passing under the craft and discussed going back for
a closer look or getting out of there. We were excited and
scared. We could still see the craft 'parked' over the road. We
got back in our respective cars and drove on. When we stopped
about another 6 miles down the road, immediately after driving
through a tollbooth, my friend told me that our dog had been
looking up and howling as we passed under the craft. The
red/orange light seemed to have 'read our minds' or something
very unusual and very hard to describe. We then drove on,
stopping again about 25 miles down the road in Witchita Falls.
We drew pictures for each other of what we had seen. We stopped
several times during the drive but arrived in Austin,Tx. the
next day about 9 a.m.

******************************************************

Note:

* Kelly said she seemed to possess some type of psychic ability
for several hours after the event; knowing what people were
going to say just before they said it.

* The encounter occurred just a few miles south of Fort Sill
Army Base and about 30 miles north of Sheppard AFB.

* Two "classic" cases were to occur shortly thereafter in
December of 1980 : Cash-Landrum in S-E Texas and Bentwaters in
England.

* Her ex-boyfriend's name is David Hardzog. Thus far I have been
unable to locate him...

* Kelly emphasized the fact that the UFO remained perfectly
still and did not wobble the slightest bit. In addition, she
heard no sound.

cgs





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:48:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

Hi All,

A doctor in New York (a fertility expert) was busted
for filing false insurance claims so that his clients
could be artificially inseminated and get 'coverage'
for it. That's not why I'm writing though.

The reporter also interviewed a representative of
the Health insurance outfit that was being bilked.
The woman made a comment that shocked me and
left me numb.

She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

This is the first I've heard of anything as widespread
as what that lady said. I would appreciate any info
that any of you can provide.

It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!

Peace,

John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                 Re: Public Urged To Attend Area 51 Hearings

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:46:18 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:22:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Public Urged To Attend Area 51 Hearings

Source: Norio Hayakawa via "alt.ufo.reports".

Stig

*******

From: groomwatch@aol.com (GroomWatch)
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Public urged to attend coming hearings on AREA 51
Date: 20 Oct 1998 07:49:09 GMT

The Air Force has just filed (on September 21, 1998) an
application to extend its past withdrawal of approximately 3
million acres of public land for the Nellis Air Force Range
(including 2,900,000 acres they expropriated in 1986,  90,000
acres that surround the controversial AREA 51/Groom Lake area
and the Groom Mountains that they expropriated in 1988 and the
4,000 acres of Whites Sides/Freedom Ridge area adjacent to AREA
51 that they expropriated in 1995).

According to the official public notice posted on the Federal
Register (October 2, 1998......Volume 63, Number 191, notices,
page 53096-53097):

The withdrawal of land will expire on November 5, 2001, unless
extended. The Air Force states that it has "determined there is
a continuing military need for the land". The Air Force also
says that "the Range is used as a national test and training
facility for military equipment and personnel. The Range
provides for realistic, secure, simulation of a battle area,
complete with surface and air defense systems, command/control
systems, and targets. These activities need to be performed in a
secure area to ensure public safety".

The withdrawal extension requires legislative action by the
Congress. For a period of 90 days from October 2, 1998, ALL
CONCERNED CITIZENS who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or
objections in connection with the proposed withdrawal extension
may present their views in writing to the Nevada State Director
of the Bureau of Land Management. Comments should be sent to the
Nevada State Director, BLM,  1340 Financial Blvd., P.O. Box
12000, Reno, Nevada 89520. (For further information, contact:
Dennis J. Samuelson,  702-861-6532).

There will be 7 public meetings. The purpose of these meetings
is for ALL interested persons to comment on the proposed
extension of the withdrawal and the associated draft legislative
environmental impact statement.

Each meeting will begin with an open house at 6:30 p.m. The
purpose of the open house is for people to gather information on
the proposed land withdrawal extension and ask questions.
Representatives from the Air Force will be there to answer
questions. A formal public hearing will begin at 7:30 p.m. for
each meeting and will continue until 10:00 p.m. ALL CONCERNED
CITIZENS  will be given the opportunity to make formal remarks
during the hearing. The 7 meetings will be conducted at the
following locations on the dates indicated:

November 9, 1998,  Indian Springs Community Center, Indian Springs, NV.
November 10, 1998,  El Dorado High School, Las Vegas, NV.
November 11, 1998, Caliente Youth Center, Caliente, NV.
November 12, 1998, Pahrump Valley High School, Pahrump, NV.
November 13, 1998, Beatty High School, Beatty, NV.
November 16, 1998, Tonopah Convention Center, Tonopah, NV.
November 17, 1998, Airport Plaza Hotel, Reno, NV.

We urge ALL concerned citizens (as well as the newsmedia) to
attend any of these meetings. We are not against the
government's legitimate use of the Nellis Air Force Range
(including AREA 51) for the realization of much needed research,
development and testing as part of the continual effort to
improve all aspects of our strategic national defense programs.
It will be a great chance to voice the public's concerns,
however, on several AREA 51-related yet unresolved issues: for
example:

Who or whatever is in charge of AREA 51 needs to be held
accountable for what may be numerous criminal infractions
against Constitutionally mandated rights of American citizens.
With this in mind, we would like to present the following
specific proposals at the meetings:

1) that the government, through its most appropriate agency
(whichever one may be designated) and through publicly
recognized media, give a statement, once and for all, of
assurance that the former AREA 51 workers were or are being
medically treated for their illnesses contracted while toxic
substances were illegally burnt on the site

2) that the government construct a clearly marked new fence or
other substantial border structure all along the restricted
boundary line, particularly on both sides of Groom Lake Road,
instead of vague, thin orange posts posted wide apart.

3) that the government construct a new guard shack right at the
restricted boundary line on Groom Lake Road, instead of the
present guard shack which is more than a third of a mile inside
the restricted area.

4) that a recognized Public Affairs Office be established
specifically for this base, not the PA office at Nellis AFB
which is apparently neither cleared nor qualified to give decent
information regarding the base since its is apparently not a
Nellis asset.

5) that the government give this multifaceted base a more
concrete designation and mission description, and not just a
vague designation like "an operating base by Groom Lake", which
is still being used. The lack of an official name of the base
could bring about more problems in the future when dealing with
future accidents, employee-compensation cases or any other legal
efforts relating to the base and its
activities should such situations arise in the future.

Hope to see you there!!!

http://members.aol.com/GroomWatch

http://www.eagle-net.org/groomwatch


Norio Hayakawa
 who also produces
the excellent Journal The circular review, and he makes a good
cup of tea to boot. As he lives only ten minutes from myself.

And he would have to disagree with the circle makers.

>that's where I drew my conclusions

That would be nice but it would appear that you are drawing
there conclusions not your conclusions, and you have allready
stated that what you have to say is irelervent.

>So maybe they can burst your paranormal bubble for you Roy,
>I mean Max.

I see your memory is going again, here's an important tip, the
first name in at the top of this mail has the name of the person
on it who you are responding to..make things easy to follow,
Errol the Bruce,  had this done so that people from lots of
different places around mundane planet earth can interact and
understand the format easily it also makes the job of formatting
for the updates crew at little easier if you forget my name then
scroll back its at the top

So if you wish to call me by some one else's name its ok as you
have already informed me that what you think is irelervent.
Low self esteem and paranoia that a bad mix.

>In no more than twenty words, can you give a brief but mundane
>explanation, as to the origin of the whole thing?

>If you mean ufology then no, can you?

There is nothing mundane about ufology.

>Max I think you have both over stepped the mark on your sarcasm,
>you seem to think I have a problem with ufology.

Your contradicting your self again, you said
>Because I don't personally get upset if the answers don't go my
>way, it appears others do.

I do not think you have got a problem with ufology i think you
have got a problem with some unknown pecieved threat from Roy
Hale. I dont care about what you think is going on with Roy
Hale, I have responded to your post, with questions and comment,
to which the purpose the list sevice is designed to do, and you
have spent your time taliking about  this other person and
washing machines, i do not care about anything other than have
you answered the questions that i put to you, just me on my own
no help needed, And you have not

You have got a problem, paranoid

>Tony
>Proof by procrastination
>Watch the BBC test card

Why is there a crop circle in the center?

Max Burns  ( On his own)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:06:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:20:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:41:30 -0400
From: Max Burns AlienHype1'@Aol.com
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:41:30 -0400
From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:40:59 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>Mr Spurrier, What is your opinion? Have you studied in detail
>the possible options available for the origin of the phenomena?

>I have no immediate opinion on the BOL but have deduced from the
>evidence that the circle makers have presented that they are not
>directly responsible for the creation of crop formations. Any
>evidence to the contrary is gratefully appreciated.

May I ask if the BOL are not directly responsible, to what area
are they responsible with regard to the crop circles?

>Do you offer any evidence that the lights in question are not
>involved in the creation of some of the crop circles that appear
>around the UK and the rest of the World?

>Only that like many other things such as a Zanussi
>fridge/freezer, Citroen Xantia, and the Starship Enterprise etc.
>as they have never been witnessed making one, however, circle
>makers have.

Oh yes the circles makers without doubt have been and do create
a percentage of the circles that appear on the ground during the
growing season.

>Zanussi fridge/freezer, Citroen Xantia, and the Starship Enterprise
>etc

Get a check up from the neck up will ya

>If you answered no to the previous question, then these lights
>as a possible cause should not be discounted and the data should
>stand with all data regarding all peoples idea's and opinion's
>about the origin of the crop circle enigma

Why? circle makers actually creating formations is a reality.

The problem of the matter really is down to a good old time and
motion study, you see if you divide the number of circles
created by the amount of people involved in the formation of man
made crop circles and include the number of nights available in
the year for the production of these circles, with all the miles
that would have to be covered and the fact that it is only dark
for 4-5 hours during a large aspect of the time frame, they
simply would not have the manpower or the time to have completed
such a large scale almost military style run operation. Never
mind the fact that under supervision the crop circle makers
could not reproduce the bending without fracture on the stalk of
the crop circles, when they were asked to reproduce one of the
complex patterns the ones with the undamaged stalks.

>I believe you and I both know that, what was being infered was
>that the gathering of people with an interest, seemed to
>consider the footage worth a viewing.

>Crop circle investigators gather in Wiltshire attempting to
>prove that et's are behind the creation of formations. UFO
>footage in the area do not constitute proof that they are
>responsible for creating crop formations.

Well I do not know about the rest of the readers of updates but
I was debating glowing orbs and whether they are creating some
of the crop circles that appear like clockwork every year, still
carry on about something else if you like

Roy said
>Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth
>Lights or even optical illusions?

I said
>Probably not.

you said
>Guess again, not according to the Colin Andrews helicopter
>footage as seen on the US program Sightings.. to which the UK
>military even denied that they had any helicopters in the area
>that day..

>You are saying they are they are earth lights or optical
>illusions, no?

Ok Tony try to keep up, the applicable part of the question was:

>Are Military Helicopter pilots been sent out to chase Earth Lights

You said, probably not

I said, guess again and then supplied information that the the
military have indeed investigated the BOL which was caught on
film and then confirms the military denial of any such activity,
they said we did not have any helicopters in the area which is a
lie as confirmed by the video footage

>I  still lack evidence from you and Roy that these are responsible
>for crop formations.

Thats just typical of you back seat of the car ufologists, why
dont you get out of the back seat of the car and go out and
collect some information, for one I am not trying to supply you
with evidence and although I have not spoken with Roy Hale, I do
not belive that his mission in life is to furnish you with this
proof, which you have allready stated

>Perhaps those allegedly
>made by anomalous balls of lights should be considered hoaxed,
>if it can be proved they have actually created a formation..

These were your exact words Tony I ask you what would be the
point of trying to supply this evidence if discovered you have
allready stated that if it can be prooved, it should be
considerd a hoax.you have allready decided I however am open to
all the available hypoth's regarding the crop circle mystery,
and I hope that one day through sterling investigations the
truth about the crop circle mystery will be uncovered.

And if it turns out to be Doug without Dave or Dave without
Doug, I cannot remember which one has passed away
Then that will do for me

>No, I ask you, where is the evidence that BOL are responsible
>for crop formations, after all that was the original discussion
>point not whether BOL actually exist.

You are the _ONE_ who the that started talking about UFOs and
aliens, fridge freezers, and star trek, and other stuff too
mundane to be repeated again

>Mr Spurrier, what do you think is going on, regarding these
>light formations?

>What I think is irrelevant.

Agreed you dont know what you are talking about

>There is proof that circle makers can and do create crop
>formations.

Well done Tony another brilliant investigation, yes and the
postman also delivers the mail. No one is disputing that some of
the circles have been made by this band of merry men with crop
fetishes.

>Roy, I mean Max,

Memory going is it, getting to late for you, perhaps a nap and a
warm milk

>I don't have a problem with BOL being anomalous unidentified objects

That good to hear because they are

>but I do with crop formations being promoted as messages from
>other worlds.

Well you have your problem its your right and you might well
deserve it, However the other hypoth's are also allowed space
under the helmet of free speech and expression of thought like
it or lump it. or you could raise a peoples army and seize
control of the country.

It could be your first new law when you get in power

>So what you are saying is that if evidence surfaces that prooves
>that, some circles may have been created by the balls of light.
>You will move to call the thing hoaxed, if it can be prooved
>that the balls of light have actually created a formation..

>The optimum points here are that you say " may have been created
>by the balls of light", of course many things could in theory
>have made them BUT circles makers have proved that they can and
>do make these formations.

OK lets hold this thought, you too Tony its Max not Roy, it was
you who said.

>If evidence emerges that prooves that BOL has caused a formation,

THAT WAS PROOF EMERGES WASNT IT?

>It should be considered a hoax.

Why would you want to discredit debunk what ever something that
you said if prooved should be considered a hoax?

Yes let's all get past the fact that some of the formations we all know
are made by the so called circle makers, No one is disputing that
if it makes you feel better, I agreed earlier with that statement and
I still do

>Well that's hardly the comment of a sceptic even, at least true
>sceptics the likes of Andy Denne. are always willing to look at
>any evidence, and simply decide what the evidence shows, you
>however are saying that if the balls of light can be shown to
>have created the pattern, then its a hoax.

>Provide evidence that BOL do make the formations and I will
>consider it, but to date no evidence is forthcoming.

Pray tell what would be the point of trying to get you to agree
with evidence if supplied, as you have allready voted.. And im
sure no one is supprised to hear its mundane choice or bust,
havent you got anything better to do

>What would you do ignore the evidence?

>No, I have conversed with some circle makers and they would
>likely agree that I have looked at the phenomenon from a neutral
>stand point.

WE BOTH KNOW THAT IS NOT TRUE, SCROLL BACK UP THE
PAGE YOU ARE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF

>Why is this your stance?

>Because I don't personally get upset if the answers don't go my
>way, it appears others do.

I am so glad to hear that, but the question was refering to your
statement, when you stated that if:

>If evidence emerges that prooves that BOL has caused a formation,
>It should be considered a hoax.

So I will repeat it for you in the hope of getting an answer
which the subject matter will be about BOL and crops circles,
you said

>If evidence emerges that prooves that BOL has caused a formation,
>It should be considered a hoax.

I asked?

>Why is this your stance?

>However I do believe that on some of your supposed research
>expo's to Sizewell in search of the large black so called Flying
>Triangle, ufology seemed to all of a sudden been left on the
>back seat so to speak.

>You've only heard about the sky watches at Sizewell,

Yes and when the story was being told to me I had to ask them to
stop, because it was all starting to sound like a mills and boon
novel without the talk dark and hansome hero..

>Perhaps Roy should investigate your answers better for you, or
>whatever.

Investigate my answers I am sorry i did not realise it was a
quiz, i though that my comments and questions poised to your
post were more than adequate, and why I would want or need too
now or at any time in the future, have to ask some body else to
voice my opinion, I am not short of a few words, and I am quite
happy thank you, making my own decisions and asking my own
questions, why would I want to ask you questions on behalf of
ROY Hale, you will not answer my questions, he can wait his
turn.

Can we go with the what ever, these are my questions in reply to
your postings on this group...

Can anyone say paranoid real quick five time while looking in
the mirror?

>Are you just looking for a paranormal escape to life?

"Why do you know where I can buy one cheap." I am into the ufo
subject to try to gain answers to questions raised because of
the large amount of unexplained at this time phenomena, what
ever the prooven answers are if or when they come.. Will be just
fine and dandy for me. not escape choice in looking into a
subject that i find interesting.

How about you?

>however, if evidence does surface then it should be considered  .
>but over this period of time it seems unlikely that it ever will..

What period of time are you talking about the time taken for me
to respond to your reply to my post?

>Pray tell Mr Spurrier, can you show us this evidence that
>although we all know that some circles are hoaxes, you can now
>proove through that all the cirlcles are hoaxes..
>All of them can't be hoaxes, or they'd be genuine.

Well actually you are wrong the premise of the question was, we
know that some of the circles are being hoaxed when the question
is coming from the standpoint the that the BOL  could be
involved in making these circles, the circle makers are the hoax
bandits, or is the BOL copying off the circle makers.

As the bone of contention is that we know that the circle makers are
making there own circles, and that it is the opinion of a large number
of researchers into the subject that they suspect  that the BOL
is either making or involved in the creation of some of the
circles, and therefore is refered to as the originator,

>Perhaps you're better off talking to the circle makers themselves.,

What and have them continue with this sharade when they make a
few circles and take credit for the better ones that they did
not make but who is gonna say, the BOL cannot shout up well not
yet anyway

I have spent some time around at the home of Nick Nicholson,
crop circle researcher (in the field hands on) who also produces
the excellent Journal The circular review, and he makes a good
cup of tea to boot. As he lives only ten minutes from myself.

And he would have to disagree with the circle makers.

>that's where I drew my conclusions

That would be nice but it would appear that you are drawing
there conclusions not your conclusions, and you have allready
stated that what you have to say is irelervent.

>So maybe they can burst your paranormal bubble for you Roy,
>I mean Max.

I see your memory is going again, here's an important tip, the
first name in at the top of this mail has the name of the person
on it who you are responding to..make things easy to follow,
Errol the Bruce,  had this done so that people from lots of
different places around mundane planet earth can interact and
understand the format easily it also makes the job of formatting
for the updates crew at little easier if you forget my name then
scroll back its at the top

So if you wish to call me by some one else's name its ok as you
have already informed me that what you think is irelervent.
Low self esteem and paranoia that a bad mix.

>In no more than twenty words, can you give a brief but mundane
>explanation, as to the origin of the whole thing?

>If you mean ufology then no, can you?

There is nothing mundane about ufology.

>Max I think you have both over stepped the mark on your sarcasm,
>you seem to think I have a problem with ufology.

Your contradicting your self again, you said
>Because I don't personally get upset if the answers don't go my
>way, it appears others do.

I do not think you have got a problem with ufology i think you
have got a problem with some unknown pecieved threat from Roy
Hale. I dont care about what you think is going on with Roy
Hale, I have responded to your post, with questions and comment,
to which the purpose the list sevice is designed to do, and you
have spent your time taliking about  this other person and
washing machines, i do not care about anything other than have
you answered the questions that i put to you, just me on my own
no help needed, And you have not

You have got a problem, paranoid

>Tony
>Proof by procrastination
>Watch the BBC test card

Why is there a crop circle in the center?

Max Burns  ( On his own)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 06:47:24 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:47:17 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:59:04 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:57:37 -0400 (EDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:47:46 -0500
>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>>>>From: Ed Fouche <fouche@connecti.com>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment
>>>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:19:26 -0500

>>>>>Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:05:24 -0500
>>>>>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>>Subject: A different question about KGB Files Show

>>>>>Hi Errol and list,

>>>>>I have been searching through the archive of Updates messages
>>>>>and have found no references to one piece of footage my quick
>>>>>eye picked up on. I ran the tape over and over with my friends
>>>>>and we all agreed what we saw. So now I look for different
>>>>>opinions.

>>>>Okay

>>>>>The one segment of film I saw that was rather intriguing was the
>>>>>F16 and I think a Mig29. The MIG29 (?) was filming over his left
>>>>>wing at the F16 when something off the F16 left wing moved
>>>>>behind and clouds then back out. Remember the footage? Well, if
>>>>>you watch the pilot of the F16, apparently when the MIG pilot
>>>>>saw the object he signaled to the F16 and the pilot of the F16
>>>>>snapped his head to look out over his left wing. Did anyone
>>>>>catch that. That is a definite <(spell corrected) piece of
>>>>>evidence that something was out there. Something that both
>>>>>pilots saw.

>>>>>What your take on this? Looking for input.

>>>>I agree totally. I set up the F-16 in the far east. I was with
>>>>the bed-down cadre in Okinawa and Korea in 1980 assigned to the
>>>>6100 LSS at Kadena AFB. It is an F-16, and that is a UFO, and
>>>>damned excellent evidence.

>>>>I don't usually comment, but I just had to respond to your post.

>>>>Best wishes.

>>>>>From the author of: Alien Rapture - The Chosen,

>>>>Edgar Fouche

>>>Damn. . . Guys! Admittedly not having the best copy, I reviewed
>>>the segment very carefully and could detect the definitive pilot
>>>head movement described -- But! Why has no one mentioned the
>>>very definite shadow the UFO casts as it drops into the clouds!
>>>Now _that_ was a dazzler, easily seen in even my bad copy!

>>>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>>We're just creating more modern mythology here. I looked at the
>>segment repeatedly over the weekend and I am convinced that the
>>head movement mentioned is a figment of someone's imagination.
>>I just do not see any such thing.

>>Yes, the shadow is a nice touch. Easily done with a number of
>>computer image programs.

>>This could be real film, but considering that the bulk of the
>>program was a deliberate hoax I'd be wary of giving it too much
>>consideration.

<snip>

>Great suffering ZOT!

>I reviewed my post and where it read "Admittedly not having the
>best copy, I reviewed the segment very carefully and could
>detect the definitive pilot head movement described -- " .....

>Should read "could _not_ detect the definitive pilot head
>movement described - "I am sore ashamed..... <g>

>Regarding the shadow, I thought the mechanics of a _real_ shadow
>was extremely _hard_ to fake. That's what I understood from Dr.
>Maccabee's treatment of concurrent shadows. This is incorrect
>then, Bob?

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com


How hard a shadow is to fake depends on what you want it cast
on.  Cast onto a complex 3-D structure like a building is not so
simple. Cast onto amorphous clouds is child's play.

Because shadows are important in photo-realistic computer
rendering there are a number of software apps and plugins
specifically designed to create them. Casting shadows onto
complex surfaces is even getting easier now.

I'm not saying that there is proof that this footage is fake,
just that the shadow in no way proves it is real.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 05:29:02 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:44:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 04:18:55 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 98 17:05:17 PDT

>>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
>>>From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Sagan, however, stacked the deck with skeptical
>>scientists, most of whom (e.g., Philip Morrison, whose own
>>knowledge, such as it was, was based, by his own admission, on
>>occasional casual reading of the UFO literature) had little or
>>no investigative experience and were largely unfamiliar with the
>>evidence.

>Typical Jerome Clark distortion we have come to experience on
>this mailing list. The title of Philip Morrison's presentation
>was 'The Nature of Scientific Evidence: A Summary'. Dr. Steven
>J. Dick, a reference recommended by Jerome Clark on a previous
>post for his observations on "Edward U. Condon, UFOs and the
>Various Cultures of Science" describes Morrison's contribution
>to the conference thusly in his book 'The Biological Universe',
>page 306 - from a chapter in the book which according to Steven
>J. Dick was directly based from his notes of his previously
>cited paper by Jerome Clark.

>       "Philip Morrison, with his penchant for zeroing in on
>the significant issues, argued that the debate came down to the
>nature of scientific evidence. 'Reproducibility' was not enough,
>for one could not reproduce an aurora or eclipse, nor was 'hard
>evidence' enough (or Darwin would have been in trouble). The
>prime requirement for responsible evidence, he held, drawing a
>parallel with the nineteenth-century acceptance of meteorites as
>extraterrestrial, was 'independant and multiple chains of
>evidence, each capable of satisfying a link-by-link test of
>meaning.' Neither the extraterrestrial hypothesis nor any other
>explanation of UFOs had multiple chains of evidence or a
>link-by-link test."

The two scientists most qualified to discuss the UFO evidence at
the AAAS panel were Hynek and McDonald, who had an enormous
amount of investigative experience and thorough familiarity with
the data. Morrison, on the other hand, had -- by his own
admission -- no more familiarity than casual reading of
unspecified UFO literature (George Adamski? Frank Edwards?
Brinsley le Poer Trench?). In no other field than UFO-bashing
would this sort of ignorance qualify one as an expert. Hynek
and McDonald rightly objected to Morrison's claim to expertise
or insight, and I suspect most people would. Ignorance is _not_
strength, even in UFO-debunking.

>>If this is tolerance, ignorance is strength, war is peace, and I am
>>emperor of the moon.

>>>Please, it is not necessary to demonize a respected man and a
>>>wonderful communicator ('Cosmos' probably brought many people
>>>into the mind frame necessary to think about UFOs etc) just
>>>because he disagrees with you and may actually have good arguing
>>>points, just as you most likely do to support your position.

I have become convinced that Ed Stewart, who is the most abusive
polemicist I have seen in this field next to Bob Todd, honestly
cannot tell the difference between criticism and demonization.
It is his view, repeatedly betrayed in prose that can only be
characterized as consistently mean-spirited, that one cannot
disagree with him without being a bad human being. I have
nowhere said or implied that Sagan and Morrison were bad human
beings (I have neither opinion nor information on that subject
-- nor, actually, interest); what I did say is that they did not
advance UFO research or offer much elucidation about the nature
of the UFO phenomenon. I am sure everybody on this list except
Ed Stewart grasped my point.

>>Interesting that our correspondent here uses the verb
>>"demonize." Sagan, as his 'Demon-Haunted World' book makes
>>clear, charged, and may have even believed on some level, that
>>people who hold views about controversial anomalies different
>>from his are little better than superstition-crazed
>>demonologists. Sagan's role in ufology is not, to be fair, so
>>uniformly dismal as Donald Menzel's was,

>Just a minor point on Menzel. We have all been told how demon
>Menzel's debunking of UFOs was so devastating to ufology that to
>this date he still exerts an influence even though buried in his
>grave for a quarter century. Interesting that while alive he
>wasn't able to convince the Air Force of his debunking
>explanations. He must of been some kind of influence to
>accomplish from the grave what the Air Force refused to listen
>to while he was alive! On another note, it was Sagan's stacked
>deck of skeptical scientists, including Menzel, that lobbied the
>Air Force to preserve intact the Project Blue Book files for
>future generations to be able to study and research.

At least we agree on something: Menzel "still exerts an
influence even though buried in his grave." His work was cited
as definitive in an anti-UFO rant by Frederick Crews in the
influential New York Review of Books a few weeks ago.

Beyond that:

"Must have," not "must of," Ed. For revealing perspectives on
Menzel, I refer interested readers to James McDonald's
documented examples of Menzel's free use of pseudoscience in the
pursuit of UFO explanations, or to astronomer Ian Seymour's
observation on Menzel's methodology and willingness to distort
data, or to the private views of Ruppelt and other Air Force
luminaries of Menzel (highly unfavorable). All of these are
discussed in my UFO Encyclopedia, and I cite bibliographic
references for those seeking more information. I also recommend,
if you can find it, Brad Sparks's privately circulated monograph
"Refuting the Skeptics: A Close Look at Donald H. Menzel"
(1977).

>>but it was not among
>>his better or more admiral moments as a scientist, and it is
>>foolish - and blind to unhappy reality - to praise it.

>Jerome Clark also took issue with an obituary that Barry
>Greenwood wrote in JUST CAUSE praising Carl Sagan's
>contributions and wrote a typical Jerome Clark letter for which
>Barry Greenwood rebutted in the following issue, JUST CAUSE #50,

>03/97, pages 4-6. The rebuttal is too lengthy to re-type here in
>its entirety. Suffice to say that Jerry Clark's pettiness and
>obsession with a dead exobiologist did not go unanswered. The
>initial paragraph of Barry Greenwood's response should be enough
>to make its point:

        "I am sorry that my memory of Carl Sagan's influence on
>not just my own interest in the search for extraterrestrial life
>but on science's as well has bothered you. It is however
>precisely what I had expected from a good chunk of the UFO
>community. Sagan was critical of the notion that aliens are
>visiting the earth. He did not deny that UFO reports should be
>investigated. In fact in his essay from 'UFOs: A Scientific
>Debate' (ed. Sagan and Page, 1972), Sagan argued for judgement to
>be withheld on UFOs, that "there isn't enough data....and that
>an open mind should be kept."

It's just too bad that Sagan didn't follow his own advice about
keeping an open mind. (And how do you know "there isn't [sic]
enough data" when you're not looking for such data?) For further
information, if you're interested, in my views of Sagan, I refer
readers to my essay "Carl Sagan's Demons," IUR, Summer 1996, pp.
3-5,32.

For reasons best known to himself, Ed Stewart thinks only
hagiographical commentary on Sagan is permissible; all else is
demonology -- a subject about which Ed, as a regular
practitioner, knows rather more than the rest of us.

To Sagan's critics, of whose existence (except mine) Stewart
seems oblivious, the man Ed reveres so much confused a religious
quest with scientific inquiry. In his 'The Extraterrestrial Life
Debate 1750-1900' (Cambridge University Press, 1986), historian
of science Michael J. Crowe has this to say:

"Persons skeptical of traditional Christian conceptions of
heaven or the afterlife have imagined planetary paradises
populated by angelic extraterrestrials.... Sagan, although
disparaging the messianic motives of some flying saucer
enthusiasts, has suggested that the mere detection of an
extraterrestrial radio signall would provide `an invaluable
piece of knowledge: that it is possible to avoid the dangers
of the period through which we are now passing....'
Furthermore, according to Sagan, `it is possible that among
the first contents of such a message may be detailed
prescriptions for the avoidance of technological disaster'
.... Such passages support the thesis, advanced by Karl S.
Guthke in his study of the extraterrestrial life debate, that
pluralism (belief in intelligent life on other worlds) ... has
become `the myth of modern times' and a `religion or
alternate religion'."

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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

              Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:48:38 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:51:25 -0400
Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes


>>>From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:44:30 EDT
>>>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:11:40 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

    Previously, Mr. Martello offered:

>>>But this issue of SETI is a bit bothersome to me. It is not
>>>that I deny it's level of importance to those amateurs engaged,
>>>it is just that I see very little value in the project. If we
>>>were to pick up radio signals from space, it would likely be
>>>from a race of entities not terribly far ahead of us in their
>>>technology.

<snip>

My response:

>>First, just because they try to contact us via RF doesn't mean
>>that's what they normally use, themselves. They might simply
>>recognize that RF is what WE normally use. (let's hope they're
>>not techno-snobs!)

<snip>

>>Second, what would you do if you were alone in the desert and
>>finally approached by smiling people with outstretched hands?
>>Would you turn them away just because they didn't speak your
>>language?

 Jim's reply:

>We are in agreement. My point was that it is my choice as a Ham
>not to participate for the reasons given. Actually, some of my
>associates in Ham Radio are participants. The hobby has such a
>wide variety of applications that there is room for divers
>interests.

>Your point is well taken.

>It is worth the efforts of those interested just to attempt
>finding life out there. But there is another issue here which I
>firmly believe would be in evidence just as soon as a signal is
>answered by the inhabitants of planet Mongo.

>SETI gets a response. There will be so many skeptics out there
>denying it, calling it a hoax, the work of the devil and Lord
>knows what all else that I wouldn't touch the project with a ten
>foot pole.

>I can see the headlines, "Contact! But Klass says it's swamp
>gas!"

Can't argue with that. Klass-gas can go a long way toward
undermining any effort by the serious UFO community to prove
anything positive.

But seriously...

You are correct to point out the problem inherent in trying to
prove something that, by and large, is conceptual. As a Ham
operator, you know that there are radio signals, of all wave
lengths, zipping all around (and through) us every second of the
day.

Try proving it to someone.

Oh, you point to a needle on your equipment and say, "Look how
strong the signal is!" or "Listen to this!" as you turn up the
volume.

They still can't SEE the radio waves you speak of, so where's
the proof? They can only witness the effects of the wave's
existence. I'm not very religious, but it's a lot like trying to
prove that Jesus existed. Believers point to the effects of his
existence, they may even point out the Roman census of that time
period showing his name, but they really can't prove that he was
real; i.e. the son of God.

In fact, if Jesus or Buddah or Allah or any other deity were to
return as some feel they might, they would face some awful
obstacles. We, as a society, have grown so skeptical that it
would take some serious proof to convince the masses. Their
"comeback" would be short lived, I think. Maybe a few
interviews, some endorsement contracts perhaps, then they'd find
themselves in a downward spiraling career; ultimately ending up
as the bottom right hand position on Hollywood Squares.

"I'll take Jesus to block.".....

It's depressing, you know?

So, I agree. Skeptics would have a field day. But isn't that
what they are doing already? When one person makes a sighting,
that information is short-lived in main stream media; shot down
by the skeptics and debunkers that seem to thrive by raining on
everyone else's parade.

So let's give them a bigger parade. Like maybe 5000 strong?

It may be easy for skeptics to dispute the results of one or two
listening posts as "inconclusive" or "biased" or the result of a
technical glitch within a specific installation. But the unified
results (if there are any) of 5000 witnesses would be pretty
hard to ignore.

Of course, the sword cuts both ways. If they find nothing, then
that's 5000 witnesses to such effect, as well.

I'm sure the skeptics are already sharpening their pencils....


Later,

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:13:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]

>>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>>or more.

>>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>>parachute would fall that much faster.

>>Jim Deardorff

>Hi Jim,

>As I read your post, several things occurred to me.

>First of all, if indeed flares were released at that altitude,
>they weren't released by anything from the nearby base. To my
>knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are capable of
>flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there.

Hi Greg,

Maybe the elevation angle of the flares was only 5 degrees, not
10, in which case their elevation is halved and the scenario
might have been possible. We need to wait to hear from Bruce on
that.

>Also, using the distance information supplied by Dr. Maccabee of
>the lights in the videos, the distances between "flares" would
>have to be measured on the order of scores of miles I would
>think. Using this, some reckoning of the speed of the aircraft
>should be available using the angular spacing of the lights
>(known factor) and their ignition sequences.

>In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would have
>to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
>released in the manner shown in the videos? This information
>might be pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very
>least.

I supppose one could always assume that there were several
different planes involved. The lights may have been separated by
some 5 degrees each (I'm trying to recall what the one video I
saw looked like), in which case they'd each be some 6 miles
apart, if 70 miles away from Phoenix. I can't think of any
useful military training purpose such a flare release would
serve, unless it would be to half-way simulate UFOs and thus
serve as a distraction for the 8 p.m. UFO event.

  Jim D.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 10:10:15 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:20:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:05:15 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>If you ever read any of my published indexes, two things will
>>stand out. 1) the index is complete and not discriminatory in
>>any way, plus its accuracy can be independently verified. In
>>other words, every article and every author is indexed. I don't
>>just index authors I like or happen to agree with 2) I don't use
>>my published works to try to convince anyone of the validity or
>>lack of validity of any hypothesis related to the UFO problem.
>>In other words, I simply don't know what the UFO problem is all
>>about and I have no vested interest where the evidence might
>>ultimately lead to. My published works are completely devoid of
>>any claim whatsoever. It makes for very dull reading. My books
>>are not quite as exciting to read as dictionaries are. ]

Before you spend too much time patting yourself on the back, my
friend, your readers should know that bibliographies by
definition do not report facts or attempt analysis. Given your
track record in these last two areas, it's just as well.


>>My collection is not relevant. It is only a resource used by me
>>to build research tools for serious researchers, and I am
>>looking 100, 200 years from now. Someone will ask 'Now, what was
>>that all about at the end of the 20th Century?' They are not
>>going to find out by reading Jerry Clark's Encyclopedia.

Actually, that -- judging from the reviews (Ed failed to respond
to a challenge from me to find one that accuses me of
intellectual dishonesty, mental abnormality, and the other sorts
of character flaws of which he routinely accuses me) -- seems to
be a minority opinion. In fact, a _very_ small minority, one of
whose members has the initials ES, the other BT. More typical
are the reviews in recent issues of Journal of Scientific
Exploration, UFO Magazine, and Fortean Times.

>>From
>>that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
>>were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective.

Well, my friend, we certainly know a lot about _your_ biases,
more I'm sure than any of us would ever have cared to know. In
fact, reviews by nonpolemicists tend to call my encyclopedia
balanced and even agnostic in its approach. The most recent
review I've seen (as of yesterday) appears in a professional
library journal, Rettig on Reference (August 1998). A typical
sentence: "Like the first edition, this is neither an apology
for nor a refutation of the existence of UFOs. Clark qualifies
evidence rather than putting a skeptic's or a believer's spin
on it."


>>To find out
>>actual relevancy, they will need to independently research the
>>subject and use whatever resources have survived. If the
>>literature is not indexed, future researchers won't ever know
>>what might be out there for them to find, read and study, as
>>well as research in a timely manner. For example, are you aware
>>of Loren Gross's UFOs: A History ongoing series of booklets?

In the introduction to The UFO Encyclopedia, I pay tribute to
Loren Gross's splendid efforts. No serious researcher can be
without access to every of his many valuable volumes. Gross is
one of ufology's unrecognized heroes.

>>>In addition, it's my understanding that Mr.
>>>Clark has been working along the same lines, so why loose your
>>>venom on him? Because he goes out on a limb to add personal
>>>insight (the nerve of some people!) to the data?

>>Please, don't confuse the two of us. The differences are
>>insurmountable.

Thank you. I really appreciate your words cautioning people
not to confuse the two of us. Believe me, the thought that
somebody might think we have the same approach -- or, for
that matter, the same personality -- makes me shudder.

>>Interpretations that are not supported by the
>>data are nothing but fabrications at worse and wishful thinking
>>at best. He doesn't just add 'personal insight'. He manipulates,
>>adds meanings that are not supported by the data and creastes
>>interpretations when data is not even present. He has done all
>>those things right here on this mailing list. He is
>>intellectually dishonest and not to be trusted as a historian.

Remember, folks, that he is talking about a book that recently
won the Benjamin Franklin Award as the best title of the year in
the Science/Environment category. The first edition was cited
as one of the best academic reference works of the early 1990s.
I say this not to blow my own horn but simply to point out how
far removed Ed's charges are from consensus reality. In common
with persons whose views are led by their emotions, he has
difficulty distinguishing what he wants to believe from what can
be demonstrated to be out there.

Okay, Ed, let's renew the challenge you so far have done your
best to evade: Produce a single review in the UFO, anomaly,
library, or academic literature of my book that says what you
have said here.

If you can't -- and I've seen more reviews than you have, my
friend, and they just aren't there -- we are going to have to
conclude that you fabricate, engage in wishful thinking,
manipulate, add meanings not supported by data, and speculate
willdly. We would further have to conclude that you are
rhetorically dishonest and not to be trusted even as a
polemicist (that you are no historian, you have already
established).

I await your response to the challenge. And I will keep
reminding you of it if you continue to duck it -- as, of course,
you will have to.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                           Re: Alms For The Poor?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:21:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Alms For The Poor?


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:25:30 +0000
>>Subject: Alms for the poor?

<snip>

>So, to all you whiners and debunkers out there, complaining
>about the sorry state of ufology, remember that you get out of
>something only as much as you put in. Considering the miserable
>lack of resources, I'm surprised that Ufology has anything to
>show for itself at all; and I say that with pride.

>Show me the money and I'll show you an alien.


hahahahahaha...  I  Iove it, I love it!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:36:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]


>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:35:38 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

><snip>

>>The Phoenix Case (March 13, 1997) is not a good one to tout as
>>an example of either exemplary UFO research or exemplary
>>UFOs..... unless you specify the events between 8 and 9 PM.

>>If you include the sightings and videotapes from 10 PM you are
>>including, with high probability, very distant bright
>>illumination flares.

>>Triangulations I carried out several months ago showed that the
>>lights were about 70 miles from Phoenix, based on widely
>>separated videotapes (Krzyston, Rairdon).

>Bruce,

>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>or more.

>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>parachute would fall that much faster.

The elevation angles were a degree or so.  Altitudes were
in the range of 15,000 ft. Answers to all your questions are
at:

www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html

and associated link to Riskers web site.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:32:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:34:57 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]



>>The 8-9 PM sightings remain _unexplained_!

>Hi Bruce, Greg, All,

>On several occasions I have asked about the report that a
>_commercial pilot_ taking off from the airport in Phoenix (which
>is centrally located) called on to the tower because he had an
>object overhead and needed instructions.

>This was reported on two seperate newscasts that I have on
>videotape. No further mention of this valuable/credible witness
>has ever been made. The pilots identity nor the name of the
>airline was revealed during the newscasts.

>Has this report been verified?

>Has the pilot been identified?

>Has anyone interviewed the pilot?

>Until the testimony of a key witness such as this is figured
>into the equation all 'conclusions' should be put on hold. There
>had to be more than one person in that cockpit if it was a
>'commercial flight'. Phoenix tower should be contacted again and
>information secured as the veracity of the report that a pilot
>had a 'close encounter' with something up there (over Pheonix)

>I'd appreciate any info about this particular aspect of the
>case.


My answers to your three questions are don't know, don't know,
don't know. Anything actually over Phoenix (witnesses looking
nealy straight up) was not a flare. The lights sighted at 10 Pm
were at very low angular elevation..just above the horizon set
by the surrounding moutains.  The 8-9 PM sightings involved
object/lights seen by Phoenix residents which were high in the
sky.  The sighting lines for the 10 PM objects converged some 70
miles away, just above the horizon, not a few miles away
"straight up." See

www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html

(and wait long enough for the piano music to be downloaded)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:34:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 14:28:03 PDT

<snip>

>>The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
>>ordered destroyed in 1948.

>It is clear that one or more copies were not destroyed. Ruppelt,
>who evidently saw one, describes its contents thus, in three
>paragraphs in the original manuscript of his 'Report on
>Unidentified Flying Objects' (they were edited out of the
>published version):


><"It concluded that UFOs were interplanetary. As documented
>proof, many unexplained sightings were quoted. The original UFO
>sighting by Kenneth Arnold; the series of sightings from the
>secret Air Force Test Center, Muroc AFB; the F-51 pilot's
>>of an F-80 pilot who saw two round objects diving toward the
>ground near the Grand Canyon; and a report by the pilot of an
I>daho National Guard T-6 trainer, who saw a violently
>maneuvering black object.

>"As further documentation, the report quoted an interview with
>an Air Force major from Rapid City AFB who saw twelve UFOs
>flying a tight diamond formation. When he first saw them they
>were high but soon they went into a fantastically high speed
>dive, leveled out, made a perfect formation turn, and climbed
>at a 30 to 40 degree angle, accelerating all the time. The UFOs
>were oval-shaped and brilliant yellowish-white.>

>"Also included was one of the reports from the AEC's
>Los Alamos Laboratory. The incident occurred at 9:40 a.m.
>on September 23, 1948. A group of people were waiting for an
>airplane at the landing strip in Los Alamos when one of them
>>relative size was [sic] the same as a dime held edgewise
>and slightly tipped, about 50 feet away."

The inclusion of this last report by Ruppelt, if it truly was in
the Estimate, means that the Estimate was not written in August,
soon after the Chiles Whitted sighting, but rather in late
September, 1948.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:27:38 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:39:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 14:28:03 PDT

>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:58:26 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>>I am aware that both Fournet and Ruppelt have claimed to have
>>seen it [the pro-ETH 1948 Estimate of the Situation].

>>The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
>>ordered destroyed in 1948.

>It is clear that one or more copies were not destroyed. Ruppelt,
>who evidently saw one, describes its contents thus, in three
>paragraphs in the original manuscript of his 'Report on
>Unidentified Flying Objects' (they were edited out of the
>published version):

<snip>

Hi Jerry, Hi Ed,

I did a quick check through a first edition hardcover copy of
Edward Ruppelt's 'The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects'
looking for anything on the "Estimate of the Situation" report
and found the following (pages 62-63):


        "In intelligence, if you have something to say about
some vital problem you write a report that is known as an
"Estimate of the Situation." A few days after the DC-3 was
buzzed, the people at ATIC decided that the time had arrived to
make an Estimate of the Situation. The situation was the UFO's;
the estimate was that they were interplanetary!

        It was a rather thick document with a black cover and it
was printed on legal-sized paper. Stamped across the cover were
the words TOP SECRET.

        It contained the Air Force's analysis of many of the
incidents I have told you about plus many similar ones. All of
them had come from scientists, pilots, and other equally
credible observers, and each was an unknown.

        The document pointed out that the reports hadn't
actually started with the Arnold Incident. Belated reports from
a weather observer in Richmond, Virginia, who observed a "silver
disk" through his theodolite telescope; a F-47 pilot and three
pilots in his formation who saw a "silver flying wing," and the
English "ghost airplanes" that had been picked up on radar early
in 1947 proved this point. ..."


As we can see, the published version of Ruppelt's book does
describe in much detail not only the external appearance of the
"Estimate of the Situation" report but also covers many of the
cases mentioned within 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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:22:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:47:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 16:32:11 PDT

>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>If Ed Stewart wants to believe -- the evidence of the English
>language and the hostile reaction of skeptics and debunkers to
>the contrary -- that the Sturrock report was a defeat for
>serious UFO research, hell, go for it, guy. Meantime, I've got
>some real estate on the moon I'd like to talk to you about.

Not interested in any loony lunar real estate deals you have to
offer, even though I am sure that your expertise in the field is
second to none. You may wish to contact the International Lunar
Exploration Working Group for possible real estate leads. They
can be reached at:

        http://ilewg.jsc.nasa.gov

>Interesting that Ed thinks this is "Jerome Clark's
>interpretation" as opposed, say, to the interpretation of the
>Washington Post, the New York Times, press wires, panel
>participants (and their post- panel comments in national media
>such as National Public Radio), and just about the whole rest of
>the human race who read the report.

I have asked for exact quotes from the report that supports your
contentions of what the report is alleged to say.  You have yet
to produce supporting evidence. For the most part the press
wires, et al... were a reaction to the Stanford Universty press
release. Readers can
find it at:

        http://www.jse.com/PR_UFO_98.html

The press release (Stanford U. is on the West Coast for those
that might not know it) definitely projects a very favorable
spin on the Sturrock/Rockefeller report which by the way was
released on June 29th, 1998.  The Washington Post (located on
the east coast, Washington, DC for those that might not know it)
broke the story also the very same day even though when it is
9am on the west coast, it is already the noon hour at the
Washington Post cafeteria and the paper has been on the street
for I suspect eight hours and the presses are already working on
the next day's paper.

        Kathy Sawyer
        Washington Post Staff Writer
        Monday, June 29, 1998; Page A01
        Section: A Section
        Article ID: 9807140059 -- 1031 words
        PANEL URGES STUDY OF UFO REPORTS: UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA NEED
        SCRUTINY, SCIENCE GROUP SAYS

What a remarkable coincidence that an east coast newspaper can
place a staff written, not a wire story, article on the front
page of their east coast newspaper on the exact same date that a
west coast university issues a press release sometime that
morning.

I knew about this story a full two months before the story
broke.  I happened to be at a get-together at Richard Haines's
home for a visiting french ufologist that I have assisted in the
past. At this get-together were Peter Sturrock, Loren Gross,
Jacques Vallee, Fred Beckman, Jim McCampbell, Larry Hatch (who
posts to this list), a Stanford professor and associate of
Sturrock's, and a friend of Beckman whose names now escape me.
If I forgot anyone, please forgive me. Sturrock himself brought
up this topic alerting everyone to keep an eye out for this
story to break as soon as they finished working out and
negotiating the remaining details. He would not get into details
because he didn't know how the final report would be worded
since negotiations were still in progress and not finalized, but
in generalized terms it would be great news for ufology. This
was in early May 1998 even though the proceedings workshop
occurred back in september/october of 1997, a full eight months
earlier. It was apparent to me that this was going to be a
managed news event. That is not derogatory. It is a fact of life
and occurs in the scientific/academic world all the time when it
is felt that a program needs media and public support before it
is peer-reviewed by the scientific establishment.  When you see
press conferences announcing things as mars-life meteorites
before the scientific community has had a chance to study the
claimed results, you have a managed news event politically
motivated to solicit public support.  It works, even though
later when the scientific community studies the alleged evidence
they find no mars-life, programs have already been funded. When
I made similar comments right after the Sturrock press release,
Jerome Clark and Robert Swiatek of FUFOR saw my comments as an
attack on ufology, quickly demonized me and even demanding that
I leave the Project-1947 list, initially a haven for serious
ufologists, for my 'attack' on the greatest thing that has
happened to ufology. But I am digressing from the real subject.

Most of the Sturrock report is actually written by Sturrock and
his team, and not by the Scientific Review Panel. The Scientific
Review
Panel consisted of the following people:

        V.R. Eshleman, T.E. Holzer, J.R. Jokippi, F. Louangee,
        H.J. Melosh, J.J. Papike, G. Reits, C.A. Tolbert, and
        B. Veyret

and are credited for writing the section entitled "Summary
Report of the Scientific Review Panel" located online at:

        http://www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock/3.html

Read their credited report and compare it to the Stanford press
release. Can anyone seriously suggest that they are saying the
same thing? Read the Summary Report of the Scientific Review
Panel again.  It is their opinion what the Sturrock panel is
allegedly all about, not the press release, not Sturrock's
interpretation, not the rest of the Sturrock report written by
Sturrock and his team, but the reaction to the best ufology
presented by the best ufologists to the Scientific Review Panel
and their summary comments that matters.  That is what the
funding, and scientific organizations will be interested in
reading, not what Sturrock/Rockefeller believes.

>Wow. You are one strange dude, guy. I'm afraid the only one
>"making up things" is you, and you are marvelously consistent
>at it. You haven't said anything about me, for example, that
you >didn't make up out of whole cloth.  Your reading of the
Sturrock >panel, I fear, is only to be expected: truly bizarre
and not >remotely true.

>>>Ed's reading of the Sturrock panel is bizarre, but much of
what >>>we hear from this man, as we have seen, answers to that
>>>adjective.

Since Jerome Clark has been unable to provide supporting quotes
from what he alleges the report to say, I have included not only
the online links to the Sturrock report and the Scientific
Review Panel summary, but also the much favored Stanford press
release. The difference between them is indeed bizarre.

>What I don't understand, my friend, is why -- if you hate this
>field and just about everybody in it and find it and them fit
>only for the rankest vilification -- you spend most of your
>waking hours doing UFO work, nearly all of it, I gather,
>bibliographical. In other words, cataloging the worthless
>writings of worthless people of whom you cannot speak badly
>enough, all addressing a subject that is about nothing.

You answered your own rhetorical question. Obviously I don't
hate. When you spend your time online blowing smoke up people's
asses trying to pass off your beliefs as if they were written in
stone and posturing your arrogance and alleged importance in
this field in what amounts to as lame appeals to authority, some
people may believe you while others may get intimidated. I don't
allow either. I respect what can be independently verified, not
intellectual dishonesty and not intellectual bullyism. I am
fortunate to be in a position where I have resources at my
immediate disposal and when needed associates in the field that
can assist me with independent analysis. Everytime you cross the
line with your intellectual dishonesty or bullyism I will be
there to rebuttle with source documentation that readers can
independently follow themselves.

>I also don't understand (or, frankly, care to) the sources of
>your bitterness and anger, which seem, well, not a little, er
>(I'm trying to be kind), excessive. (The unkind would say
nuts.) >You can't seem to mount a consistent or reasonable
argument or >convincingly refute counterarguments; instead of
rational >discourse, you just get louder and meaner. Ah, well. I
think >I'll bow out of this, having -- as you seem not to have
-- a >life to lead. Maybe you should spend a little more time
with >your family. I find that family life has a hugely
mellowing >effect.

Unfortunately, I'll see you online. Your ego demands it.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:37:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:49:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 18:50:31 PDT

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>apology for my dog-alongside-the-car analogy.

>>No problem. I respect dogs more than I do most ufologists.

>That being the case, Ed, why aren't you in some other business?

Ufology is not a business for me.

>Raising dogs, for example? You are clearly incapable, given your
>overwhelming commitment to an emotion-driven approach to
>ufology, of rendering serious, objective judgments. Such
>judgments are not necessary in dog-raising.

I don't render judgments. I cite the relevant literature. I
leave the objectivism of ufological wisdom to the masters in the
business such as you.

>Give it some serious >thought, since you clearly haven't given
serious thought to the >complex and ambiguous issues with which
serious ufologists >grapple.

Not every one has such a clear understanding of the subject your
imminence has displayed on this list. Thank you for your serious
thoughts in introducing illuminaries such as Ron Westrum and
Steven J. Dick into the discussions. I don't think I could have
made some of my points clearer without using Westrum's past
record and Dick's insights and writings on the subject.  I have
you to thank for the foresight into introducing them into the
discussions.

>I also suspect that if you got out of this business,
>you'd be happier. Why surround yourself with people who make you
>miserable and enraged?.

I am not miserable. I am not enraged.  How can I be miserable or
enraged? I am surrounded by the ensightful writings of John
Keel, Jacques Vallee, Willy Smith, Paul Devereux, Peter
Brooksmith, John Rimmer, John Harney, Dennis Stacy, and the list
goes on and on...

I also have at my disposal the brilliant and insightful early
writings of who-would-of-guess would turn out to become a
premier spokesperson for ufological wisdom in the latter part of
the 20th century. As an example, his UFOs are 'planetary
poltergeist' arguments are classics and deserve to be read by
all aspiring ufologists. None other than George M. Eberhart,
associate editor of IUR, was in agreement when he gave the
coveted "**" mark to "The Unidentified: Notes Toward Solving The
UFO Mystery", written by Jerome Clark and Loren Coleman, in his
bibliographical masterpiece.

Surrounded by such rich examples of literature, all I need for
complete happiness is a crispy chicken on sourdough from
Jack-in-Box.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                      NASA's New Ion Propulsion System

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:36:10 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:59:35 -0400
Subject: NASA's New Ion Propulsion System


Source: Hughes Space And Telecommunications Company via
"alt.alien.research".

Stig

*******

From: Harry Bosch <harryb@chatlink.com>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.research
Subject: Ion Propulsion System:
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:50:35 -0700
Organization: Chaos, Inc.
Lines: 87


I thought you might like to know:

I dug this up from sci.spacenews news group.


HUGHES SPACE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY
Electron Dynamics Division
P.O. Box 92919 (S10/S323)
Los Angeles, CA 90009
Public Relations (310) 364-6363
Investor Relations (310) 662-9688

HUGHES' ION PROPULSION SYSTEM TO DRIVE NASA'S DEEP SPACE 1

TORRANCE, Calif., Oct. 19, 1998 -- The ion engines "Star Trek's"
Mr. Spock dreamt of 30 years ago are now a reality. When NASA's
Deep Space 1 spacecraft is launched from Cape Canaveral this
month, it will carry a revolutionary ion propulsion system
designed with NASA and manufactured by Hughes Electron Dynamics
Division, a unit of Hughes Electronics Corporation.

The NASA Solar Electric Power Technology Application Readiness
(NSTAR) 30-centimeter system, consisting of an ion thruster,
power processor, and digital control and interface units, was
designed specifically to support NASA's future requirements. It
is being validated by the New Millennium Deep Space 1 project.
Unlike its commercial satellite counterpart that uses a xenon
ion propulsion system, XIPS (pronounced "zips"), for north-south
stationkeeping and for orbit raising, the NSTAR system will be
the primary propulsion system for the Deep Space 1 spacecraft.

The Deep Space 1 spacecraft may be the first of several to use
the NSTAR system. Under the $8.1 million contract that was
awarded by NASA to Hughes Electron Dynamics Division in 1995,
two flight thrusters, and associated power processor and digital
control and interface units, were produced.

The advantage of ion propulsion is efficiency. Ion propulsion is
10 times more efficient than chemical thrusters. This translates
into a reduction of propellant mass of up to 90%. For commercial
communications satellites, the reduced propellant mass creates
an option to reduce launch cost, increase payload, or increase
satellite lifetime, or any combination of the above.

For Deep Space 1, the improved propellant efficiency of the
NSTAR system results in a lighter spacecraft that will reach its
destination in half the time. Deep Space 1 is currently
scheduled to reach the near-Earth asteroid 1992 KD in July 1999.
By Oct. 1999, Deep Space 1 will have completed its primary
mission and will be on a trajectory that could result in an
encounter with Comets Wilson-Harrington and Borelly in 2001.

"XIPS is the result of more than 40 years of research by Hughes
and NASA. The NSTAR 30-centimeter system was designed to meet
very specific operational parameters," said Tim Fong, manager of
Hughes Electron Dynamics Division. "The NSTAR ion propulsion
system on Deep Space 1 requires operation over a wide range of
thrust and input power, since the solar power available drops
significantly as the spacecraft goes further away from the sun.
This NSTAR system is remotely programmable, allowing NASA to
adjust its thrust to meet these changing conditions over the
life of the mission."

In addition to the 30-centimeter NSTAR system designed for NASA,
Hughes Electron Dynamics Division also produces two commercial
XIPS systems: a 13-centimeter unit that is an option on the HS
601 spacecraft built by Hughes Space and Communications Company,
and a 25-centimeter version that will debut on Hughes' first HS
702 in early 1999.

Hughes Electron Dynamics Division built the first commercial
XIPS system, which was launched Aug. 28, 1997, on PAS-5, an HS
601HP satellite for PanAmSat Corporation.

Hughes Electron Dynamics Division is a world leader in the
design and manufacture of microwave, traveling wave-tube
amplifiers, and ion thrusters for commercial and military
applications. The earnings of Hughes Electronics are used to
calculate the earnings per share
attributable to GMH (NYSE symbol) common stock.

---
Andrew Yee
ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca

We get closer every day. . .

Harry
--
========================================
"No one really listens to anyone else, and if you try it for a while
you'll see why."  -  Goethe
========================================





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Su Walker <suwalker@ames.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:38:26 +0900
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:44:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts


>I read the following update with interest because I am a professional
>clairvoyant and instructor of psychic skill development. I view
>psychic perception as a very matter of fact phenomena, not unlike
>seeing or hearing. I saw some inherent problems with the assumptions
>written below.

>>Not everyone there could see these lights, so could this suggest
>>a psyhcic connection?

>I think that this is a possible explanation. Earth energies and
>spirit phenomena can be seen by natural psychics and likewise
>earth energies can be sensed by anyone who has a psychic gift.

This is not entirely true. Not all psychics see earth energies
or spirit phenomena. This is an area where individuals can train
themselves (just as if you have musical talent, you can train
your self to play the violin or the piano).

>These balls of light have been seen by psychics while on an
>outdoor meditation, they put them down to earth energies
>generated by themselves and natural earth energies - nothing
>extraterrestrial.

I'm not sure if you gathered a group of 10 really good psychics
if you would come up with the consensus that they all believed
that the balls of light would be generated 'by themselves,' and
would be nothing more. I wouldn't make that assumption and I've
been working full time in this field for more than seven years.

>If these lights are only visible to psychics,
>then it is more likely than not that they can be controlled
>using the psychic's mind.

Again, not so. Those who perceive psychic phenomena (psychic
reception) are _not_ automatically skilled in psychic projection
(psychokinesis). This is a separate discipline with separate
training or skill.

>Let me explain - if you see a light in
>a crop field, being both a psychic and a UFO investigator, you
>will automatically assume that this light may have something to
>do with the extraterrestrial/crop circle phenomenon.

I would like to think a good investigator would not assume, but
in fact observe the phenomena in order to draw conclusions.
Would, given the circumstances, you suspect this might be so. It
is ONE hypothesis, but a good investigator, psychic or not,
would NOT assume.

>Although
>you may not consciously believe this, it may be that your
>subconscious mind associates a simple earth energy with an ET
>crop circle creator. It would be then possible for you to
>_think_ the light to move in what looks like intelligent
>manoeuvers, espescially if there are more than one psychic in
>the group.

Again, if you had a group of trained psychokinetics or
telekinetics I could understand this, but otherwise your
assumption that all of the psychics have this trained ability, I
believe is erroneous.

>Could you tell me if everyone described the same
>movements of the light?

>Looking at crop circles and lights from another angle, is it not
>possible that the circle makers themselves dowse a corn field
>first to find the earth energies etc to create the circle on?

I understand that you are looking for a correlation between
whomever is making the lights and the strong earth energy lines
(ley lines) they seem to correspond with. Why these strong ley
lines? Good question. Do the circle makers examine the area,
naturally gravitate to it, try to show where the ley lines are
by drawing attention to them? Hard to say. I am not jumping to
the assumption that "circle makers" you refer to are of the
human variety...nor am I assuming an "extraterrestrial" variety.

>This could also explain why many of the circle makers have seen
>the lights themselves but due to their outlook on the phenomena
>of crop circles, they could look at the lights more objectively
>and claim that although the lights were there, they were not
>under intelligent control (not saying the circle makers aren't
>intelligent <g>)

>>I later found that one of the canadian ladies was native
>>american cherokee indian.And that she was also a healer, who
>>then went onto to describe the encounters of light , and how
>>this light has played a major part of the healing process, in a
>>wide variety of cases.

>This is a common occurence with healers. Some see lights while
>others see blocks of colour.

>>I have heard another term for these lights, Nature Spirits are
>>they an exstension of us and what we are within the structure of
>>all things cosmic:

>>From my understanding, nature spirits are viewed as small
>independant balls of light that tend to concentrate on the
>surroundings of natural things.

>>People create their own questions because
>>they're afaid to look sraight.

>Why look for a paranormal explanation to everything then?


I totally agree. While many things on earth are not yet
explained, jumping to an assumption of paranormal vs.
extraterrestrial vs. 'normal on earth but not yet understood' is
where we have to be careful.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                             Re: Boris Shurinov?

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:13:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:11:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Boris Shurinov?


Dear colleagues,

I wonder could you once again help me. I am trying to locate the
e-mail address of Russian UFO researcher Boris Shurinov. Names
and e-mail addresses of any other UFO researchers in the former
Soviet Union would also be appreciated.


Yours Sincerely,


Philip Mantle.
E-mail: el51@dial.pipex.com




                             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

   8 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
   <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
   >>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...] >>Was
   the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or >>in the
   video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10 >degrees? If so,
   the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet >>or more. >>What do you
   think the military had in mind dropping flares at >>that great an
   altitude? At that height the air density is over >>>parachute would
   fall that much faster. >>Jim Deardorff >Hi Jim, >As I read your post,
   several things occurred to me. >> >First of all, if indeed flares were
   released at that altitude, t>hey weren't released by anything from the
   nearby base. To my >knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are
   capable of >flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there. > >Also,
   using the distance information supplied by Dr. Maccabee of >the lights
   in the videos, the distances between "flares" would >have to be
   measured on the order of scores of miles I would >think. Using this,
   some reckoning of the speed of the aircraft >should be available using
   the angular spacing of the lights >(known factor) and their ignition
   sequences.> >In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would
   have >to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
   >released in the manner shown in the videos? This information >might be
   pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very >least. Greg May
   I suggest once again reading
   www.geocities.com'area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html and THEN commence





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:11:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]

>>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>>or more.

>>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>>parachute would fall that much faster.

>>Jim Deardorff

>Hi Jim,

>As I read your post, several things occurred to me.

>First of all, if indeed flares were released at that altitude,
>they weren't released by anything from the nearby base. To my
>knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are capable of
>flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there.

>Also, using the distance information supplied by Dr. Maccabee of
>the lights in the videos, the distances between "flares" would
>have to be measured on the order of scores of miles I would
>think. Using this, some reckoning of the speed of the aircraft
>should be available using the angular spacing of the lights
>(known factor) and their ignition sequences.

>In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would have
>to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
>released in the manner shown in the videos? This information
>might be pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very
>least.

>Greg

Greg, Bruce & List,

Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
also show variances in height.

They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
during their descent.

Where are the dead flares recovered by the curious who surely
would have been aware of the issue?

Regards,
Leanne.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 21:19:11 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:55:17 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42


>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:27:31 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 42

>    UFO ROUNDUP
>Volume 3, Number 42
>October 19, 1998
>Editor: Joseph Trainor

>CHUPACABRA PHOTOGRAPH
>TAKEN IN SOUTHERN BRAZIL

>     On Monday, October 12, 1998, Leandro da Silva,
>a Brazilian speleologist and two companions decided
>to explore a cave in the Serra do Espinhaco mountains
>just east of Baldim, a small city in the state of Minas
>Gerais in southern Brazil.
>     By 7 a.m., the trio had penetrated 150 meters into
>the limestone cave, which is reputed to extend for
>several kilometers underground.  Da Silva had his
>Kodak digital camera close at hand.

For those wishing to see the alleged photo I have put together a
page containing the original messages to Joseph Trainor and two
photographs at: http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/v03/rnd03_42a.html

Please note we do not claim the story/photos to be genuine -
personally I would say a hoax but present the photos for others
to make their own minds up and perhaps debate in the same way as
the alleged Mexico City sighting photos were.

The article could be posted to the list but the attachments will
be around 135K, so I will leave it up to Errol to decide if he
wants me to post it.

Regards,


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/
UFOICQ Australian UFO Reports and Experiences:-
        http://ufoinfo.com/ufoicq/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                Re: NBC-series 'Project UFO' and Col.Coleman

From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:45:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:18:33 -0400
Subject: Re: NBC-series 'Project UFO' and Col.Coleman


Hi List;

Now I make a little inquiry about the NBC-TV-series 'Project
UFO'. You known that Pentagon-speaker and flying saucer-sighter
Col.William "Bill" Coleman was co-producer of this show.

Now I hope to get more informations about the whereabouts and
personal history of this man in view of the UFO-matter. I think
that this is a very interessting matter because we have on a
world-wide scale very seldom a military UFO-sighter which was
short time also chief of a UFO-project, public
relations/informations-officer on the top-level and also
privatley a producer of a TV-UFO-series. Has anyone furthermore
information and has Coleman published a clear and long statement
about his role in UFOlogy? On the edge: can anyone send me a
picture in jpg-format with this man???

Thats it. Thanks.

Werner in Germany





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                       'Crescent' Formation In Ontario

From: psa@direct.ca (Paul Anderson)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:57:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:11:42 -0400
Subject: 'Crescent' Formation In Ontario


Circles Phenomenon Research Canada Update
October 20, 1998



"CRESCENT" FORMATION IN ONTARIO
*Preliminary Report*

A large crop "formation", roughly in the shape of a crescent or
"c" was reported on October 17 near Lowville, Ontario. Found by
Mike Bird, a research associate of Drew Gauley, Ontario
coordinator for CPR-Canada.

In cattle corn (8' - 12' tall). Approx 210' north to south by
177' east to west. Possibly up to a few weeks old. "Teardrop"
shaped area of standing corn inside the crescent approximately
10' across. Also two "companion" shapes outside the main
formation, one on the edge of the field and another to the
south, each about 5' by 15'.

Stalks were broken and "burned" at break points. Also white
powdery / cobweb-like material found underneath a denser section
of flattened crop (crop was planted sparsely, in rows two feet
apart). Possibly a natural fungus (?).

Ground shots and samples (of plants, soil and "cobweb" material)
taken.

This makes fourteen reports now from Canada this year, in five
provinces!

Futher details, photos soon.

____________________________


CANDO "4:20" PHOTOS AVAILABLE SOON

Aerial and ground shots of the controversial "4:20" formation
near Cando, Saskatchewan (see August 25 report) have now
been received and will be on the web site shortly. (A number
of requests for these ones!).

____________________________


UPDATES ON SPY HILL, WAPELLA CIRCLES

A couple changes for these Saskatchewan reports - Spy Hill
first found September 5, not 14. Wapella is a single circle, not
circle with ring.

____________________________


Web site updated October 20.

____________________________


For further information or correspondence, contact:





Paul Anderson

Director
CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International
Main Web Site:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310
1998 Updates:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1998

Director
MILLENNIUM RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Web:  mypage.direct.ca/p/psa/ (being revised)

Representative
BLT RESEARCH, INC.

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Tel / Fax:  604.731.8522
E-Mail:  psa@direct.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 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Geoff Dittman <gdittman@autobahn.mb.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:56:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:49:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


><snip>

>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

<snip>

>It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
>are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!


Hi John:

There has been much controversy over this topic since about the
1970s.  I think one of the first books to touch on the subject
was Rachel Carson's _Silent Spring_ which looked at the dangers
of pesticides and the effects they might have on humans.

Others have warned about the effects as well.  Back in 1992 Theo
Colborne, a senior fellow of the World Wildlife Fund blamed
lower sperm counts in humans and other animals on pollution.
Sometime in 1993 the medical journal _Lancet_ ran a report which
blamed increased levels of estrogen in males, passed from the
pregnant mothers to their children.  The excess hormones were
injested by pregnant women from the water supply, oral
contraceptives, and their diet.

More recently, Theo Colborne, Dianne Dumanoski, and John
Peterson Myers published _Our Stolen Future_ which again raised
the controversy over pollution and fertility.  It looks at cases
of birth defects, abnormalities, and reproductive failures in
animals and lays the blame on various chemicals that "mimic
natural hormones, upsetting normal reproductive and development
processes."  The book sold fairly well and I think recently came
out in tradeback, so you shouldn't have much difficulty in
finding it.  I believe they estimated the number of American
couples as infertile as 10%.  Other researchers however disagree
with their findings, saying the numbers are greatly exaggerated
and that there is little evidence to suggest that chemicals are
the culprit.  When the book came out, there were numerous
stories in magazines and newspapers.  The Canadian edition of
Time magazine had a cover story on the topic back in early to
mid 1996; I suspect the US edition did as well so check your
library.

As for alleged alien abductions, some researchers claim there is
a connection.  Most notably, Ray Fowler in his book _The
Watchers_ claimed that Betty Andreasson Luca's abductors told
her they were abducting humans to create hybrids because the
human race was becoming sterile as a result of pollution.

Hope this helps,

Geoff Dittman





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:00:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:28:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:06:35 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com><

>you see if you divide the number of circles created by the amount of
>people involved in the formation of man made crop circles

Ok, what was the result of your calculation?

>Never mind the fact that under supervision the crop circle makers
>could not reproduce the bending without fracture on the stalk of
>the crop circles, when they were asked to reproduce one of the
>complex patterns the ones with the undamaged stalks.

Can you give the dates and sites for these supervised circle
making demonstrations? The reply is likely to contain that the
sites used for these planned events contained already damaged
crop which is why the have been allowed use for demonstration
purposes by the farmer.

>I hope that one day through sterling investigations the
>truth about the crop circle mystery will be uncovered.

Absolutely, and I'm sure everyone agrees with that, but is does
seem that by calling circle makers "hoaxers", and denying their
abilities the process will take a very long time.

>And if it turns out to be Doug without Dave or Dave without
>Doug, I cannot remember which one has passed away

I'm not sure that either have passed away actually.

>Can we go with the what ever, these are my questions in reply to
>your postings on this group...

Ok, so what gave you the idea to post nonsense about the back
seat of cars, human biology, and mating habits? Particularly as
you now know who else you were refering to? Sounds to me like
you've been talking to someone who has a grudge over his editor
leaving his group, or should I say gave them an ultimatum and
lost.

>Max I think you have both over stepped the mark on your sarcasm,
>you seem to think I have a problem with ufology.

>Your contradicting your self again, you said
>Because I don't personally get upset if the answers don't go my
>way, it appears others do.

Did I say I was personally upset? in fact I was trying to save
you face as writing pathetic little songs makes you come across
as being a touch childish.

Tony





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:16:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:39:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:06:35 EDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:20:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

Previously, Max posted:

>The problem of the matter really is down to a good old time and
>motion study, you see if you divide the number of circles
>created by the amount of people involved in the formation of man
>made crop circles and include the number of nights available in
>the year for the production of these circles, with all the miles
>that would have to be covered and the fact that it is only dark
>for 4-5 hours during a large aspect of the time frame, they
>simply would not have the manpower or the time to have completed
>such a large scale almost military style run operation.

<snip>

First off, this is nonsense.

How many people are involved, total? I don't know where you
live, but it's dark for a good eight hours or more in my neck of
the woods. And how many miles are being covered? Don't these
people have cars? Or are the Amish responsible for all crop
circles?

>Never
>mind the fact that under supervision the crop circle makers
>could not reproduce the bending without fracture on the stalk of
>the crop circles, when they were asked to reproduce one of the
>complex patterns the ones with the undamaged stalks.

Show me some accurate numbers and study's to support such
claims. I believe in UFO's, Max. But this kind of
"guess-timating" does NOT speed the plow for the cause of
ufology. It only provides easy targets for skeptics and
debunkers to lock on to. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but this
sort of illogic is not the kind of help I personally am looking
for.

As far as crop circles and balls of light are concerned;
obviously, the fact that hoaxers produce some doesn't mean that
they produced them all. But there's no proof that they could
_not_ have all been hoaxed. Don't fall victim to the 'Chariots
of the Gods' mentality that, just because YOU can't figure out
how something massive was created, then it must have been the
work of extraterrestrials.

We need cooler heads than that or we won't get anywhere.

Take care,

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                                 Colleagues

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:04:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:33:04 -0400
Subject: Colleagues


Hello List!

Errol's mailing list is worldwide known as one of the best
in the world and we all here have learned at lot from the
various contributions of high respected researchers to the
actual events in the vast field of ufology.

What I intended to do since a long time I would like to do
now: just to  say a big German "Danke!" to Errol for the great
job he is doing. His work helps a lot not to lose the trust
that there are others with you though you are not with them
physically who are on the same quest for the truth - wherever
it is to be found.

I also would like to say another big German "Danke!" to a
researcher who is among us since a longe time, who undoubtedly
has spent very much of his private time in looking for
interesting websites and the latest news and who
contributed a lot to our ongoing research and studies but
always stayed a bit in the background:

Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>!

I was always glad to join this list not only because of its
mostly objective atmosphere and the lack of too heavy personal
injuries.

As an example how it goes in different newsgroups and lists I
would like to quote something I found in the Compuserve forum
"The Issues" fom Thu, Oct. 15th. The author is a Mr. Hesemann.

Begin of quote: "Anyway, I just used the card as an example that
a PhD has no more use than a credit card. It impresses naive
people but that=B4s it. What really counts is RESULTS. We have a
certain number of PhDs in the UFO community, from Rick Boylan to
David Jacobs, and, although I highly respect all of them
(or better: most of them), I doubt that anyone in the field
covers it on such an international range as I do and is able
to present the results of so many international field
investigations." End of quote.

Sincerely

Joachim Koch, Berlin





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:18:53 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:36:37 -0400
Subject: Re:  Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Hi All,

<snip>

>She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
>experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

>This is the first I've heard of anything as widespread
>as what that lady said. I would appreciate any info
>that any of you can provide.

>It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
>are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!

>Peace,

>John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-

Hi John,

When he was younger, my brother Evan got many, many women
pregnant (he worked in a private fertility clinic here in
Toronto) so I forwarded your question to him for his comments
(see below).

Evan did not make any comment to my suggestion that because
certain groups have gone on record as saying that their goal is
to strive for an ideal population of 500 million (about 5
billion less than what it is now!) so the environment can be
protected and resources not be depleted, could they be using
"alien abductions" as a cover for achieving this goal?

Evan wrote:

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:08:30 -0400
From: Evan Balaskas (evan.balaskas@bloodservices.ca>
To: nikolaos@YorkU.CA
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Need infor -R U Shooting Blanx?- (fwd) -Reply

<snip>

As for the infertility question, couples are considered to be
infertile if they have gone at least 1 year without conceiving a
child, without the benefit of birth control. There are many
reasons for this, including not having sex at the right time of
the cycle (for couples not having much sex). Two other very good
reasons (which I believe to be the main culprits) are sexually
transmitted diseases which when left untreated (most are
undetected until it's too late) cause severe scaring resulting
in infertility, and multiple abortions and or certain
contraceptives which cause problems with the female reproductive
system. Wearing tight underwear and chemical pollution are also
know culprits. When I worked at the fertility clinic, 1 out of 7
couples were infertile, so I'm not surprised with your numbers.

Better get back to work.
Bye for now,
Evan









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:59:15 -0400
Subject: 'M.E.' & Abductees


Some information regarding abductees has come to light here in
the UK that I think you need to be aware of. I work with a one
paticular repeater since childhood, who has got the memory
recall, without regression she also has partiall psi-abilities.

She has had all the usual things that are reported, visions,
hybrids (please hold the baby its yours scenario) increased psy
abilities after an event, a large number of medical problems
including nasal blockage, to which she has had four C.A.T scans
to which the hospital has lost all the results apparently, at
one stage the hospital tried to accuse her of not turning up for
one of the scans, to which the person who took her to all of the
appointments, as she does not drive, retorted with I have brought
her to all the appointments "so that dog just won't hunt".

As well as too many other illnesses to list at this time

She is also a member of an abductee group, and with twenty
members there is a large number fourteen to be precise who have
all been diagnosed with the medical problem M.E. to which I
believe that the national average for the illness is about one
person in six hundread here in the UK.

I believe that this figure which is well over fifty percent, of
people who claim they have been abducted in this group, needs to
be looked at?

Is there any other abducte groups in the US who can also reveal
any data regarding this medical anomaly?

Is there a link between the abductions and M.E.?

Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

If you or anyone else has clearer data on this I would be
obliged to recieve it?

She has also been contacted twice by a man claiming to be from
the UK Military who after five hours on the telephone shared
between two calls has tried at the moment unsuccessfully to
recruit her into a special group, with an excellent financial
package, and the main purpose of this group would be remote
viewing.

He has also acknowledged to her that there is an increased psy
ability after an abduction event, at the moment she has turned
them down as happens with a lot of abducte's they have an
increased  global green interest, and she has told him that she
wishes to have nothing to do with guns and war.

The man who has called said that he will call her again to see
if she has had a change of heart, I will keep you all informed.

Any comments or help would be appreciated.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:12:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 05:29:02 PDT

>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 04:18:55 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 98 17:05:17 PDT

>>>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
>>>>From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>      "Philip Morrison, with his penchant for zeroing in on
>>the significant issues, argued that the debate came down to the
>>nature of scientific evidence. 'Reproducibility' was not enough,
>>for one could not reproduce an aurora or eclipse, nor was 'hard
>>evidence' enough (or Darwin would have been in trouble). The
>>prime requirement for responsible evidence, he held, drawing a
>>parallel with the nineteenth-century acceptance of meteorites as
>>extraterrestrial, was 'independant and multiple chains of
>>evidence, each capable of satisfying a link-by-link test of
>>meaning.' Neither the extraterrestrial hypothesis nor any other
>>explanation of UFOs had multiple chains of evidence or a
>>link-by-link test."

>The two scientists most qualified to discuss the UFO evidence at
>the AAAS panel were Hynek and McDonald, who had an enormous
>amount of investigative experience and thorough familiarity with
>the data.

They did and I might add at the invitation of Carl Sagan.

>Morrison, on the other hand, had -- by his own
>admission -- no more familiarity than casual reading of
>unspecified UFO literature (George Adamski? Frank Edwards?
>Brinsley le Poer Trench?). In no other field than UFO-bashing
>would this sort of ignorance qualify one as an expert.

Morrison's paper was on the nature of scientific evidence, and
not as Jerome Clark's continued abuse of facts and historical
perspective implies, on the nature of ufological evidence. If
Jerome Clark wants to make a case for Philip Morrison not being
qualified to address the nature of scientific evidence, please
do so but don't mislead readers with your otherwise false
diatribes.

>Hynek
>and McDonald rightly objected to Morrison's claim to expertise
>or insight, and I suspect most people would.

Really? Just above you state that Morrison himself 'admitted' he
was unfamiliar with the UFO data, but with a stroke of the
keyboard, when it seems to please your argument, you say that
Morrison claimed expertise which was allegedly objected to by
Hynek and McDonald, but you fail to quote and provide a source.
So Clarkish! Exactly what did Hynek and McDonald object to? His
paper on the nature of scientific evidence? Or his good looks
and reputation? I would be interested in reading in context
these alleged objections. Please provide references that can be
independently verified. Nothing personal.

>>>>Please, it is not necessary to demonize a respected man and a
>>>>wonderful communicator ('Cosmos' probably brought many people
>>>>into the mind frame necessary to think about UFOs etc) just
>>>>because he disagrees with you and may actually have good arguing
>>>>points, just as you most likely do to support your position.

>I have become convinced that Ed Stewart, who is the most abusive
>polemicist I have seen in this field next to Bob Todd, honestly
>cannot tell the difference between criticism and demonization.
>It is his view, repeatedly betrayed in prose that can only be
>characterized as consistently mean-spirited, that one cannot
>disagree with him without being a bad human being. I have
>nowhere said or implied that Sagan and Morrison were bad human
>beings (I have neither opinion nor information on that subject
>-- nor, actually, interest); what I did say is that they did not
>advance UFO research or offer much elucidation about the nature
>of the UFO phenomenon. I am sure everybody on this list except
>Ed Stewart grasped my point.

I am somewhat afraid to say this because so far Jerome Clark is
not doing too good in his continued obssessions, but I really
must. The quote you are referring to is not mine. It belongs to
Nancy White. Unless you are suggesting that I am both Ed Stewart
and Nancy White your convictions, I am afraid, are more a
product of the recesses of your own mind than anything that you
are capable of supporting with relevant facts and direct quotes.
BTW, I really appreciated Nancy White having the intestinal
fortitude to contribute to this thread and not being intimidated
by a self-described "heavyweight" that can't even read or keep
track of who writes what.

>>>Interesting that our correspondent here uses the verb
>>>"demonize." Sagan, as his 'Demon-Haunted World' book makes
>>>clear, charged, and may have even believed on some level, that
>>>people who hold views about controversial anomalies different
>>>from his are little better than superstition-crazed
>>>demonologists. Sagan's role in ufology is not, to be fair, so
>>>uniformly dismal as Donald Menzel's was,

>>Just a minor point on Menzel. We have all been told how demon
>>Menzel's debunking of UFOs was so devastating to ufology that to
>>this date he still exerts an influence even though buried in his
>>grave for a quarter century. Interesting that while alive he
>>wasn't able to convince the Air Force of his debunking
>>explanations. He must of been some kind of influence to
>>accomplish from the grave what the Air Force refused to listen
>>to while he was alive! On another note, it was Sagan's stacked
>>deck of skeptical scientists, including Menzel, that lobbied the
>>Air Force to preserve intact the Project Blue Book files for
>>future generations to be able to study and research.

>At least we agree on something: Menzel "still exerts an
>influence even though buried in his grave."

Sorry! Once again you have displayed an incapacity to comprehend
the English language and have added a connotation to a quote of
mine pulled out of context which is not supported by the in
context statement in its entirety. To get it right, you can read
it as many times as you require to gain a rudimmentary
understand of what it says. There is no time limit. Take your
time. In the meantime, what part of "we have all been told..."
don't you understand?

>"Must have," not "must of," Ed. For revealing perspectives on
>Menzel, I refer interested readers to James McDonald's
>documented examples of Menzel's free use of pseudoscience in
the >pursuit of UFO explanations, or to astronomer Ian Seymour's
>observation on Menzel's methodology and willingness to distort
>data, or to the private views of Ruppelt and other Air Force
>luminaries of Menzel (highly unfavorable). All of these are
>discussed in my UFO Encyclopedia, and I cite bibliographic
>references for those seeking more information. I also
recommend, >if you can find it, Brad Sparks's privately
circulated monograph >"Refuting the Skeptics: A Close Look at
Donald H. Menzel" >(1977).

Let see, Menzel wasn't able to convince other scientists, or the
United States Air Force for which Jerome Clark claims to have
all the references one would need to verify it. Well, guess
what? If the scientific community and the Air Force are on
record as not taking Menzel seriously (which they are and it has
been my contention all along), why are the proponents of
ufological wisdom trying to shove down the throats of the
ufological gullible and incite them to believe that Menzel is a
continuing reason for ufology's woes? I don't get it, but then
again I live in the real world and am not privy to the
obsessions of ufological wisdom.

>>Jerome Clark also took issue with an obituary that Barry
>>Greenwood wrote in JUST CAUSE praising Carl Sagan's
>>contributions and wrote a typical Jerome Clark letter for which
>>Barry Greenwood rebutted in the following issue, JUST CAUSE #50,
>>03/97, pages 4-6. The rebuttal is too lengthy to re-type here in
>>its entirety. Suffice to say that Jerry Clark's pettiness and
>>obsession with a dead exobiologist did not go unanswered. The
>>initial paragraph of Barry Greenwood's response should be enough
>>to make its point:

>>        "I am sorry that my memory of Carl Sagan's influence on
>>not just my own interest in the search for extraterrestrial life
>>but on science's as well has bothered you. It is however
>>precisely what I had expected from a good chunk of the UFO
>>community. Sagan was critical of the notion that aliens are
>>visiting the earth. He did not deny that UFO reports should be
>>investigated. In fact in his essay from 'UFOs: A Scientific
>>Debate' (ed. Sagan and Page, 1972), Sagan argued for judgement to
>>be withheld on UFOs, that "there isn't enough data....and that
>>an open mind should be kept."

>It's just too bad that Sagan didn't follow his own advice about
>keeping an open mind. (And how do you know "there isn't [sic]
>enough data" when you're not looking for such data?)

I gather since you chose to ignore and not to respond to the
part of Barry Greenwood's response:


        " If Sagan were off base in his negative views on alien
visitation, then one case, only one example need be provided to
prove so.  Which one is it? Or several? Do you care to put
yourself on the line on this matter?" --- Barry Greenwood


You, yourself, have no data to support your position, but you
demonize Sagan for stating the obvious. Ufological wisdom at its
best!

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:22:47 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:31:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]

>>>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>>>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>>>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>>>or more.

>>>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>>>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>>>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>>>parachute would fall that much faster.

>>>Jim Deardorff

>>Hi Jim,

>>As I read your post, several things occurred to me.

>>First of all, if indeed flares were released at that altitude,
>>they weren't released by anything from the nearby base. To my
>>knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are capable of
>>flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there.

>Hi Greg,

>Maybe the elevation angle of the flares was only 5 degrees, not
>10, in which case their elevation is halved and the scenario
>might have been possible. We need to wait to hear from Bruce on
>that.

>>Also, using the distance information supplied by Dr. Maccabee of
>>the lights in the videos, the distances between "flares" would
>>have to be measured on the order of scores of miles I would
>>think. Using this, some reckoning of the speed of the aircraft
>>should be available using the angular spacing of the lights
>>(known factor) and their ignition sequences.

>>In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would have
>>to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
>>released in the manner shown in the videos? This information
>>might be pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very
>>least.

>I supppose one could always assume that there were several
>different planes involved. The lights may have been separated by
>some 5 degrees each (I'm trying to recall what the one video I
>saw looked like), in which case they'd each be some 6 miles
>apart, if 70 miles away from Phoenix. I can't think of any
>useful military training purpose such a flare release would
>serve, unless it would be to half-way simulate UFOs and thus
>serve as a distraction for the 8 p.m. UFO event.

>  Jim D.

G'day Jim & List,

Jim are you positing that the Air Farce [ ;-) ] may now have a
deliberate policy of dropping flares before the appearance of a
UFO so as to 'prove' publicly that any strange lights, that may
be spotted after the flares, were 'only just flares'? Plausible
denial before the event - very clever - but if repeated as a
ploy it speaks volumes about either 'black projects' or even an
arrangement with 'alien peoples'.

Regards

Leanne






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                 Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:35:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:52:36 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -


-[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

>From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:15:02 -0400
>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:30:31 -0400

>This afternoon I received an email from Ohio researcher Don Keating,
>who advised that there is no FOX Channel 2 TV station in Cleveland.
>Keating added that the only FOX station in Cleveland is WJW Fox Channel
>8, located at 5800 S. Marginal Road, right across from Lake Erie just
>east of downtown.

>Further, a Jamie-Andrea Yanak from Cleveland, Ohio, claiming to be
>employed in a local news-media capacity, also stated that there was
>no WJBK Fox-Channel 2 in Cleveland.

>The following announcement by Yanak was located on an internet
>'newsgroup'
>in response to the "UFO ROUNDUP" article concerning the October 10
>event:

>>Unfortunately you have been misled.

>>First of all there is no channel 2 in Cleveland, or any
>>WJBK. VHF broadcasters have only 3 letters in their FCC
>>call signs, not 4. Our FOX affiliate here is WJW channel
>>8.  They carried no such story on October 10, or any
>>other recent date.

>>Working in the local news media myself, I can further
>>state that no other reports of this object where made
>>by any other TV or radio station in the northeast Ohio
>>area, nor carried on the AP wire.

>>You've been hoaxed, be more carefull and PERSONALLY
>>check your info next time.

>>Jamie-Andrea Yanak
>>Cleveland, Ohio

First off, I have no idea and will not comment on the validity
of the UFO sighting; it's all pretty confusing.

However, there are several things that I can clear up:

1) FOX is a UHF and not a VHF network.

2) Regarding the number of FCC call letters; down here in
Houston, the local FOX station goes by KRIV, NBC goes by KPRC,
ABC goes by KTRK, CBS is KHOU, etc, etc, etc. Obviously the
above information regarding FCC call signs is incorrect. Ms.
Yanak may have been thinking of network call signs as opposed to
affiliates.

3) The "number" such as channel "2" may have been the local
cable listing and not the "RF" placement on the tuner. For
instance, NBC's Houston affiliate, KPRC, is actually called
Channel 2 on the TV dial. However, it comes in on channel 12 via
Warner Cable. We have several different cable companies across
the city and different stations come in on a variety of odd
channels via the cable box.

 Ms. Yanak should take her own advice:

"Be more carefull and PERSONALLY check your info next time."

Later...

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:06:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:36:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT

>Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
>also show variances in height.

>They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
>during their descent.

Leanne, I agree. The pattern looked too stable. I know Bruce
must be thinking we're beating a dead horse here, but....they
just don't _look_ like flares (the ones in the oft seen videos).
I would expect a more random dispersion. If indeed the range
from the camera was as great as Bruce thinks, I would also
expect the apparent size of the lights to be vastly smaller, and
for the lights to flicker more, especially given the amount of
atmosphere between the cameras and the objects, and also
allowing for slightly uneven burning which should be expected.

Does anyone know the weather conditions during the time the
videos were taken: specifically, wind direction changes with
altitude (shearing)? And, could moisture content of the air
account for the apparent size of the objects? I recall seeing an
aircraft or two over Phoenix in those videos. They exibited no
halo effect that I could discern, so that would seem to suggest
a low humidity.

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:23:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative


Concerning Bruce Maccabee's calculation that these lights were
at a distance of some 70 miles from Phoenix, I queried Bill
Hamilton on his findings. By comparing one of the Phoenix videos
of the lights with a daytime video shot taken from the same
camera and place, he determined that the lights had actually
appeared a little below the crest of the background Estrella
Mts. This would make them closer than 7 to 9 miles away. His
superposition on this is depicted in his web site, whose address
I unfortunately failed to save.

He made a calculation, using the height of these mountains and
their distance from Phoenix, that the elevation angle of the top
of the mountain ridge from the video-camera site was around 5 or
6 degrees (see below). If we use a figure of 5.5 degrees, then
if the lights had been 70 miles away, they would have been at an
altitude of a little over 35,000 ft. But according to what Bill
learned from the Maryland Air National Guard, flares they drop
are dropped from an altitude below 15,000 ft. So that's a
20,000-ft discrepancy.

Thus, if the lights were at an elevation angle smaller than 5-6
degrees, they were in front of a mountain range 7-9 miles away;
if they were at greater elevation and 70 miles away, they were
around 35,000 ft up and would not have been flares.

In his website, Bill noted an important fact: the sequence in
which the lights started to extinguish themselves was different
in the two videos he had access to. This indicates that they
were videotaped at two somewhat different times when they were
likely at two different locations. We've all seen reports where
a UFO shows up in one place at one time and then jumps to a
location a substantial distance away a little later in time.
Five orbs could do this as well as one orb. This seems the most
likely explanation for Bruce's calculation giving a different
answer than what Bill found. Triangulation assumes the fix taken
on the objects was made at the same time from both vantage
points.

Bill's response is posted below:
  Jim Deardorff

-----

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@hotmail.com>
To: deardorj@proaxis.com
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights alternative
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:59:42 PDT

In answer to your question, if the distance to the mountains is
estimated to be 7 miles, the angle of elevation is over 6
degrees, and if estimated to be 9 miles, the angle of elevation
is over 5 degrees. The so-called flare would be at an altitude
higher than the altitude of release (15,000 ft according to the
Maryland ANG).

However, my calculations show the lights to be at a lower angle
of elevation that places them in front of the Estrellas by
actual pixel count.

What we saw visually does not match the description of the LU-U2
flares. Those flares burn intensely white. We saw amber-gold.
Those flares are usually dropped at low altitudes by the A10
which is a ground support plane. We have no exact times for the
alleged flare drops. We only know that Lt. Keith Shepherd
stated that the A10s were back on the ground by 8:30 PM after
their exercise and flare drop. It was obvious to me that they
were making a lame attempt to account for the giant V seen over
Phoenix at 8:30PM and not the videos taken around 10 PM.

Two of us, who have seen flares over military operating areas,
saw the lights through a telescope. The appeared to be
perfectly round without surrounding glow in the atmosphere.
These category of lights have been referred to as "orbs" and
that is what I believe they were as others were seen moving
horizontally or even ascending at other times of the night.

Best,

Bill Hamilton






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:37:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:50:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:06:06 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>The analysts at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, the Air
>Technical Intelligence Center of the Air Materiel Command, were
>very very smart people. As I have pointed out in my book, The
>FBI/UFO Connection, they were experts in their fields and they
>used their best reasoning to arrive at the logical conclusion
>that these were (a) craft not made on earth and (b) were either
>remotely controlled or piloted by non-human intelligences.

I have your publication. I fail to find a document source for
the above claim. How about providing a chapter/page number? Are
you referring to a specific document other than the alleged
estimate of the situation (EOTS)?

>The result of their analysis and reasoning was placed into the
>Estimate which was then, according to Ruppelt, passed up the
>chain of command to Vandenburg. He rejected it. The men from
>ATIC visited the General. He told them, in essence, sorry wrong
>answer!

What is the basis of this observation on? As I recall, Ruppelt
claimed that Vandenberg rejected the Estimate of the Situation
(EOTS) because the evidence was insufficient to support the
conclusions the ATIC personnel had reached. To my knowledge,
there are no documents which even suggest that Vandenberg's
rejection of the EOTS meant the ETH officially was off limits,
as the implication of Maccabee seems to suggest.

>Anyway, one can imagine the ATIC analysts going "home" with
>their tails between their legs, feeling chastised.

One can imagine many things, as Maccabee clearly does, but the
evidence to support those imaginings is simply not documented in
any of the official records. Please provide source
documentation, if I am wrong. Otherwise, one must assume that
the interpretations to these events are solely Maccabee's and
are not supported by the available documentation. If Maccabee
knows of any authentic government document that shows clearly
the rejection of the EOTS was intended as an official signal
that the ETH would not be considered in the future, produce the
documentation for our enlightment.

>They had used
>their best reasoning and had arrived at a logical answer to the
>saucers and had been told by the General... "sorry wrong answer"
>or something like that.

Again, "sorry wrong answer" implies that Vandenberg's rejection
was a not-so-subtle directive ordering that the ETH would not be
considered a viable possibility in the evaluation of future
sightings, regardless of the 'evidence'. That is not supportable
by any existing documentation. If I am wrong, cite the
documentation.

>The net result of the rejection is that (d) was removed from
>the list of options.

Again, nowhere does the documentation show the ETH was removed
from the list of options. If, for example, the Roswell incident
actually had involved an alien spacecraft, there is no way
Vandenberg could have rejected the EOTS. But then the EOTS would
have included detailed information concerning the alien craft,
which would have been more than enough evidence to support the
conclusions ATIC personnel allegedly reached by relying only on
Project SIGN sighting reports.

>Now all reports had to be shoehorned (forced)
>into categories a,b, and c. Hence we have the final project Sign
>report (a last gasp of the ET proponents) admitting that not all
>sghtings had been explained, but saying that Project Saucer (the
>public version) was working hard to explain all reports... and
>then Project Grudge, which fulfilled that promise (which
>included offering hokey explanations for the 50 toughest cases).

>To the outside world, then it appeared that everything was being
>explained. There was no support by the Air Force for
>further research into the saucer problem and the "propaganda"
>(which is what it was) statements by th Air Force served to
>dampen the interest. (Ironically, this worked counter to the
>desires of AF intelligence to collect more data. The chief of
>AF intel had to send out requests for further data after each
>major public statement by the AF about how the saucer problem
>was solved, or uninteresting or whatever).

So what? It is clear that the Air Force had an interest in
curbing public concern over the flying saucers.

>The point here is that Vandenburg set a policy.. ET craft are
not >an acceptable explanation

That imagining is not supported by any documentation. Vandenberg
didn't reject the EOTS as a roundabout way of setting policy to
eliminate the ETH as an acceptable explanation, but because it
lacked evidence to support its conclusions. The implication of
Maccabee's claim is that the 'real' UFO investigations were
being carried out in total secrecy, probably including the
exploitation of the ET technology gleaned from the Roswell
saucer. Maccabee's claim is short on documentation, long on
unsupported interpretation.

>....which had a "trickle down" effect of dampening scientific
>interest in the UFO problem. The ATIC researchers were moved
>out of Project Sign and Grudge to other locations. The quality
>of investigation dropped
>(why be serious if the seemingly logical answer was not allowed
>to be used?)

Except the "seemingly logical answer" lacked proof of any kind,
proof that could only come from a crashed vehicle, or
unambiguous photography of unquestioned authenticity.

>By the early 1950'2 the TRADITION had been set.... UFOs/saucers
>are nothing but mistakes and hoaxes, etc., there is nothing new
>or interesting to scientists there, so forget them.

Anecdotal stories will never be enough to prove the ETH. Without
linkage of data providing an unbroken chain of evidence
(Courtesy of Philip Morrison), the ETH will forever remain
unproven. The documentation shows that the Air Force had no such
evidence. Maccabee's interpretation would have us believe that,
in the face of hard evidence, the Air Force, and Vandenberg in
particular, denied the existence of ET visitations, and imposed
that denial on all of the US military.

>Menzel, with
>his high level of credibiliy, enforced this TRADITION by
>presenting supposed explanations for all the sightings he listed
>in his first book.

You need to get in the huddle with Jerome Clark and come to an
agreement as to whether Menzel had a "high level of credibility"
or not? On another post he provides compelling arguments that
neither the Air Force or his fellow scientists bought his
debunking explanations. Now, what do you want the ufological
gullible to believe in this particular scenario you are
presenting?

<snip>

>However, if either a major, major landing event (or
>something similar)

We've had UFO sightings for at least fifty years, and a major
landing event has yet to occur. The subject of UFOs really isn't
a big deal, except to the people who are involved in the
subject. It has never been a pressing social issue. And if an
alien spacecraft were to land on the White House lawn tomorrow,
it wouldn't validate all past UFO observations as observations
of ET cruisers.

>or else a major infux of
>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.00 which would allow scientists to be
>supported while doing real, actual, legitimate, unbelievable
>research into UFO sightings, etc.,

Ah, yes! The show-me-the-money-I'll-show-you-an-ET school of
ufological wisdom! And until that time it appears that
interested scientists have difficulty in doing real, legitimate
and believable research in ufology that can stand up to critical
analysis, discernment and independent verification,
my-hands-are-tied-and-I-can't-get-up school of ufological
wisdom.

Nevertheless, Maccabee's imaginings are based on an alleged
document none of us has ever seen. Did Vandenberg outline his
reasons for rejecting the document in other documents? If he
did, no one has seen those documents either. All we know is that
the EOTS allegedly concluded that flying saucers were
interplanetary craft, and that Vandenberg rejected the document
because it lacked proof. To my knowledge, there isn't a single
document setting forth any policy stating that the ETH would not
be considered from that point on.

Of course it could all change tomorrow with the discovery of
previously unknown documents that can be verified.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:43:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:33:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 10:10:15 PDT

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:05:15 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Before you spend too much time patting yourself on the back, my
>friend, your readers should know that bibliographies by
>definition do not report facts or attempt analysis. Given your
>track record in these last two areas, it's just as well.

Of course, I did ask for introductory articles from people that
were associated with FSR and MUFON. I asked Gordon Creighton and
Walt Andrus to provide a historical perspective article on the
organizations and Richard Haines and John Schuessler each to
write an article that would add insight into the role of
scientific research and ufology. I did not edit what they wrote
giving them prior approval that I would print whatever they
submitted to me. I also included what I called the compiler's
notes where I outlined my own thoughts/philosophy on the
subject. My 'bias' is simply hoozing through the papers of
Creighton, Andrus, Haines and Schuessler, as well as my own.
That dastardly demon Ed Stewart strikes again!

>Actually, that -- judging from the reviews (Ed failed to
respond >to a challenge from me

Reviews of your book are not relevant to your intellectual
dishonesty which you have displayed online which is now a part
of the written record and archived on the records of this
mailing list and available for review and/or downloading by
anyone with access to the internet. You seem to think that it is
such a great thing to receive a favorable review by the Journal
of Scientific Exploration.  Let me bring attention to another
favorable review published by JSE shortly before yours. Stanton
Friedman's "Top Secret/Majic" was reviewed in JSE by Wood and
received a very favorable and sympathetic review. Yet, Stanton
Friedman shares with you the distinction of being proven on line
to be intellectually dishonest on this very same mailing list
which are substantiated by the threads/discussion/posts online,
just like your intellectual dishonesty is also substantiated by
your posts online which are now part of the record and archives.
If one was to follow your argumentive logic, we should all be
embracing the 'evidence' of MJ-12 because Stanton Friedman's
book was endorsed by Wood in the prestigious peer-reviewed pages
of JSE.  The way I see it JSE has a problem, an obvious lack of
submitted quality papers and book reviews as well as an apparent
problem in their peer-review process.

>>>From
>>>that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
>>>were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective.

>Well, my friend, we certainly know a lot about _your_ biases,
>more I'm sure than any of us would ever have cared to know.

Every claim I have made about your intellectual dishonesty, I
have documented it online with your exact quotes and challenged
you to show otherwise - including I might add to substantiate
your comments on the Sturrock Panel. The fact you have chosen
not to provide supporting documentation suggests you can't
substantiate your positional arguments.

>In
>fact, reviews by nonpolemicists tend to call my encyclopedia
>balanced and even agnostic in its approach. The most recent
>review I've seen (as of yesterday) appears in a professional
>library journal, Rettig on Reference (August 1998). A typical
>sentence: "Like the first edition, this is neither an apology
>for nor a refutation of the existence of UFOs. Clark qualifies
>evidence rather than putting a skeptic's or a believer's spin
>on it."

For reasons of your own, you have chosen not to follow the above
characterization online in this mailing list. It is a matter of
record. If you wish to avoid the obvious in future postings,
take your intellectual dishonesty and park it outside.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:18:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:43:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Hi All,

>A doctor in New York (a fertility expert) was busted
>for filing false insurance claims so that his clients
>could be artificially inseminated and get 'coverage'
>for it. That's not why I'm writing though.

>The reporter also interviewed a representative of
>the Health insurance outfit that was being bilked.
>The woman made a comment that shocked me and
>left me numb.

>She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
>experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

>This is the first I've heard of anything as widespread
>as what that lady said. I would appreciate any info
>that any of you can provide.

>It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
>are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!

>Peace,

>John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-

John,

Sadly John this is not new, news.  One of the earliest writers
to bring this information to the public attention of the UFO
community was Val Germann, many years ago (1992).  Raymond
Fowler acknowledges Germann as the source of this information
and extensively quotes from the reports that Germann had
prepared in the "Andreason Legacy" pages 410-414 by Raymond
Fowler, 1997 Marlowe & Company, New York, $24.95.

A thorough reading of Fowler's book will juggle your mind a bit;
however, after reading it and digesting the material one might
never look at the people piling up sightings reports again
without an unjaundiced eye and wondering what these characters
(alien and human) really up to?

To understand who Ray Fowler is and where he has been; start
with his Casebook of A UFO Investigator and progress through a
few of his intermediary books  (Watchers I & II, The Alagash
Abductions), then to Legacy. Its a good way to condense 40+
years of experience in the field.

Gary

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                        Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:12:17 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:59:42 -0400
Subject: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


Okay, here we go....

I'm probably going to regret sticking my nose into all this, but
I have to believe there can be some kind of peace between Mr.
Clark and Mr. Stewart. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm gonna try...

I got a question for each of you:

Jerry,

If you find Ed to be so uniquely biased against you and truly
feel that he is the only one harboring any mean spirited dislike
for you and your work, then why bother contending with him?
Certainly he's no threat to you, your opinions or your career.
In other words, if he is an anomoly within public sentiment as
you claim, then just ignore him. As you've pointed out many
times, you feel no one else of any consequence agrees with him,
so what's the problem? You're a talented writer; move on to
another topic.

Ed,

If Jerome's writings are offensive to you because he forms an
opinion rather than just relay facts, then why read them? It
only seems to upset you. Did it ever occur to you that all the
indexing and cataloging you've been doing might be accessed by
people that will do exactly what you seem to hate; form strong
individual opinions? Are you worried that the rest of us aren't
smart enough to tell the difference between someone's opinion
and a set of facts, even if an opinion is presented as fact? If
so, don't. It's insulting.

I can't speak for the rest of the list, but I don't need
protection from the "intellectual dishonesty" of Jerome Clark
any more than I need to be reminded on a daily basis of Ed's
"mean spirited" approach to collecting data.

Frankly, the spirit of open debate has gone a bit flat with the
two of you trading broadsides. You have each challenged each
other till the flavor's been chewed out of the gum. It's getting
really, really old.

So here's my challenge to both of you:

Post your views about UFO topics and don't mention each other,
not even once, for a week. I'll send a crisp ten dollar bill to
each of you if you can do it. Other wise, I'll e-mail my address
to you for my winnings.

Hopefully, it'll be the best 20 dollar bet I ever lost.

Sincerely,

Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:44:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:52:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:37 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 14:28:03 PDT

>>>The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
>>>ordered destroyed in 1948.

>>It is clear that one or more copies were not destroyed. Ruppelt,
>>who evidently saw one, describes its contents thus, in three
>>paragraphs in the original manuscript of his 'Report on
>>Unidentified Flying Objects' (they were edited out of the
>>published version):

>><"It concluded that UFOs were interplanetary. As documented
>>proof, many unexplained sightings were quoted. The original UFO
>>sighting by Kenneth Arnold; the series of sightings from the
>>secret Air Force Test Center, Muroc AFB; the F-51 pilot's
>>>of an F-80 pilot who saw two round objects diving toward the
>>ground near the Grand Canyon; and a report by the pilot of an
>I>daho National Guard T-6 trainer, who saw a violently
>>maneuvering black object.

>>"As further documentation, the report quoted an interview with
>>an Air Force major from Rapid City AFB who saw twelve UFOs
>>flying a tight diamond formation. When he first saw them they
>>were high but soon they went into a fantastically high speed
>>dive, leveled out, made a perfect formation turn, and climbed
>>at a 30 to 40 degree angle, accelerating all the time. The UFOs
>>were oval-shaped and brilliant yellowish-white.>

>>"Also included was one of the reports from the AEC's
>>Los Alamos Laboratory. The incident occurred at 9:40 a.m.
>>on September 23, 1948. A group of people were waiting for an
>>airplane at the landing strip in Los Alamos when one of them
>>>relative size was [sic] the same as a dime held edgewise
>>and slightly tipped, about 50 feet away."

>The inclusion of this last report by Ruppelt, if it truly was in
>the Estimate, means that the Estimate was not written in August,
>soon after the Chiles Whitted sighting, but rather in late
>September, 1948.

Which Ruppelt is to be incorporated into ufological wisdom? How
is the accuracy of his statements to be determined when all we
know about this alleged document are in his conflicting
statements/writings? What does that say about the validity of
his other claims about the EOTS?

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 22:18:31 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:07:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:22:30 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 16:32:11 PDT

>>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>I knew about this story a full two months before the story
>broke.

Actually, for what it's worth, I knew about it months before
that. Mark Rodeghier, one of those who briefed the panel, told
me the meeting had gone well. The results, when announced, were
no surprise to me, though of course I was pleased.  Again, an
excellent insiders' account appears in the current (Fall) issue
of IUR.

>When
>I made similar comments right after the Sturrock press release,
>Jerome Clark and Robert Swiatek of FUFOR saw my comments as an
>attack on ufology, quickly demonized me and even demanding that
>I leave the Project-1947 list, initially a haven for serious
>ufologists, for my 'attack' on the greatest thing that has
>happened to ufology. But I am digressing from the real subject.

I have no idea why Ed, purveyor of some of the most abusive
polemic it has ever been my misfortune to see in this field,
accuses _others_ of demonizing _him_. A clumsy rhetorical ploy
if there ever was one, and a pretty boring one by now.

>Most of the Sturrock report is actually written by Sturrock and
>his team, and not by the Scientific Review Panel. The Scientific
>Review
>Panel consisted of the following people:

>       V.R. Eshleman, T.E. Holzer, J.R. Jokippi, F. Louangee,
>       H.J. Melosh, J.J. Papike, G. Reits, C.A. Tolbert, and
>       B. Veyret

>and are credited for writing the section entitled "Summary
>Report of the Scientific Review Panel" located online at:

>       http://www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock/3.html

>Read their credited report and compare it to the Stanford press
>release. Can anyone seriously suggest that they are saying the
>same thing? Read the Summary Report of the Scientific Review
>Panel again. It is their opinion what the Sturrock panel is
>allegedly all about, not the press release, not Sturrock's
>interpretation, not the rest of the Sturrock report written by
>Sturrock and his team, but the reaction to the best ufology
>presented by the best ufologists to the Scientific Review Panel
>and their summary comments that matters. That is what the
>funding, and scientific organizations will be interested in
>reading, not what Sturrock/Rockefeller believes.

Interesting that none of these panel members have come forward
to protest what Stewart and Klass want us to believe was the
utter distorting of their conclusions. Maybe these guys need
Stewart and Klass to tell them what they think.

>Since Jerome Clark has been unable to provide supporting quotes
>from what he alleges the report to say, I have included not only
>the online links to the Sturrock report and the Scientific
>Review Panel summary, but also the much favored Stanford press
>release. The difference between them is indeed bizarre.

I urge everybody to read the report in its entirety and judge
for himself or herself which of us has read it correctly.

>>What I don't understand, my friend, is why -if you hate this
>>field and just about everybody in it and find it and them fit
>>only for the rankest vilification -you spend most of your
>>waking hours doing UFO work, nearly all of it, I gather,
>>bibliographical. In other words, cataloging the worthless
>>writings of worthless people of whom you cannot speak badly
>>enough, all addressing a subject that is about nothing.

>You answered your own rhetorical question. Obviously I don't
>hate. When you spend your time online blowing smoke up people's
>asses trying to pass off your beliefs as if they were written in
>stone and posturing your arrogance and alleged importance in
>this field in what amounts to as lame appeals to authority, some
>people may believe you while others may get intimidated. I don't
>allow either. I respect what can be independently verified, not
>intellectual dishonesty and not intellectual bullyism. I am
>fortunate to be in a position where I have resources at my
>immediate disposal and when needed associates in the field that
>can assist me with independent analysis. Everytime you cross the
>line with your intellectual dishonesty or bullyism I will be
>there to rebuttle with source documentation that readers can
>independently follow themselves.

If you don't respect intellectual dishonesty and intellectual
bullyism, obviously you have no respect for yourself. Sad
indeed. Perhaps that explains the sources of your rage.

Which reminds me, O Mean-Spirited One: When exactly are you
going to step evading my challenge to you to cite reviews that
trash me for all the intellectual and personal crimes you claim
(or pretend) to see in my UFO Encyclopedia? You can run, dude,
but you can't hide on this one.

Which also reminds me.

While typing a rejoinder to Ed's most recent trashing of my
encyclopedia, I received - by pleasant coincidence - an e-mail
from sociologist Robert E. Bartholomew, of James Cook University
in North Queensland, Australia. Dr. Bartholomew, author (with
psychologist George S. Howard) of the excellent `UFOs and Alien
Contact: Two Centuries of Mystery' (Prometheus Books, 1998), had
the following to say about my book and has given me permission
to quote it:

"I received `The Encyclopedia of UFOs' (Second edition) about a
month ago and I've managed to get through about a third of it.
I have learned a great deal from it. It is a landmark book, a
remarkable achievement, and if they gave out Pulitzer Prizes for
UFO books, this should be the one to get it. The entries are so
detailed, balanced and well-referenced, it's like reading 273
books in one. I've suggested to several sociology colleagues
that they get their libraries to order it. I have two book
reviews planned which I should get to by mid-November once I've
completely digested it. Any criticisms I have are minor."

Thanks, Ed, for giving me the chance to quote the kind words
above. And I look forward to seeing those reviews that back up
your venomous characterizations of my personality, motivation,
honesty, sanity, and intelligence.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:46:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:44:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


This is a rebuttal to Ed Stewart's tomes on the question of God,
The Universe and Everything.

I have this to say about that. The actual framafugation of this
somewhat intense paducal intoberation is that there is only one
of these to go around. I read a book once and it was not Ed
Stewart's. Perhaps Mr. Stewart is aware of this fact. Or should
this be typed with a queery at the end??? Uh, querry.

The infestation of those who profilgate the prolific but less
often profound liberation of these inane ineptitudes and
peptides of sense common, have never proved one way or another
about this.

So how, in the name of insegrediousness, can you say that, Mr.
Stewart? Huh? Huh?

Listen, I've been researching this subject of ours for, oh,
twenty or thirty minutes longer than you, ol buddy. In fact, I
have schrappnel in my body that's older than you are. Hah! So
whaddya have to say to that?

In colusion, I would like to precaricably state without a doubt,
that you are absloutely wrong on the first point but I _may_
give you the second point.

Now answer that will you?

Dr. Jaime Gesundt,
CSURCADHFFW
Canal Street UFO Research Center and Discount House
of Fresh Wines.

PS: in case this doesn't get posted on UpDates, I am sending it
to you direct

________________________________________________________________

Moderator Insert:

Good plan Jim - you just never know when that _Bastard!_
moderator will throw a snit about formating, life, the
universe and everything.....


[Cut to 'Blackadder' scene.....]


In Prince's House

(knock at door)

G: Enter!

E: Dr. Johnson, Your Highness.

G: Ah, Dr. Johnson! Damn cold day!

J: Indeed it is, sir, but a very fine one, for I celebrated last
   night the encyclopaedic implementation of my pre-meditated
   orchestration of demotic Anglo-Saxon.

G: (nods, grinning, then speaks) Nope -- didn't catch any of that.

J: Well, I simply observed, sir, that I'm felicitous, since,
   during the course of the penultimate solar sojourn, I
   terminated my uninterrupted categorisation of the vocabulary
   of our post-Norman tongue.

G: Well, I don't know what you're talking about, but it sounds
   damn _saucy_, you lucky thing! I know some fairly
   liberal-minded girls, but I've never penultimated any of them
   in a solar sojourn, or, for that matter, been given any Norman
   tongue!

E: I believe, sir, that the Doctor is trying to tell you that he
   is happy because he has finished his book. It has, apparently,
   taken him ten years.

G: Yes, well, I'm a slow reader myself...

J: (places two manuscripts on the table, but picks up the top
   one) Here it is, sir: the very cornerstone of English
   scholarship. This book, sir, contains every word in our
   beloved language.

G: Hmm.

E: Every single one, sir?

J: (confidently) Every single word, sir!

E: (to Prince) Oh, well, in that case, sir, I hope you will not
   object if I also offer the Doctor my most enthusiastic
   contrafribularities.

J: What?

E: 'Contrafribularities', sir? It is a common word down our
   way...

J: Damn! (writes in the book)

E: Oh, I'm sorry, sir. I'm anispeptic, frasmotic, even
   compunctuous to have caused you such pericombobulation.

J: What? What? WHAT?

G: What are you on about, Blackadder? This is all beginning to
   sound a bit like dago talk to me.

E: I'm sorry, sir. I merely wished to congratulate the Doctor on
   not having left out a single word. (J sneers) Shall I fetch
   the tea, Your Highness?

G: Yes, yes! And get that damned fire up here, will you?

E: Certainly, sir. I shall return interfrastically. (exits)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                              UFO Name Change?

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:46:45 -0400
Subject: UFO Name Change?


List,

I thought this may be of interest.

Leanne

>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>Subject: UFO name change.
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:29 +0930

>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
> 'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>natural unidentified objects.

>What do you all think.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 22:42:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:52:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:37:51 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 18:50:31 PDT

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Howdy, my good-natured friend,

>Ufology is not a business for me.

Nor for me, either, alas. I wish it were. Who says there's money
in ufology? Nobody who's ever participated in it, that's for
sure. I'm gonna be a plumber in my next life.

>>Raising dogs, for example? You are clearly incapable, given your
>>overwhelming commitment to an emotion-driven approach to
>>ufology, of rendering serious, objective judgments. Such
>>judgments are not necessary in dog-raising.

>I don't render judgments.

I guess then it's not rendering judgments to call me a liar, a
mental case, a manipulator, and the lowest sort of human being,
and to admit that you dislike just about everybody in the field
- including, I suspect, yourself, and to trash ufology and all
it stands for in virtually every breath..

>Not every one has such a clear understanding of the subject your
>imminence has displayed on this list.

I think you mean "eminence," guy. Don't you own a dictionary?


>>I also suspect that if you got out of this business,
>>you'd be happier. Why surround yourself with people who make you
>>miserable and enraged?.

>I am not miserable. I am not enraged.

Man, you sure could have fooled the rest of us.

 How can I be miserable or
>enraged? I am surrounded by the ensightful writings of John
>Keel, Jacques Vallee, Willy Smith, Paul Devereux, Peter
>Brooksmith, John Rimmer, John Harney, Dennis Stacy, and the list
>goes on and on...

>I also have at my disposal the brilliant and insightful early
>writings of who-would-of-guess

I think you mean "insightful" and "who would have guessed." My
friend Peter's last name is not Brooksmith but Brookesmith.

>would turn out to become a
>premier spokesperson for ufological wisdom in the latter part of
>the 20th century. As an example, his UFOs are 'planetary
>poltergeist' arguments are classics and deserve to be read by
>all aspiring ufologists. None other than George M. Eberhart,
>associate editor of IUR, was in agreement when he gave the
>coveted "**" mark to "The Unidentified: Notes Toward Solving The
>UFO Mystery", written by Jerome Clark and Loren Coleman, in his
>bibliographical masterpiece.

Ah, yes, 'The Unidentified'. A book I long ago disowned but
which, inexplicably to me, some people continue to admire,
including some of the people whom Ed professes to admire above.
(You guys know who you are.) You can say this for Ed: you can
count on his rants to be incoherent, uninformed, and
personality-driven.

Anyway, anybody who admits openly to admiring John Keel is
really not somebody who ought to be pointing fingers at others
for their silly ideas. As that great philosopher Hank Williams
(in his Luke the Drifter guise) once observed, be careful of
stones that you throw.

In any event, most recently, I offer a critical discussion of
`The Unidentified' (written in1974, in what I like to think of
as my callow youth) in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp.
753-54. Unlike you, my friend, and in common with mature adults,
I am willing to admit it when I'm wrong. If I do say so myself,
nobody has written more eloquently on the flaws and limitations
of my first book than I have. It's a product, as I wrote in Fate
around 1980, of ufology's countercultural "revisionist
hysteria."

Incidentally, I have in my library one copy of a Stewart book.
It's his 613-pp. bibliography of Flying Saucer Review. It is a
splendid piece of work, precisely the sort of research tool we
serious ufologists need. Having done a fair amount of
bibliographic work myself (though certainly not to the extent
that Ed Stewart has done), I have a sense of how difficult,
tedious, and time-consuming this sort of task is. We all owe Ed
a debt of gratitude for his fine accomplishment here. His FSR
book is expensive but well worth searching out.

>Surrounded by such rich examples of literature, all I need for
>complete happiness is a crispy chicken on sourdough from
>Jack-in-Box.

Whatever makes you happy, guy. It's pretty obvious that
happiness is in sadly short supply in your life, and you need to
take it wherever you can find it. If you find it in greasy fast-
food chicken, God bless you.

Cheers (and I mean them sincerely),

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                          Calling Matthew Favaloro

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:55:56 -0400
Subject: Calling Matthew Favaloro


Hi List,

If Matthew Favaloro of Australia, is out there can you please
e-mail me on the above address.


Regards

Roy..  ELUFON U.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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:02:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 14:28:03 PDT

>>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:58:26 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

><snip>

>>>I am aware that both Fournet and Ruppelt have claimed to have
>>>seen it [the pro-ETH 1948 Estimate of the Situation].

>>>The document was alleged to have been written and all copies
>>>ordered destroyed in 1948.
>
>>It is clear that one or more copies were not destroyed. Ruppelt,
>>who evidently saw one, describes its contents thus, in three
>>paragraphs in the original manuscript of his 'Report on
>>Unidentified Flying Objects' (they were edited out of the
>>published version):

><snip>


There are three key sentences which have been omitted in the
discussion of the Estimate of the Situation. For readers
unfamiliar with Ruppelt after reading these sentences and
understanding their implications just ask yourself why the
people discussing this issue have omitted this information from
the discussion. The following is abstracted from some material I
have written to accompany my long in forthcoming index of
Ruppelt's 'The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects'.

Here are the index entries for the Ace Books edition:

Estimate of the Situation
an intelligence assessment of a vital problem.......................
58
batted down by General Vandenberg...................................
64
concludes UFOs were
interplanetary...................................59
declassified and incinerated -- highly irregular security procedure
..64
ignored by Sidney Shallet
...........................................86
kicked back to ATIC
.................................................66
proved that UFOs were real..........................................
82

Here is some of the commentary:

Copyright (C) Gary Alevy 1998

Secret Documentation

There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
recent promises of de-classification. The Estimate of the
Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. The Estimate was
considered by its creators at ATIC to contain "proof positive"
of the reality of the UFO and that they were interplanetary!
Ruppelt discusses the peculiar fate of this estimate, after
noting that it was not accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air
Force, General Hoyt Vandenberg. Ruppelt states:


    "The estimate died a quick death. Some months later it was
completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator. A few
copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of the golden
days of the UFOs."


Readers familiar with the handling of secure documents will
recognize the unusual way this document was treated,
declassified and then destroyed. This is a highly irregular
procedure, after all the purpose of declassification is to make
the documentation available to the public, not suppress it. Also
most unusual is that although the document was declassified
neither Ruppelt, nor any of the other people who have have had a
copy to read has ever made it publicly available. All of these
readers were probable signors to the National Secrets Acts given
their connections to the intelligence community. [15] Don't miss
Ruppelt's revelations about the role the Estimate played in the
battle of the pro and anti-UFO factions in the military and
intelligence communities. An interesting footnote to the history
of Project Sign's Estimate of the Situation has been documented
by Loren Gross. He compiled a list of individuals who publicly
acknowledged that they had read the "momento copies". [16]
Another document discussed by Ruppelt has also yet to see the
light of day, Major Dewey Fournet's 'hot' motion analysis report
that proved that UFOs were under intelligent control. Like the
Ark of the Covenant the "momento copies" and Fournet's report
are thought to exist but have not been seen again. Their
location is known only to a priesthood of keepers of secrecy.

Endnotes:

 15 Moynihan, Daniel P. (Chairman) The Commission on Protecting
and Reducing Government Secrecy
Senate Doc. 105-2
Washington, D.C. 1997.

See page XXXI for a discussion which documents how truly secret
information in the government which is never intended to see the
light of day is only transmitted verbally and is never committed
to paper and ink. There never was much hope for the smoking gun
secret document to reveal the UFO mystery, if this discussion
doesn't make clear why, then you'll never understand it. The
verbal technique was also utilized by General Leslie Groves for
the development of the atomic bomb during the Manhattan Project.

See pages 8-9 for illuminating discussion of the role of leaks
and counterleaks in the struggle by proponents and opponents in
the establishment of contested policy. "It is now almost routine
for American officials of unquestioned loyalty to reveal
classified information as part of ongoing policy disputes, with
one camp leaking information in support of a particular view, or
to the detriment of another, or in support of settled
administration policy."

 16 Gross, Loren E. UFOs: A History Volume 2: 1948. August --
December, 1948 pp. 51.
Port St. Lucie, Arcturus, 1988.

"Supporting testimony of the documents existence (Project Sign's
Estimate of the Situation) later came from Dr. J. Allen Hynek
who told West Coast journalist Robert B. Klinn and David Branch
in 1972 did not only did he know about the document, but that he
even had read. Keyhoe, evidently using the influence he had with
Dewey Fournet, got a peek at a three-page summary of the
"estimate" due to a sympathetic colonel in Air Force
intelligence."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:17:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:13:23 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

Hi Max

>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

I have come across many people who have also experienced
unknown kidney infections, in fact most if not all abductees
seem to suffer some long term illness. Could the abduction
memories be a side affect of being ill?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:16:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:11:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:38:26 +0900
>From: Su Walker <suwalker@ames.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

Su,

> I am a professional clairvoyant and instructor of psychic skill
>development. I view psychic perception as a very matter of fact
>phenomena

I am a natural born psychic and medium but am not professional
as I do not agree with taking money from others who need to
benefit in my gift. I have been a practising medium for almost
15 years now and see my abilities as a natural phenomena that
has been with me all of my life.

>This is not entirely true. Not all psychics see earth energies
>or spirit phenomena. This is an area where individuals can train
>themselves (just as if you have musical talent, you can train
>your self to play the violin or the piano).

I was not talking about the individuals who have to train to
bring out their psychic ability, I am talking about those who
were born a psychic.

>I'm not sure if you gathered a group of 10 really good psychics
>if you would come up with the consensus that they all believed
>that the balls of light would be generated 'by themselves,' and
>would be nothing more. I wouldn't make that assumption and I've
>been working full time in this field for more than seven years.

I didn't actually say that it was solely by themselves. In fact
I know of a group of about 18 excellent psychics who regularly
practise outdoor meditation and earth healing, and all claim
that the BOL are a connection between themselves and Mother
Earth. Therefore, the balls of light were generated by the
psychics interacting with Earth energies. Of course there may be
other explanations for the BOLs seen in the area, but with
Stonehenge, Avebury, and many other ancient sites around that
area the place is literally full of new age and spiritual people
visiting.

>>Let me explain - if you see a light in
>>a crop field, being both a psychic and a UFO investigator, you
>>will automatically assume that this light may have something to
>>do with the extraterrestrial/crop circle phenomenon.

>I would like to think a good investigator would not assume, but
>in fact observe the phenomena in order to draw conclusions.
>Would, given the circumstances, you suspect this might be so. It
>is ONE hypothesis, but a good investigator, psychic or not,
>would NOT assume.

I think you have misunderstood what I was getting at here.  A
UFO investigator is at Wiltshire to study crop circles, a few
investigators still believe that the crop formation phenomenon
is solely connected with extraterrestrial origins. Therefore
wouldn't this type of investigator be looking to _prove_ that
the two phenomena are linked and if they saw BOL around the crop
circle locality then they would put 2 and 2 together and perhaps
come up with a biased conclusion.

>Again, if you had a group of trained psychokinetics or
>telekinetics I could understand this, but otherwise your
>assumption that all of the psychics have this trained ability, I
>believe is erroneous.

Again, I understand what you are trying to say, but I am not
talking about trained psychics, I am talking about those who
were born with this gift. In my experience (over 20 years +<g>)
natural born psychics/mediums seem to have this ability. I agree
that the psychics that are _trained_ in later life need to be
shown all abilities, but from the many people that I know in
this field, the natural psychics do not need training and
possess a vast amount of psychic and spiritual abilities. Also,
they wouldn't need to possess telekenetic powers if the ball of
light is "connected" with those viewing it.

>Do the circle makers examine the area,
>naturally gravitate to it, try to show where the ley lines are
>by drawing attention to them? Hard to say. I am not jumping to
>the assumption that "circle makers" you refer to are of the
>human variety

The circle makers are human (some wouldn't agree <g>) and dowse
the field for earth energies and Ley lines before creating the
crop formation. Therefore, it may be that the BOL are results of
the formations rather than the cause of the formations.

>...nor am I assuming an "extraterrestrial" variety.

What are your views on this phenomenon then? You haven't
actually stated where you stand on this

>I totally agree. While many things on earth are not yet
>explained, jumping to an assumption of paranormal vs.
>extraterrestrial vs. 'normal on earth but not yet understood' is
>where we have to be careful..

Absolutely. But isn't it better to look at all angles of the
phenomenon rather than just the one? That is what my original
posting was meant to be doing, giving an alternative to a
singular tunnel-visioned account.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             UFOs Bending Light

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:01:13 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:29:21 -0400
Subject: UFOs Bending Light

List,

I thought this may be of interest . . .

Regards,
Leanne


-----

Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
To: The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au
*******************************************
From: Simon Harvey-Wilson     19/10/98

I am considering trying to update the invisibility part of my
article called "Beam me up Scottie: Teleportation,
Materialization and Invisibility" in the Journal of Alternative
Realities, Volume 5, Issue 1, 1997 at the Australasian Society
for Psychical Research's home-page:

http://www.ozemail.com.au/~amilani/ufo.html

There are two points that interested me and if anyone has any
relevant information please could you let me know.

1) In his article "The Shadow Government Its Identification and
Analysis" (New Dawn magazine May-June 1997, p.21) Richard J.
Boylan claims that the United States Dept of Energy is doing
research into "high-energy invisibility 'cloaking' technology".
Is there anything to substantiate this claim, or is anyone on
the network good enough at physics to tell us what it means?

2) The 4th April 1966 Sullivan case in South Australia refers to
the bending of headlight beams, presumably by some sort of
energy field from the UFO.

Science claims that only the amount of gravity found in a black
hole would be strong enough to bend a headlight beam. Assuming
that a black hole wasn't involved, this and other evidence
suggests that some UFOs have a technology that can mimic some of
the effects of gravity. Hence the term electro-gravitics, an
electro-magnetic field that acts in some ways like gravity. By
bending light enough one could probably make something
invisible. Anyone have any ideas? Assuming that aliens aren't
eligible, there's probably a Nobel Prize awaiting whoever does
manage to link gravity and electro-magnetism, if the 'black'
researchers haven't already done it.

Simon Harvey-Wilson
simonhw@webace.com.au





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

              -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project UFO'

From: Bob Durant <70232.17@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:36:47 -0400
Subject: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project UFO'

List:

Here is what I know or think I know about the planned NBC
program on UFOs.

I was contacted by the producers early this year. They
discovered that I had done an investigation of the August 1997
Swissair UFO sighting, and that I seemed to be the only person
in contact with the captain of that flight. The producers wanted
to include the sighting in their show, but needed the captain on
camera. I said I would do my best, provided I knew something
about the program, or knew enough so that in good conscience I
could recommend cooperation to the Swissair captain. This caveat
took the form of my usual five minute speech about how shoddy
UFO programming has always been.

The production assistant went to great pains to tell me the
following. Whether it is true, or was true but by air time won't
any longer be true, and so on, is beyond me. So, without
endorsement, here it is.

The producers are independent contractors who have done many
documentaries over the years, and are under contract to NBC for
a single UFO "special" of two hours duration. The working title
is something like "UFOs -- Confirmed." The general editorial
slant is reflected in the title, meaning that they intend to
take a positive position on the issue of UFOs as a serious
topic.

What I found interesting was the insistence that this was being
done because of marketing studies that showed (1) great success
with UFO topic programming in terms of drawing audiences, and
(2) an understanding that the public already believes in UFOs
and wants that belief reinforced. Consequently, from the
television entertainment business vantage, putting on a
skeptical show did not make sense to the producers or to the
ultimate authority, NBC. This is a very cynical position to
take, but in a sense it is good to hear, given some of the
"mainstream" treatments I have suffered through.

Also, NBC asked for and are getting high level "production
values." I believe this means they will spend more money than
shows like Sightings and Encounters typically spend on scenery,
recreating incidents, actors, and the rest. The idea is to have
something that, regardless of content, will at least look very
slick and professional. This is intended for prime time viewing,
and will almost certainly be preceded by much advertising.
Because of the belief that it will draw a very large audience,
it will be run during a special "sweeps" rating period.

I asked for some names from the UFO community who were being
interviewed or were giving background info, and though I can't
recall the names now, remember being pleasantly surprised.
Instead of groaning, I mean. I was told that the Sturrock Panel
would be covered.

The Swissair captain decided not to cooperate with the show.
Probably a smart move, given the history of these things.

--Bob Durant





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                              Dreamland Returns

From: Dennis William Hauck <DWHauck@poetic.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:56:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:39:49 -0400
Subject: Dreamland Returns

I have just talked with Ramona Bell and we have rescheduled my
Art Bell "Dreamland" show for Sunday November 8, 1998.

Art will return as host of the show.

Ramona told me what they have been going through has been very
difficult for everyone concerned, but they want to get on with
things and continue with the show. She said only that what had
happened was personal for Art and that he would divulge full
details shortly. As of 10:00 PST today, she told me, I was only
the second person on the planet to know this.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 05:42:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:53:29 -0400
Subject: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


'UFO Magazine' (UK) New Nazi-Et Lie - A Lesson In GCSE History!

Yes, the new 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is on the stands (hidden at the
back where sensible people will be able to avoid it).

One article - UFO crash at Czernia - is a hilarious brand of
Nazi pseudo history, factual inaccuracy and a desperate attempt
to shore up the 'ET recovered' technology myth. Graham Birdsall
seems to have completely lost his sense of objectivity This kind
of thing serves only those who wish to distort the truth about
flying disc technologies. All I can say is that I hope the
spooks pay well for such marvellous disinformation..

The story has it that a UFO 'crashed' in Poland on land owned by
Eva Braun's parents no less...

............in 1937.

So far so bad but what else?

It was recovered - not by the Polish cavalry, at this stage
still on horseback, but by a detachment of Waffen SS troops!

18 months before Gleiwitz and the subsequent invasion of Poland
by Hitler's troops! Oh dear oh dear!

Oh dear indeed, a course in GCSE history might be in order for
the masters of Quest MegaTowers newly situated in the leafy
suburbs of Ilkley, West Yorkshire, where one of the biggest UFO
hoaxes of the 1980s was born - the 'Ilkley Entity' otherwise
known and understood to be a plastic dummy placed on a hillside
and photographed for posterity.

Now I wonder who passed the photograph on to researchers in the
North West?

Anyway back in Poland the 'recovered UFO' taken by (non-existent
SS troops) was no doubt back engineered and converted by means
unknown into a flying disc. All this in three years and Rudolph
Schriever must have lied when he claimed to have adapted his
VTOL disc idea from those of William Horton Zimmerman in the
USA. Even more unusually, he employed jet engines which,
although in their infancy were no match for alien hardware no
doubt deciphered by a latter-day Jarod via telepathy.

ET and Hitler link up?

Only in your wildest dreams people.

The author of this terrible article - a disgrace to Ufology in
fact - then finishes off the piece with a load of old (very old
and very sad) crap about "Vril", "Haunebu" discs etc. etc.

As I pointed out the "V" designation relates to "Versuchs" - the
German word for experimental.

You might remember that some time ago I predicted the new
Nazi-ET lie; and here it is - sadly lacking in reality or
evidence.....

This Nazi/occult stuff is the fall back position for those
unhappy and/or unconvinced by the ever-so-shaky Roswell case. It
is desperate stuff totally lacking in _any_ evidence and
entirely without a factual basis. But idiots will believe it and
idiots will buy it. Sales of Peter Moons' ridiculous 'Black Sun'
Nazi/occult/Mountauk right-wing propaganda may even be
encouraged as a result.

This nonsense will not deter us from seeking both truth and
reality.

Tim Matthews.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:31:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:57:38 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>Is there a link between the abductions and M.E.?

>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

>If you or anyone else has clearer data on this I would be
>obliged to recieve it?

I don't think this theory holds up. You'd have to take a poll
of a large sample of abductees to see if this still appears
true. I'm an abductee and the opposite appears to be true...I
_never_ get the flu or colds or anything. I've wondered if I
don't have some kind of genetic factor that accounts for this.
Don't know, of course. My family in general is very healthy.

--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Northumberland Group...

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:19:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:19:10 -0400
Subject: Northumberland Group...

        ::
:
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:36:03 EDT
To: updates@globalserve.net
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO Name Change?
:
:


To the UFO group from Northumberland:

I lost your email address when AOL went down
briefly Thursday morning. Please contact me again
at Masinaigan@aol.com.

Sorry for the inconvenience.
                                                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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:28:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:17:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:06:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT

>>Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
>>also show variances in height.

>>They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
>>during their descent.

>Leanne, I agree. The pattern looked too stable. I know Bruce
>must be thinking we're beating a dead horse here, but....they
>just don't _look_ like flares (the ones in the oft seen videos).
>I would expect a more random dispersion. If indeed the range
>from the camera was as great as Bruce thinks, I would also
>expect the apparent size of the lights to be vastly smaller, and
>for the lights to flicker more, especially given the amount of
>atmosphere between the cameras and the objects, and also
>allowing for slightly uneven burning which should be expected.

>Does anyone know the weather conditions during the time the
>videos were taken: specifically, wind direction changes with
>altitude (shearing)? And, could moisture content of the air
>account for the apparent size of the objects? I recall seeing an
>aircraft or two over Phoenix in those videos. They exibited no
>halo effect that I could discern, so that would seem to suggest
>a low humidity.

>Greg

Greg and Leanne-

I understand that the lights don't appear to be "flares", but
Bruce's triangulation places them in the area where flares were
allegedly being dropped at the time.  This is a theory that can
be tested, which I'll admit is unusual in this genre. . . . <g>
If I recall correctly, Bruce also shows that the objects were
slowly descending at a rate that might not be easily seen from
the distance involved.

Bruce lays his information out very well, and it seems very
convincing that the objects seen at 10:00 that evening were most
likely the flares dropped by the Maryland unit that came forward
last summer and indicated they had been the cause of the "Phoenix
Lights" report.  As has been pointed out, this does not address
several reported sightings earlier that evening, and those remain
unexplained.

On the other hand, if you find any weather or atmospheric
conditions that would preclude the "flare" explanation, that
would be most interesting.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:20:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:15:09 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT


>I thought this may be of interest.

>Leanne

>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>Subject: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:29 +0930

>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>natural unidentified objects.

>>What do you all think.

>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.


Salutations list,

I speak only for me here, but 'OWC' sounds like a rap group. No
disrespect intended.. :) Actually, 'Off World Craft' implies
that the object is not of this world. Presumptions are being
made here.. :)

Perhaps another acronym is needed, something like; CUO - Craft
of Unknown Origin or WHITT - What the Hell Is That Thing.. <BG>

DonnieS

"If you always watch your back your liable to walk into a wall."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: UFOs Bending Light

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:41:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:21:15 -0400
Subject: Re:  UFOs Bending Light

>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFOs bending light
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:01:13 PDT

>1) In his article "The Shadow Government Its Identification and
>Analysis" (New Dawn magazine May-June 1997, p.21) Richard J.
>Boylan claims that the United States Dept of Energy is doing
>research into "high-energy invisibility 'cloaking' technology".
>Is there anything to substantiate this claim, or is anyone on
>the network good enough at physics to tell us what it means?

Boylan is not a reliable source, but in any event, there is
little likelihood that such a technology would be useful. The
very use of "high-energy" would make such a device a beacon for
countermeasures or attacking missiles, even if there were a
basis in physics for such a technology (which, to the best of my
knowledge, there isn't).

Adaptive camoflage using something like LCD skins and sensors
might be a more likely way to go, but such a technology would be
fragile and definitely vulnerable to EMP.

>2) The 4th April 1966 Sullivan case in South Australia refers to
>the bending of headlight beams, presumably by some sort of
>energy field from the UFO.

An interesting suggestion was once made (where, escapes my
memory) that the bending could have been caused by the presence
of a significant temperature difference in the neighborhood of
the UFO, which altered the refractive characteristics of the air
at the boundary of the temperature difference.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:27:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts


> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:16:52 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:38:26 +0900
>>From: Su Walker <suwalker@ames.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

Sue,

>The circle makers are human (some wouldn't agree <g>) and dowse
>the field for earth energies and Ley lines before creating the
>crop formation.

I asked this before, but of the wrong person - apologies to
them. What's your source on this curious snippet of information?
(The last part, rather than the 'issue' of whether people are
human or not).

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:23:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:00:09 -0400
>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:06:35 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com><

Hi Tony,

>>you see if you divide the number of circles created by the amount of
>>people involved in the formation of man made crop circles

>Ok, what was the result of your calculation?

I'm interested to know this too, especially as Max would have to
know how many people are involved in what is an inherently
secretive activity.

>I'm not sure that either have passed away actually.

Dave Chorley died a couple of years ago... in secret, naturally.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Adam Lowe <spookyfox@lowea.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:28:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:32:49 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

<snip>

>Is there a link between the abductions and M.E.?

>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?


Hi Max,

I have been suffering with ME for nearly 10 years and this
subject came up on a ME mailing list about 3 years ago. It
wasn't taken seriously and some people submitted names of people
who should be taken. There is a similarity between ME and UFOs
and that is some people still insist that ME doesn't exist. I
have seen a specialist who told me that "there is no such thing
as ME" and that "its all in your mind" but the next one I saw
diagnosed me as having ME. I have never met anyone with ME who
has said anything about abductions but with the battle we have
to go through to be recognised as being ill I can understand if
it wasn't mentioned.

When the Sturrock report was released it had accounts of how
UFOs effected some people and I did recognise some similarities
with some ME symptoms. However, ME has a lot of symptoms and
they can show up in many different circumstances. My life has
been devastated by ME and my thoughts go out to those who have
ME and have to cope with the abduction experiences as well.

Adam.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:08:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:52:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT

>Greg, Bruce & List,>

>Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
>also show variances in height.

>They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
>during their descent.

>Where are the dead flares recovered by the curious who surely
>would have been aware of the issue?

>Regards,
>Leanne.


As I pointed out in a previous message the angular elevations
were less than 2 degrees, estimated altitudes under 20,000 ft.

Slight differences in altitude (hundreds of feet) at 70 miles
are difficult to distinguish in video presentation.

The flares burn the metal casing along with everything else but
the parachute and support straps. I don't know how much remains.
Probably would have fallen on military controlled territory
anyway.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 10:07:02 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:43:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 05:29:02 PDT

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 04:18:55 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 98 17:05:17 PDT

>>>>>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:03:53 -0400
>>>>>From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>The two scientists most qualified to discuss the UFO evidence at
>>the AAAS panel were Hynek and McDonald, who had an enormous
>>amount of investigative experience and thorough familiarity with
>>the data.

>They did and I might add at the invitation of Carl Sagan.

Who, as I have already pointed out, stacked the deck with
skeptics and debunkers, who knew little or nothing about the UFO
phenomenon. Only in the practice of UFO-bashing, as I further
pointed out, is ignorance considered strength. It is just about
impossible to imagine any other subject in which scientists who
are uniformed about it would be paraded out as experts or
otherwise portrayed as authoritative voices.

>>Morrison, on the other hand, had - by his own
>>admission - no more familiarity than casual reading of
>>unspecified UFO literature (George Adamski? Frank Edwards?
>>Brinsley le Poer Trench?). In no other field than UFO-bashing
>>would this sort of ignorance qualify one as an expert.

>Morrison's paper was on the nature of scientific evidence, and
>not as Jerome Clark's continued abuse of facts and historical
>perspective implies, on the nature of ufological evidence. If
>Jerome Clark wants to make a case for Philip Morrison not being
>qualified to address the nature of scientific evidence, please
>do so but don't mislead readers with your otherwise false
>diatribes.

As I have said, as Morrison himself admitted, he knew nothing -
or, at best, very little - about the UFO and was therefore
unqualified to talk about how it related to anything, including
the nature of scientific evidence. Hynek and McDonald rightly
complained that people like Morrison had no business on the
panel. But then, of course, Sagan had the deck stacked, and that
was the point - even if it continues to sail past the point on
Ed's head.

>>Hynek
>>and McDonald rightly objected to Morrison's claim to expertise
>>or insight, and I suspect most people would.

>Really? Just above you state that Morrison himself 'admitted' he
>was unfamiliar with the UFO data, but with a stroke of the
>keyboard, when it seems to please your argument, you say that
>Morrison claimed expertise which was allegedly objected to by
>Hynek and McDonald, but you fail to quote and provide a source.
>So Clarkish! Exactly what did Hynek and McDonald object to? His
>paper on the nature of scientific evidence? Or his good looks
>and reputation? I would be interested in reading in context
>these alleged objections. Please provide references that can be
>independently verified. Nothing personal.

Hynek and McDonald objected, as I do, to Morrison's lack of
knowledge about the UFO phenomenon - as, being a trifle less
obtuse than Ed Stewart, they damn well should have. Amusingly,
Morrison cites as "evidence" against UFOs a few anecdotal
accounts of mistaken observations. And here Ed was lecturing us
not long ago, in his characteristic snarl, about the utter
worthlessness of anecdotal accounts. That being the case, dude,
I am at a loss to understand why you are now asking us to take
Morrison seriously. But no one has ever accused you of launching
a coherent argument, I realize. You use whatever's convenient at
the moment of the rant.

Hynek's and McDonald's complaints were made in various forums
about which Ed, as a bibliographer, ought to know but of which
he pretends ignorance. I'll let him twist slowly in the wind and
see where else he goes with this before being more specific.
This should be fun.

In the meantime, guy: How long are you going to continue to try
to evade my challenge to you? Be a man, now: Provide citations
and quotes from specific reviews in which my UFO Encyclopedia
and I are accused of gross bias, distortion, intellectual
dishonesty, mental abnormality, and other high crimes and
misdemeanors with which you repeatedly charge me.

I'm waiting, my friend. So is everybody else. You can run, but
you can't hide.


>>At least we agree on something: Menzel "still exerts an
>>influence even though buried in his grave."

>Sorry! Once again you have displayed an incapacity to comprehend
>the English language and have added a connotation to a quote of
>mine pulled out of context which is not supported by the in
>context statement in its entirety. To get it right, you can read
>it as many times as you require to gain a rudimmentary
>understand of what it says. There is no time limit. Take your
>time. In the meantime, what part of "we have all been told..."
>don't you understand?

Hilarious. I was having fun at your expense - acting as if I
actually thought you weren't reverting to the tedious sarcasm
that permeates your discourse. Make no mistake: I do NOT think
you are rational, sensible, or informed enough to appreciate
Menzel's continuing influence on anti-UFO polemic.

>Let see, Menzel wasn't able to convince other scientists, or the
>United States Air Force for which Jerome Clark claims to have
>all the references one would need to verify it. Well, guess
>what? If the scientific community and the Air Force are on
>record as not taking Menzel seriously (which they are and it has
>been my contention all along), why are the proponents of
>ufological wisdom trying to shove down the throats of the
>ufological gullible and incite them to believe that Menzel is a
>continuing reason for ufology's woes? I don't get it, but then
>again I live in the real world and am not privy to the
>obsessions of ufological wisdom.

Again, we may be grateful that Ed has not tried to do UFO
history, a subject he knows little about - though that doesn't
discourage him from bloviation like the above.

I don't know who "proponents of ufological wisdom" are, but I
think we can safely deduce that Ed is an opponent of ufological
wisdom. In the real world, Menzel, a major American scientist
whose judgments were taken seriously indeed, had enormous
influence on the perception of scientists worldwide re the UFO
problem, and his work was often cited in the scientific
literature of the period. (He was also the first person to
publish a UFO book under an academic imprint, and that fact in
itself gave the volume a credibility it in no way deserved but,
sadly, got.) In addition, as David M. Jacobs once wrote, Menzel
"had tremendous influence in shaping the style of debunking."

Menzel's work is still cited, though less often (Klass, a
nonscientist, has largely replaced him), but no serious observer
of UFO history would downplay Menzel's role. I still see him
mentioned from time to time, most recently in a UFO-bashing
piece by Frederick Crews in the New York Review, as having
written the definitive word on the subject.

Of Menzel, the late atmospheric physicist and UFO researcher
James McDonald wrote, "Dr. Menzel's background in physics and
astronomy is well-attested by his authorship of a number of
texts and references in those areas. Despite that background,
when he comes to analyzing UFO reports, he seems to calmly cast
aside well-known scientific principles almost with abandon, in
an all-out effort to be sure that no UFO report survives his
attack. Refraction processes are quite well understood in
optics, and the refracting properties of the atmosphere are
surely as familiar in astronomy as in meteorology, if not more
so. Yet in `explanation' after `explanation' in his books,
Menzel rides roughshod over elementary optical considerations
governing such things as mirages and light reflections."

Ed wants us to believe that the Air Force rejected Menzel's
conclusions. It is true that Blue Book did not buy into them
during the Ruppelt period, when investigations were conducted
with an open mind. In later years, however, when Blue Book
reverted to Grudge-like attitudes, he and the project became
close. As one Blue Book director has written, "On several
occasions Dr. Donald H. Menzel spent weeks at Wright- Patterson
Air Force Base reviewing both old and new cases, and he made
many useful suggestions." (See The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., p.
636, and Robert Friend's article in JUFOS 5, 1994.)


>>It's just too bad that Sagan didn't follow his own advice about
>>keeping an open mind. (And how do you know "there isn't [sic]
>>enough data" when you're not looking for such data?)

>I gather since you chose to ignore and not to respond to the
>part of Barry Greenwood's response:

In fact, I wrote a response to Greenwood, who did not see fit to
publish it - which is his right, after all; it's his magazine.
Why, if you're interested, Ed, don't you write Barry and ask for
a copy of my letter?

        " If Sagan were off base in his negative views on alien
>visitation, then one case, only one example need be provided to
>prove so. Which one is it? Or several? Do you care to put
>yourself on the line on this matter?" --- Barry Greenwood

I like Barry Greenwood, who's a gentleman and a friend. But his
powers of analysis have failed him here, as he highlights the
central problem of the Sagan approach, which would not even be
thought of (or, if thought of, laughed out of court) if applied
to any other scientific question, namely:

With practically no scientific work conducted to answer the
question one way or another, Sagan uses the absence of "proof"
(whatever that is) of ET visitation - something that could be
found, if it is there, only at the end of a serious, well-funded
investigation - as a reason not to conduct scientific research
on UFOs. Incredible.

Imagine a scientist in the early days of the AIDS epidemic
confronting people who come to him with strains of a deadly
illness which does not, to surface appearance, look like any
known illness. Some victims and observers insist that a new and
dangerous disease has appeared on the scene. The medical
scientist sneers; there's no "proof" of that, he says, so why
bother to investigate? Sagan's position is absurd, and it says
something about the illogic of the anti-UFO position, not to
mention the futility of the sort of hagiographical approach Ed
(as well as, I'm sad to say, my friend Barry) advocates toward
Sagan.


For a bunch of solid cases, see the list of puzzling, documented
sightings Mark Cashman provided you a few days ago (causing you
to lapse into silence; I've seen no response from you to
Cashman, naturally), or else go to my UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed.,
and look up the following entries, since you don't seem to know
much about this subject. These entries address many of the best
cases on which rests the argument that UFOs may be extraordinary
anomalies (conceivably under somebody's intelligent control;
"alien visitation, "earth lights," and the rest, however, are
theories to be taken up aside from the body of suggestive data
below) ; Sagan, by the way, avoided mentioning nearly all of
them in his various writings on the UFO phenomenon. Gee, I
wonder why.

Arnold Sighting
BOAC Sighting

Cash-Landrum CE2
Chiles-Whitted Sighting
CE1s
CE2s
CE3s
Coyne CE2
Cressy Sighting
Damon CE2
Daylight Discs
Delphos CE2
Dr. X Case
Everglades CE2
Exeter CE1
Falcon Lake CE2
Fishersville CE2
Fort Monmouth Radar/Visual Case
Gill CE3
Green Fireballs and Other Southwestern Lights
Hessdalen Lights
Hill Abduction Case
Iran CE2
Itaipu Fortress Incident
JAL Sighting
Kelly-Hopkinsville CE3
Kinross Case
Kuwait Sightings
Lakenheath-Bentwaters Radar/Visual Case
Langenburg CE2
Lavonia CE2
Laxson CE3
Levelland Sightings
Lubbock Lights
McMinnville Photos
Marshall County CE2
Montana Film
Moore Case
Morocco Sightings
Muroc Air Base Sightings
Nash-Fortenberry Sighting
New Zealand Film
Ocala Radar/Visual Case
Portage County Sightings
Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14
RB-47 Radar/Visual Case
Red Bluff Sightings
Ririe CE3
Salt Lake City Sighting
Senator Russell Sighting
Socorro CE2/CE3
Stonehenge CE3
Tombaugh Sighting
Trans-en-Provence CE2
Trindade Island Photographs
Utah Film
Valensole Disappearance
Washington National Radar/Visual Case

Westchester Sightings

After you've read all of these entries, my good-natured friend,
go to McDonald's many monographs, most based on his personal
investigations of many puzzling cases. Read (since you seem not
to have read it before) such seminal works as Ruppelt, Hynek,
Jacobs's UFO Controversy, Gross's valuable monographs, and so
on.

And then maybe, if you haven't learned better by then, you'll be
able to mount some marginally sensible response to me - and to
Mark Cashman, whose devastating rejoinder to you leaves you
amusingly speechless - that does not consist in its entirety of
ad hominem slurs. If, of course, you are capable of discourse
that is both rational and civil.

Lay off the demonology, Ed (both your own and John Keel's). It
would make you feel a whole lot better, and I don't doubt that
it would make you think a whole lot better, too.

And now: Are we - finally - going to see citations of those UFO
Encyclopedia reviews which charge me and it with intellectual
dishonesty, gross bias, mental unbalance, and all those other
colorful accusations? We're all waiting.

Your pal,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. <aura@telekabel2.nl>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:22:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:08:39 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:17:19 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>Hi Max

>>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

>I have come across many people who have also experienced
>unknown kidney infections, in fact most if not all abductees
>seem to suffer some long term illness. Could the abduction
>memories be a side affect of being ill?

>Sue

Max, Sue,

Indeed kidney - or other physical problems are often reported by
abductees. But if it would be _a side-effect_ of _an_illness_ we
still have no explanation for the other cases. But if it was a
side-effect of being ill in general, than we'd have a lot more
people reporting abductions. So instead of wondering if
abduction"memories" are caused by being ill, I think one should
turn the question around..... Could these health-problems be
caused by whatever caused these memories?

Just my two cents,

Andy Denne
(A.U.R.A.)
The Netherlands





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:09:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:05:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:06:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights


>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT

>>Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
>>also show variances in height.

>>They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
>>during their descent.

>Leanne, I agree. The pattern looked too stable. I know Bruce
>must be thinking we're beating a dead horse here, but....they
>just don't _look_ like flares (the ones in the oft seen videos).
I> would expect a more random dispersion. If indeed the range
f>rom the camera was as great as Bruce thinks, I would also
>expect the apparent size of the lights to be vastly smaller, and
>for the lights to flicker more, especially given the amount of
>atmosphere between the cameras and the objects, and also
>allowing for slightly uneven burning which should be expected.

pattern looked too stable..... well, you have to grab it with a
computer. I agree that on a typical TV presentation you can't
see much. The images are too large..blooming outward from
brightness. Also, you have to remove camera motion to make
measurements of the small variations. Consider that the angle
created by moving 500 ft at 70 miles is only about 0.09 degrees.
The lights DID flicker... again, you have to see the complete
videos and you need t watch many times to see details not
obvious initially.


Does anyone know the weather conditions during the time the
videos were taken: specifically, wind direction changes with
altitude (shearing)? And, could moisture content of the air
account for the apparent size of the objects? I recall seeing an
aircraft or two over Phoenix in those videos. They exibited no
halo effect that I could discern, so that would seem to suggest
a low humidity.

Likely low humidity. Don't have the weather conditions.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:08:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:02:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative


>Concerning Bruce Maccabee's calculation that these lights were
>at a distance of some 70 miles from Phoenix, I queried Bill
>Hamilton on his findings. By comparing one of the Phoenix videos
>of the lights with a daytime video shot taken from the same
>camera and place, he determined that the lights had actually
>appeared a little below the crest of the background Estrella
>Mts. This would make them closer than 7 to 9 miles away. His
>superposition on this is depicted in his web site, whose address
>I unfortunately failed to save.

Bill is referring only to his sighting with Tom King at
Blonder's house. His calculations do not apply to Krzyston, L or
Rairdon. See

www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html.

If I have located Blonder's house correctly, the distance to the
mountain is 14 miles, not 7, according to the geological survey
map: about 3 1/2 inches on a map with a scale of 4 miles to the
inch.


>He made a calculation, using the height of these mountains and
>their distance from Phoenix, that the elevation angle of the top
>of the mountain ridge from the video-camera site was around 5 or
>6 degrees (see below). If we use a figure of 5.5 degrees, then
>if the lights had been 70 miles away, they would have been at an
>altitude of a little over 35,000 ft. But according to what Bill
>learned from the Maryland Air National Guard, flares they drop
>are dropped from an altitude below 15,000 ft. So that's a
>20,000-ft discrepancy.>

As nearly as I can tell he underestimated the distance and
overestimated the elevation difference between the mountain he
was looking over and the height where he was standing.

>Thus, if the lights were at an elevation angle smaller than 5-6
>degrees, they were in front of a mountain range 7-9 miles away;
>if they were at greater elevation and 70 miles away, they were
>around 35,000 ft up and would not have been flares.

This is true. _If_ the lights were at 5-6 degrees from Blonder's
house they were not what Krzyston, L and Rairdon videotaped.


>In his website, Bill noted an important fact: the sequence in
>which the lights started to extinguish themselves was different
>in the two videos he had access to. This indicates that they
>were videotaped at two somewhat different times when they were
>likely at two different locations. We've all seen reports where
>a UFO shows up in one place at one time and then jumps to a
>l>Five orbs could do this as well as one orb. This seems the most
>likely explanation for Bruce's calculation giving a different
>answer than what Bill found. Triangulation assumes the fix taken
>on the objects was made at the same time from both vantage
>points.>

An alternative hypothesis, based on th measurements which show
the lights dropped downward, is that the various videographers
were looking over different portions of mountain skylies. These
skylines are rather jagged. If th lights disappeared behind the
mountains then they would go out at different times.

>Bill's response is posted below:
> Jim Deardorff

<snip>

>What we saw visually does not match the description of the LU-U2
>flares. Those flares burn intensely white. We saw amber-gold.
>Those flares are usually dropped at low altitudes by the A10
>which is a ground support plane. We have no exact times for the
>alleged flare drops. We only know that Lt. Keith Shepherd
>stated that the A10s were back on the ground by 8:30 PM after
>their exercise and flare drop. It was obvious to me that they
>were making a lame attempt to account for the giant V seen over
>Phoenix at 8:30PM and not the videos taken around 10 PM.>

The Maryland National Guard statement was that the guard had use
of the training area from 9:30 to 10:00 PM. It was also reported
that the planes carried 8 flares each and that they were
forbidden to land with unused flares.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:57:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:58:34 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:17:19 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>Hi Max

>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

>> I have come across many people who have also experienced
>>unknown kidney infections,

M.E Is nothing to do with kidney infections!

>>In fact most if not all abductees
>>seem to suffer some long term illness. Could the abduction
>>memories be a side affect of being ill?

I don't know, but from what I know I doubt it, However my
question was is there a link between specificicaly, the illness
M.E. and the fact that over fifty percent of one abducte group
in the UK has been medicaly diagnosed with the ilness, which is
well over the UK national average?

Although I am not sure of the full spelling of the ilness it
sounds like this

Mialgic Enkefalowmilatis

[Mialgic Encephalomyelitis?  See:

 http://freespace.virgin.net/david.axford/me/me.htm

 Also known as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome! --ebk]

Max





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: Jimmy 'The Doc' Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:18:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:49:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:12:17 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

>Okay, here we go....

>I'm probably going to regret sticking my nose into all this, but
>I have to believe there can be some kind of peace between Mr.
>Clark and Mr. Stewart. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm gonna try...

>I got a question for each of you:

>Jerry,

>If you find Ed to be so uniquely biased against you and truly

<snip>

>Ed,

>If Jerome's writings are offensive to you because he forms an
>opinion rather than just relay facts, then why read them? It

<snip>

>I can't speak for the rest of the list, but I don't need
>protection from the "intellectual dishonesty" of Jerome Clark
>any more than I need to be reminded on a daily basis of Ed's
>"mean spirited" approach to collecting data.

>Frankly, the spirit of open debate has gone a bit flat with the
>two of you trading broadsides. You have each challenged each
>other till the flavor's been chewed out of the gum. It's getting
>really, really old.

>So here's my challenge to both of you:

>Post your views about UFO topics and don't mention each other,
>not even once, for a week. I'll send a crisp ten dollar bill to
>each of you if you can do it. Other wise, I'll e-mail my address
>to you for my winnings.

>Hopefully, it'll be the best 20 dollar bet I ever lost.

>Sincerely,

>Roger Evans
>Houston, Texas

=============================================>

Wait a minute Roger.... just one moment here. Not so fast with
those ten dollar bills, OK? I would like to make you an offer
you can't refuse... 'cause I won't let you.

I have another suggestion _and_ I'm gonna save you money to
boot... I have an uncle (Uncle Toto) in the, uh, the... well
let's just say he's a made member of the family, OK? Anyway, he
promised me that he would do two kneecaps, providing they are on
the same body, for _free_!

Now as long as I have the choice as to which two, I will extend
this offer to include .... one of the boys you mentioned.

Just one final point. Uncle Toto is in Palermo. He won't be back
until after the grand jury indictments are overturned. So you
must be somewhat patient for a few weeks, OK?

Chow.

Jimmy "The Doc" Mortellaro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 11:46:41 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:05:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:12:17 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

>Okay, here we go....

>I'm probably going to regret sticking my nose into all this, but
>I have to believe there can be some kind of peace between Mr.
>Clark and Mr. Stewart. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm gonna try...

>I got a question for each of you:

>Jerry,

>If you find Ed to be so uniquely biased against you and truly
>feel that he is the only one harboring any mean spirited dislike
>for you and your work, then why bother contending with him?
>Certainly he's no threat to you, your opinions or your career.
>In other words, if he is an anomaly within public sentiment as
>you claim, then just ignore him. As you've pointed out many
>times, you feel no one else of any consequence agrees with him,
>so what's the problem? You're a talented writer; move on to
>another topic.

Hi, Roger,

Thanks for a very good posting. Believe me, I've thought more
than a few times about the issues you raise. Ed is indeed an
"anomaly within public sentiment," and he's been unable to
demonstrate otherwise. And yes, no one of any consequence agrees
with him. So why do I continue yanking his chain?

I will be honest about it, even if perhaps in some larger karmic
sense it does me no credit: Yanking Ed's chain is fun. He
doesn't really make me mad, because his charges are off target
and, often enough, off the wall, and anybody who reads what I
write back to him can see that my tongue is just about always in
my cheek. Yes, I suppose dealing with Ed is, in the end, a big
waste of time which I cannot really afford, but dammit, I _am_
enjoying Mr. Sunshine's curious take on reality. I think you
would have to agree it's, uh, unusual.

[To Ed:]

>I can't speak for the rest of the list, but I don't need
>protection from the "intellectual dishonesty" of Jerome Clark
>any more than I need to be reminded on a daily basis of Ed's
>"mean spirited" approach to collecting data.

Roger, you have completely misunderstood me here. Stewart's
mean-spiritedness is _not_ in his "approach to collecting data."
I have specifically separated, more than once, his excellent
bibliographical work from his less happy addiction to ad hominem
polemic. Almost in spite of himself (and spite is something Ed
is drowning in), he is making a contribution to research in this
field.

>So here's my challenge to both of you:

>Post your views about UFO topics and don't mention each other,
>not even once, for a week. I'll send a crisp ten dollar bill to
>each of you if you can do it. Other wise, I'll e-mail my address
>to you for my winnings.

>Hopefully, it'll be the best 20 dollar bet I ever lost.

Roger, thanks but no thanks. God help me, but I'm just having
too much fun -- the sort of fun, I fear, that money can't buy
off. When it ceases being fun (probably pretty soon), I'll lay
off. If you want to spend 20 bucks and add five to it, subscribe
to IUR, if you don't already do so.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 11:17:35 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:46:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:43:21 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 98 10:10:15 PDT

>>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:05:15 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:13:11 -0700
>>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


Howdy, Mr. Sunshine,

>>Before you spend too much time patting yourself on the back, my
>>friend, your readers should know that bibliographies by
>>definition do not report facts or attempt analysis. Given your
>>track record in these last two areas, it's just as well.

>Of course, I did ask for introductory articles from people that
>were associated with FSR and MUFON. I asked Gordon Creighton and
>Walt Andrus to provide a historical perspective article
>and Richard Haines and John Schuessler each to
>write an article that would add insight into the role of
>scientific research and ufology. I did not edit what they wrote
>giving them prior approval that I would print whatever they
>submitted to me. I also included what I called the compiler's
>notes where I outlined my own thoughts/philosophy on the
>subject. My 'bias' is simply hoozing through the papers of
>Creighton, Andrus, Haines and Schuessler, as well as my own.
>That dastardly demon Ed Stewart strikes again!

What is "hoozing"? Is this a word? To the best of my knowledge,
I have never accused you of "hoozing" bias.

I'm sorry you think of yourself as a demon. I personally just
think of you, as I suspect most do by now, as a rude and
emotional dude who seems to have a hard time discriminating
between what he wants us to believe and what he can demonstrate
to be out there.

List, I think we can all be relieved that Ed Stewart did not
attempt history or analysis in his bibliographies. As I say in
another posting, his FSR bibliography (and I don't doubt his
MUFON one, which I haven't seen) is a worthy contribution to the
research-tool part of the UFO literature. When Ed sticks to
bibliographical research, he is helping all of us who are
serious ufologists, and whatever his other faults, we do owe him
a debt of gratitude.

>>Actually, that -- judging from the reviews (Ed failed to
>respond >to a challenge from me

>Reviews of your book are not relevant to your intellectual
>dishonesty

Especially, of course, since you can't get anybody to verify
your charges about my intellectual dishonesty in them. Of course
you'd think that if I am intellectually dishonest and mentally
abnormal and those character defects are clearly visible in my
UFO Encyclopedia, as you have stated repeatedly, others --
besides the supremely ill-humored, mean-spirited Mr. Stewart and
his side-ranter Mr. Todd (who by his own admission hasn't even
read my work) -- would have noticed and remarked on them.
Produce the evidence, guy, and stop trying to dodge the issue.
The whole (list) world is watching.


>You seem to think that it is
>such a great thing to receive a favorable review by the Journal
>of Scientific Exploration. Let me bring attention to another
>favorable review published by JSE shortly before yours. Stanton
>Friedman's "Top Secret/Majic" was reviewed in JSE by Wood and
>received a very favorable and sympathetic review.

Actually, dude, none of the reviews of my Encyclopedia (or other
books) in the Journal of Scientific Exploration were written by
Bob Wood. All JSE reviews of my work have been favorable (as
have reviews in UFO, anomaly, and academic literature; even
debunker Robert Baker wrote a largely positive review of my
`Unexplained!' in a skeptics' newsletter), and they were written
by the likes of Stuart Appelle, Henry H. Bauer, and ... I'm
drawing a blank on the guy who reviewed my `The Emergence of a
Phenomenon', but it was not Wood. The Society of Scientific
Exploration, which publishes the JSE, consists of Ph.D.-level
scientists and engineers who have a range of views (skeptical to
neutral to advocate) about anomalous phenomena but who agree
that they merit scientific investigation. It's a fine
organization which deserves all our support. Go to <jse.com>for
information (and also for the text of the Sturrock panel
report).

You know, you'd think that if my work suffered from the
egregious flaws and cravenness our good-humored friend claims to
find, _somebody else_ in the reviewing business would have
noticed it. So far, nobody has, and in response to that simple
fact, all Ed can do, when that fact is pointed out, is to get
meaner and louder -- nothing new there. Then, of course, it is
always possible that Ed lives in a parallel universe and is
attacking a Jerry Clark and a UFO Encyclopedia that exist there
and that none of the rest of us has seen.


>>>>From
>>>>that source all they will find out is what Jerry Clark's biases
>>>>were on the UFO scene from his personal perspective.

>>Well, my friend, we certainly know a lot about _your_ biases,
>>more I'm sure than any of us would ever have cared to know.

>Every claim I have made about your intellectual dishonesty, I
>have documented it online with your exact quotes and challenged
>you to show otherwise - including I might add to substantiate
>your comments on the Sturrock Panel. The fact you have chosen
>not to provide supporting documentation suggests you can't
>substantiate your positional arguments.

In your dreams, my friend. Let's put forth another challenge
here:

If the views of the scientists on the panel were hideously
distorted, as you want us to believe and may or not believe
yourself, it should be easy to prove as much. The scientists
involved should have howled in protest and made their
unhappiness known in no uncertain terms when their report was
represented as arguing that scientists should conduct UFO
investigation because puzzling UFO data exist. Right? Seems
simple enough, even for you. Okay, then, Mr. Sunshine, please
cite chapter and verse on where they've protested this gross
misrepresentation of their views. You don't need to tell them
what they think; let _them_ do it this time, okay?

And while you're at it, since participants in the meeting
provide such a radically different account from the one you, a
nonparticipant, provide, are we to believe that these people are
liars? Are, for example, Rodeghier and Swords lying in their
account in the current issue of IUR? If so, of course, we may
assume that the other participants will have taken vigorous and
public objection to what R & S have to say (not to mention what
international media had to say, which sure as hell ain't what
you're saying, my friend). That being the case, I'm sure you'll
have no trouble providing chapter and verse evidence to that
effect.

I eagerly await the evidence you have to show us. And if you try
to ignore it, your usual tactic when you can't document what
you're saying (which is just about all of the time), I'll keep
reminding you.

Your friend and admirer,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                 Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:15:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:10:09 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:35:28 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

>>From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:15:02 -0400
>>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:30:31 -0400

><snip>

>However, there are several things that I can clear up:

>1) FOX is a UHF and not a VHF network.

Not necessarily. The affiliate in any city is negotiated. WAGA,
broadcast channel 5, is the FOX affiliate in Atlanta. This is
VHF. The CBS affiliate in Atlanta is on channel 46. This is UHF.

>2) Regarding the number of FCC call letters; down here in
>Houston, the local FOX station goes by KRIV, NBC goes by KPRC,
>ABC goes by KTRK, CBS is KHOU, etc, etc, etc. Obviously the
>above information regarding FCC call signs is incorrect. Ms.
>Yanak may have been thinking of network call signs as opposed to
>affiliates.

<snip>

Not necessarily. WSB is the ABC affiliate in Atlanta and
broadcasts on channel 2. The older broadcast stations may have
only three letter call signs. The FCC assigned only three
letters until they ran out. <g>

One interesting note, broadcast call signs east of the
Mississippi begin with a 'W' while those on the left side begin
with a 'K'. As with any rule, however, there are exceptions. <g>



Regards,
Terry Blanton, PE
Communications Engineer







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

              Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes

From: Sheree Cox <cox@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:44:42 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:22:42 -0400
Subject: Re: 5000 Amateurs Scanning With Satellite Dishes


Dear List:

Of course this is only my opinion.....

I think this is an interesting project but don't alot of us
believe that 'they' (the aliens) have already been in touch with
us.  And maybe that's why the government has stopped funding
'SETI'!!  Maybe I'm way off-base, but it's just a thought.

S. Cox






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:13:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:22:47 PDT

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>Maybe the elevation angle of the flares was only 5 degrees, not
>>10, in which case their elevation is halved and the scenario
>>might have been possible. We need to wait to hear from Bruce on
>>that.


(We've heard form him now -- around 1 degree above the horizon,
he said.)

>>I supppose one could always assume that there were several
>>different planes involved. The lights may have been separated by
>>some 5 degrees each (I'm trying to recall what the one video I
>>saw looked like), in which case they'd each be some 6 miles
>>apart, if 70 miles away from Phoenix. I can't think of any
>>useful military training purpose such a flare release would
>>serve, unless it would be to half-way simulate UFOs and thus
>>serve as a distraction for the 8 p.m. UFO event.

>>  Jim D.

>G'day Jim & List,

>Jim are you positing that the Air Farce [ ;-) ] may now have a
>deliberate policy of dropping flares before the appearance of a
>UFO so as to 'prove' publicly that any strange lights, that may
>be spotted after the flares, were 'only just flares'? Plausible
>denial before the event - very clever - but if repeated as a
>ploy it speaks volumes about either 'black projects' or even an
>arrangement with 'alien peoples'.

Hello Leanne,

No, I was referring to the possibility that the A.F. might have
dropped flares after 10 pm to try to distract attention away
from the Phoenix UFO sightings of 8 to 8:30 p.m. This kind of
ploy is sometimes surprisingly successful.

   Jim D.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:28:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:21:03 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

Hi Max, hi All,

I read your post with interest. Before I respond I need to ask
a few questions if that is ok. Sorry for length of my response
but this is a subject that is very near and dear to me. <G>

You wrote:

>Some information regarding abductees has come to light here in
>the UK that I think you need to be aware of. I work with a one
>paticular repeater since childhood, who has got the memory
>recall, without regression she also has partiall psi-abilities.

It's odd for me to hear of a human being referred to as a
"repeater." Do you use the term to imply that there are
'gastrointestinal' problems in addition to the abductions? Could
you tell me what type of testing was employed (and by whom) to
determine her "psi" abilities. What do you mean by "partial?"
She has psi abilities but they are unreliable? Or do you mean
that she only has 'certain' abilities?

There are an awful lot of 'claims and assumptions' in just the
first paragraph Max. If you want to be taken seriously then you
should be a bit more thorough in the presentation of your
material. You write as if it is 'understood' that abductees have
a certain degree of psychic ability. I have never heard of, or
participated in, such a study. I don't believe one has ever been
conducted. You speak of increased "psi ability" among those
reporting abduction as if it is a proven fact. It's not, you
know.

>She has had all the usual things that are reported, visions,
>hybrids (please hold the baby its yours scenario) increased psy
>abilities after an event,

Again - How was this "psi-ability" measured and by whom? Was the
test administered before and after an alleged abduction episode.
Just how was it determined that her psychic ability increased
(and by how much?) afterwards?

Also:

All kinds of things are "reported" Max. Doesn't make them all
abduction related or even relevant in some cases. Betty
Andeasson has had an encounter with Jesus on board a UFO, but
then people have been claiming Jesus encounters for centuries
(the first one was reported three days after his death if I'm
not mistaken) that had nothing to do with alien abduction. Do
you see what I mean.

Same goes for "visions, hybrids," and even "baby presentations."
Because John the Baptist had 'visions' doesn't make him an
abductee, same goes for your friend. As far as hybrids go, our
mythology and folklore is chock full of them!  The Irish country
folk used to dress male toddlers in little girls nightgowns so
that the 'fairies' wouldn't take them away in the night. When a
healthy male child was taken the 'fairies' would leave behind a
sickly and dying child. I don't want to belabor the point, but
you do understand what I'm saying (I hope.) We shouldn't
'assume' anything when someone is reporting alien intervention
into their lives. In fact, a very strong case can be made that
'abduction' should be the -last thing- that one blames or turns
to as an explanation.

The moment you _confirm_ abduction for someone you have
contaminated them. It has to be something that the person
arrives at on their own, based on a thorough investigation of
the facts in each individual case. And then, it is a
determination that only the person should make for themselves.
It shouldn't be imposed upon them or the determination made for
them by any outside self professed ex-spurts.

>a large number of medical problems
>including nasal blockage, to which she has had four C.A.T scans
>to which the hospital has lost all the results apparently, at
>one stage the hospital tried to accuse her of not turning up for
>one of the scans, to which the person who took her to all of the
>appointments, as she does not drive, retorted with I have brought
>her to all the appointments "so that dog just won't hunt".

Again Max, 'nasal blockage' is as common as colds! Unless the
CAT scan showed an anomolous foreign something or other, and it
could be proven that the object is indeed 'artificial' and of
'alien' origin, it doesn't do your case much good to present
'nasal blockage' as corroboration. Everyone has to do a little
'house cleaning' every once in awhile. It doesn't mean that they
are being abducted.

All you offer us is a 'conspiracy theory' (you -imply- that
there was a 'plot' to make the CAT scans disappear) and this
poor ladies clogged sinuses as evidence. (Sorry Max, but -that
dog- won't hunt either!) <G>

You mention 'other medical conditions.' What are they, and how
do they relate to abduction? You need to elaborate if you are
going to report on a case in a public forum like UpDates. If you
think I'm being 'rough on you' you should first realize that I
am an abductee and I work with abductees. We're on the same side
of the fence so to speak. There are landsharks on this list that
would mince this 'report' you have posted and your keester along
with it! I'm trying to be helpful. When you present an abduction
case like this one Max, get all the facts straight, present
them, and try not to 'speculate' or make 'assumptions.'
Especially not publicly. Poorly presented cases and material
only hurt the cause it doesn't help it. That, is where I'm
coming from.

>As well as too many other illnesses to list at this time

>She is also a member of an abductee group, and with twenty
>members there is a large number fourteen to be precise who have
>all been diagnosed with the medical problem M.E. to which I
>believe that the national average for the illness is about one
>person in six hundread here in the UK.

What is "M.E." Max? Forgive my M.I. (Medical Ignorance.)

>I believe that this figure which is well over fifty percent, of
>people who claim they have been abducted in this group, needs to
>be looked at?

If 50% of _any_ group was one way or another it would bear
scruitiny! However '19' is not a statistically significant
group. Once you tell me what M.E. is I will conduct a survey of
the 67 members of AIC and post the results on the UpDates list.
I also have access to maybe a hundred more at IF here in NY.
Even a couple of hundred is not a statistically significant
number but it's a lot more than 19 and if it is shown that a
significant number have this M.E. then all the more reason to
investigate.

One of the 'staff' members of AIC is a psychiatrist and MD. Two
of IF's 'staff' are psychologists. I'm sure they'll be helpful
in providing guidance and information so that this can done
properly.

My point is, that this is how things _should_ be done. Carefully
and with the involvement of trained professionals. People are
going to question methods and data anyway. Better to do it
correctly from the beginning so that the final data has some
credibility and a chance of bearing up under close scruitiny. It
also gives you the luxury of reporting _facts_ and not just
personal interpretations and beliefs.

>Is there any other abducte groups in the US who can also reveal
>any data regarding this medical anomaly?

Maybe, once I find out what ME is! <G>

>Is there a link between the abductions and M.E.?
>
>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

Those are big questions Max. Get the funding and the pro's to do
it, and you're in business! Questions like the ones that you
have posed above are a lot easier asked than answered.  <G>
There is a ton of fundamental research that needs to be done in
regard to abduction and those who report it. It is the shame of
our time that so many thousands worldwide are simply laughed off
and ignored.

>If you or anyone else has clearer data on this I would be
>obliged to recieve it?

You might want to apply the "clearer data" requirment to
yourself amigo! <G>

>She has also been contacted twice by a man claiming to be from
>the UK Military who after five hours on the telephone shared
>between two calls has tried at the moment unsuccessfully to
>recruit her into a special group, with an excellent financial
>package, and the main purpose of this group would be remote
>viewing.

Did I hear "excellent financial package?" Shoot, tell this
mystery man that I'll be glad to remote view anything he wants!
Just tell him that I can't be held responsible for 'content' and
'accuracy' ok? <VBG>

>He has also acknowledged to her that there is an increased psy
>ability after an abduction event,

Could you get copies of the studies used to make that
determination from the "man?" Share it with all of us please.
This is important. If it's true, next time I think I've been
abducted I'm going to empty my bank account and move into a
stall along side the horses at Belmont Racetrack! After that,
it's 'Fat City' for Johnny boy! <G>

(*Suggest you do same! If this is true, take her out to
Churchill Downs and test your theory out with real British
pounds! I'll be very interested in the results of that little
test. You bet! <G>)

>at the moment she has turned
>them down as happens with a lot of abducte's they have an
>increased  global green interest, and she has told him that she
>wishes to have nothing to do with guns and war.

Hate to bust yer bubble but, I know abductees that smoke,
litter, and own Clint Eastwood style .357 magnums that they
would use on a Grey alien in a heartbeat. How does that fit into
your generalization?

>Any comments or help would be appreciated.

I hope you really mean that Max. Honest, my critique is intended
to be helpful. I sincerely hope that you take this in the spirit
in which it was intended. We have a responsibility to these
folks to make as intelligent and credible a presentation of this
phenom as we can. There is already way too much speculative crap
circulating as it is. No Need to add the 'trash' heap.

Peace,

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:46:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:27:01 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


Errol,

I now have the correct spelling and the medical description,
direct from a medical book for the terms used..


The full medical name for the ilness known as M.E

"myalgic encephalomyelitis"

myalgia refers to pain in the muscles

encephalomyelitis refers to inflammation of both the brain and
the spinal cord

If you use the term "myalgia capitis" it means pain in the scalp
muscles; cephalgia or HEADACHE!

Since there are no muscles per se in the brain, but there are
scalp muscles, and myalgia means "pain"

The symptons of the illness are lack of energy, aches and pains,
a kind of drained feeling and some sufferers are almost bed
ridden with this complaint. the medical fraternity have been
unable to find any cause for the illness, and in the 1980's in
the UK it was refered to as Yuppie flu.

The illness has also been known to last up to
4 or 5 years in certain cases.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                               Re: Colleagues

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:56:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Colleagues


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:04:59 -0400
>From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Colleagues
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>I was always glad to join this list not only because of its
>mostly objective atmosphere and the lack of too heavy personal
>injuries.

>As an example how it goes in different newsgroups and lists I
>would like to quote something I found in the Compuserve forum
>"The Issues" fom Thu, Oct. 15th. The author is a Mr. Hesemann.

>Begin of quote: "Anyway, I just used the card as an example that
>a PhD has no more use than a credit card. It impresses naive
>people but that=B4s it. What really counts is RESULTS. We have a
>certain number of PhDs in the UFO community, from Rick Boylan to
>David Jacobs, and, although I highly respect all of them
>(or better: most of them), I doubt that anyone in the field
>covers it on such an international range as I do and is able
>to present the results of so many international field
>investigations." End of quote.

>Sincerely

>Joachim Koch, Berlin

Hello Joachim,

That quote from Michael Hesemann shows that he's not a
particularly modest guy. Like some I've seen on this list.

But what he said could well be true. He went to South Africa and
video-taped the testimony of some of the school children who had
the encounter with the entity and its UFO, thus providing an
independent account from what John Mack had obtained much
earlier.

He went to Varghina and video-taped a reenactment of the events
by the three girls who had the encounter with the alien there.

He visited Socorro, NM, when the cameraman's film was a hot
topic, searching for the site of the alleged May, 1947 UFO
crash, and visited Santilli concerning the film.

He went to Mexico City and located 7 more witnesses to the Aug.
1997 UFO there, different ones than the 20 or so who Jaime
Maussan & the Elders had located.

Of course he's been to England more than once to video-tape the
crop-circle formations. I haven't kept close track of where all
he's been, but these spots are some that come to mind.

Also he visited Jerusalem last summer searching for the tombsite
of Joseph of Arimathea as best recollected by Meier from 35
years ago -- the tombsite in which the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel'
document was discovered, and succeeded in pinning it down to an
area he later learned contains 1st century tombs. This
interescts my own major area of inquiry, so I have more to say
on this in my web site. He visited Meier's place around then
also and obtained about a dozen sets of statements in support of
the genuineness of Meier's experiences, including from Meier's
two sons, now grown up; this nicely augments all the testimony
that Wendelle Stevens and Gary Kinder obtained years ago.

I think ufology needs investigators like him who go out and get
witnesses' testimony, as well as those who analyze data on film,
video-tapes, radar returns, etc. I also think he's right not to
pay too much attention in this field to one's advanced degrees,
especially if they should get in the way of openminded
intelligent inquiry.

Jim Deardorff
Corvallis, Oregon
E-mail: deardorj@proaxis.com
Home page: http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                              Art Bell is Back

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:57:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:54:16 -0400
Subject: Art Bell is Back


Dear CAUS Subscribers:

CAUS just received the following e-mail from a subscriber in the
know:

"Well Peter, it's official. Art Bell just signed a new contract
and should be returning to the air waves shortly. As I
understand it, Art's new contract will be announced October
26th, or he'll be back on the air that date. That's the good
news! The bad news is that Art's claim that his family is
threatened is phoney baloney. His family is just fine."

"Art has told us that if we were in his shoes, we'd do the same
thing. I suppose he means by that if there was that much money
at stake, we'd lie to America like he did. You know .... he may
just be right. I suppose most of us would gladly sell our soul
if the money was right. I guess in his case, it was."

Peter A. Gersten
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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:03:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:29:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:07 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

>I'm interested to know this too, especially as Max would have to
>know how many people are involved in what is an inherently
>secretive activity.

Absolutely, but he could take the most active circle production
night of the season which would tell him the minimum amount of
teams there are creating the formations.

Of course because balls of lights undoubtably make circles
as well that percentage would need to be applied too.

Tony





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                 Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:07:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:14:40 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:35:28 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

I can't let this one pass by. . . .

<snip>

>First off, I have no idea and will not comment on the validity
>of the UFO sighting; it's all pretty confusing.

>However, there are several things that I can clear up:

>1) FOX is a UHF and not a VHF network.

Not correct, but generally true. There is no such thing as a UHF
or VHF network. Channel 5 in Washington, DC is the FOX
affiliate, being a former Dumont (How many remember the Dumont
Television Network?) and later an independant television
station. Of course, the concept of an over the air "network" is
becoming meaningless with the proliferation of cable channels
that are available to anyone who has access (and with DSS that
includes just about everyone).

>2) Regarding the number of FCC call letters; down here in
>Houston, the local FOX station goes by KRIV, NBC goes by KPRC,
>ABC goes by KTRK, CBS is KHOU, etc, etc, etc. Obviously the
>above information regarding FCC call signs is incorrect. Ms.
>Yanak may have been thinking of network call signs as opposed to
>affiliates.

The Communications Act of 1932 set up the framework we live by
today in broadcasting. Call signs used in the US all begin with
a "W" or a "K", with most stations east of the Mississippi using
"W" and those on the other side using "K". KDKA in Pittsburg is
one of the major exceptions. Three letter call signs were given
out until it became clear that four would be needed for the
number of stations that would eventually go on the air, so they
soon began assigning four letter call signs.

>3) The "number" such as channel "2" may have been the local
>cable listing and not the "RF" placement on the tuner. For
>instance, NBC's Houston affiliate, KPRC, is actually called
>Channel 2 on the TV dial. However, it comes in on channel 12 via
>Warner Cable. We have several different cable companies across
>the city and different stations come in on a variety of odd
>channels via the cable box.

Very true. There is a lot of confusion, which is why most people
use the network (or cable channel) name to establish its
identity.

> Ms. Yanak should take her own advice:
>
>"Be more carefull and PERSONALLY check your info next time."

Good advice for all of us.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                  UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:27:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:16:51 -0400
Subject: UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Stanton T. Friedman

UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK

Saturday 24th Ocotber 1998

United Kingdom UFO Network special guest:

Stanton T. Friedman

Stanton will be answering your questions live in a moderated
meeting starting at 11pm (UK time) Saturday 24th October 1998.

Stanton will be connecting from New Brunswick, Canada.

Full connection details at foot of mail.

-- BIOGRAPHY --

Stanton Friedman is one of the leading UFO investigators with
more than thirty-seven years in the field. He has appeared on
hundreds of radio and TV programs including Larry King,
Nightline, Unsolved Mysteries, Art Bell Show and a previous
guest on the UK.UFO.NW -IRC- channel. He is probably one of the
most well known ufologists in the world.

Stanton Friedman is perhaps best known for his unrelenting
research into what has been termed the 'Cosmic Watergate'. He is
the author of Top Secret/Majic and along with Don Beliner, Crash
at Corona.

---

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 to UK.UFO.NW 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

Select 'Live IRC chat' button.

-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. Below are a list of times you may find useful.

United Kingdom UFO Network world times.

Adelaide:       0730
Amsterdam:      midnight
Athens:         0100
Auckland:       2200 Sunday
Bangkok:        0500
Beijing:                0600
Berlin:         midnight
Brasilia:               1900
Budapest:       midnight
Cairo:          0100
Calcutta:       0330
Casablanca:     2200
Chicago:        1700
Copenhagen:     midnight
Dallas:         1700
Dublin:         2300
Havana: 1800
Helsinki:       0100
HongKong:       0600
Istanbul:       0100
Johannesburg:   midnight
Karachi:                0300
Lima:           1700
Lisbon:         2300
Madrid:         midnight
Manila:         0600
Montreal:       1800
Moscow: 0200
Nairobi:                0100
New Delhi:      0330
New York:       1800
Nuuk:           2000
Paris:          midnight
Perth:          0600
Pheonix:        1500
Reykjavik:      2200
Rio:            1900
Riyadh:         0100
Rome:           midnight
Santiago:       1800
Seoul:          0700
Singapore:      0600
Sydney:         0800
Tashkent:       0300
Tehran:         0230
Tel Aviv:       0100
Tokyo:          0700
Toronto:        1800
Vancouver:      1500
Zagreb:         1700

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:45:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:19:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

>From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:10 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

>I asked this before, but of the wrong person - apologies to
>them. What's your source on this curious snippet of information?
>(The last part, rather than the 'issue' of whether people are
>human or not).

Rob

I believe it's listed as point 2 of preparation in your
beginners guide to circle making. Not that I've ever tried it in
practise, well......

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 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           MAGONIA ETH Bulletin 8

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:07:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:42:27 -0400
Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin 8


-------------------------------

www.magonia.demon.co.uk

MAGONIA ETH Bulletin

Editor: JOHN HARNEY
                No. 8    October 1998
=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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

EDITORIAL

It is very difficult to find any really interesting and mysterious
unexplained UFO reports, which are worth careful analysis to see if they
indicate whether there might just be a possibility that the ETH should be
taken seriously. However, recent signs are encouraging. Brad Sparks's
re-examination of the RB-47 case, published in Jerome Clark's latest
encyclopedia, and a revival of interest in the Travis Walton case, both
indicate the possibility of interesting developments in the foreseeable
future.

___________________________________________________________________________

EXETER CE1

In 1965 the following statement was made to Project Blue Book:

I, Norman J. Muscarello, was hitchhiking on Rt. 150, three miles south of
Exeter, New Hampshire, at 0200 hours on the 3rd of September. A group of
five bright red lights appeared over a house about a hundred feet from
where I was standing. The lights were in a line at about a sixty-degree
angle. They were so bright, they lighted up the area. The lights then moved
out over a large field and acted at times like a floating leaf. They would
go down behind the trees, behind a house and then reappear. They always
moved in the same sixty-degree angle. Only one light would be on at a time.
They were pulsating: one, two, three, four, five, four, three, two, one.
They were so bright I could not distinguish a form to the object. I watched
these lights for about fifteen minutes and they finally disappeared behind
some trees and seemed to go into a field. At one time while I was watching
them, they seemed to come so close I jumped into a ditch to keep from being
hit. After the lights went into a field, I caught a ride to the Exeter
Police Station and reported what I had seen.

        Patrolman Eugene Bertrand accompanied Muscarello back to the field where
he had seen the UFO. At first he saw nothing, but when they walked into the
field the flashing lights reappeared and staged a repeat performance.
Before the lights finally moved off in a south-easterly direction, the two
men were joined by Patrolman David Hunt, who also saw them.
        There was a great wave of sightings in New Hampshire in 1965, but this
incident was the most impressive and is the best known. Most of the others
were, quite reasonably, attributed to sightings of aircraft lights, bright
stars and planets.
        As this incident got a lot of publicity, the US Air Force was keen to
provide an explanation to reassure the public that it was really nothing to
get excited about. However, Blue Book made rather a mess of it. In a book
published some years after the event, Dr J. Allen Hynek wrote:

Not only is this a fine example of a Close Encounter of the First Kind, but
it is a showcase illustration of Blue Book negligence, put-down of
witnesses, attempts to explain away the testimony of responsible witnesses
with a parade of "official" explanations, and of capitulation on the part
of the Pentagon which, months later, had to admit that the case should have
been carried as "Unidentified". The file folders in Blue Book, however,
still have the original evaluation of "Astro-Stars/Planets" and "Aircraft
from Operation Big Blast". (The astronomical evaluation is completely
untenable and Operation Big Blast terminated more than an hour before the
incident at Exeter began, according to official records.) (1)

        Ufologist Raymond Fowler carried out thorough investigations of the case
,
as did journalist John G. Fuller, who wrote a book about it. (2) After
conducting a correspondence with the Air Force about the case, Bertrand and
Hunt finally received a letter from Lt. Col. John P. Spaulding, grudgingly
admitting that " . . . we have been unable to identify the object that you
observed on September 3, 1965." (3)
        It was suggested that an advertising plane could have generated the
sightings, but investigators, knowing that such aircraft often generated
CE1 reports, checked and found that none of these were flying at the time.
It is, anyway, unlikely that an advertiser would pay for a plane to fly
around at such an unearthly hour.

        One of the main sceptical attacks on the case came from Robert Sheaffer,
in his demolition job on ufology, entitled The UFO Verdict. (4) To soften
up the his readers before launching into possible explanations, he uses one
of the favourite ploys of CSICOP sceptics, the denigration of ufologists
and witnesses. He tells them that John G. Fuller " . . . has recently
written The Ghost of Flight 401, in which he asserts that one major airline
has managed to fill some of the empty seats on its jumbo jets with spirits
from the beyond." (5) Not only that but, " . . . officers Bertrand and Hunt
both told NICAP that they had previously read UFO literature, although
Fuller fails to mention this interesting fact." (6)
        Sheaffer suggests that some of the New Hampshire sightings were probably
observations of Jupiter, including, by implication, those made by
Muscarello and the two patrolmen. He notes that some close-encounter
reports have proved, on investigation, to be sightings of astronomical
objects.
        If this seems unlikely, we should perhaps consider a case investigated b
y
Allan Hendry. A waitress arriving home at 3:37 a.m. saw a saucer 25 feet in
diameter, with red, green and blue flashing lights and a cloud haze around
it. She called two other persons who also saw it. There were two lights
next to the object which looked like stars, but pulsated in different
colours like the saucer. The objects were viewed for 50 minutes. When
Hendry checked the part of the sky the witnesses were looking at on
astronomical charts he found that, on the morning in question, a crescent
moon was visible and nearby were Mars and Jupiter in close conjunction. The
witnesses had not reported seeing the moon in spite of having described the
sky as clear, apart from a haze around the objects. (7)
        Although somewhat exaggerated, the description of the objects was
compatible with an observation of the moon and two planets seen through
haze. However, in the case of the Exeter sightings, it is difficult to see
how Jupiter could be perceived as a row of five brilliant red lights
blinking on and off in sequence. If these reports were not generated by
misperceptions of an advertising plane, a US Air Force exercise, or bright
stars or planets, then it is difficult to imagine what the true explanation
could be.

References
1. Hynek, J. Allen. The Hynek UFO Report, Sphere Books, London, 1978, 154
2. Fuller, John G. Incident at Exeter, G.P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1966
3. Hynek, op. cit., 165
4. Sheaffer, Robert. The UFO Verdict: Examining the Evidence, Prometheus
Books, Buffalo, New York, 1981
5. Ibid., 111
6. Ibid., 112
7. Hendry, Allan. The UFO Handbook, Sphere Books, London, 1980, 77-78
____________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

BOOK REVIEWS

Jenny Randles. Something in the Air, Robert Hale, London, 1998. =9C16.99
This book is a plea for aircraft encounters with UFOs to be taken more
seriously. To this end Jenny Randles appeals to her readers to avoid the
extremes of dismissing such reports as nonsense, or attributing them to the
activities of ETs in their flying saucers.
        Some reports of aerial encounters with UFOs cannot be attributed to star
s
or meteors, or atmospheric optical phenomena. This leaves two main causes
of such reports, if we leave out the ETs. These are: atmospheric electrical
phenomena, such as ball lightning and other electrical phenomena not often
observed, so unrecognised by science, and; sightings of secret military
aircraft on test flights.
        Apart from the classic cases which are discussed, there is much
interesting and original material, particularly concerning British
sightings. Jenny manages to explain some of the British reports as natural
phenomena, or false impressions caused by unusual formations of aircraft,
such as fighter planes being refuelled at night, giving the impression of a
giant triangle. However, the theory that many sightings are of secret
aircraft, manned or remotely piloted, being developed by British Aerospace
at Warton, Lancashire, based to a great extent on the work of Tim Matthews,
is highly controversial among British ufologists.

        Jenny's work has confirmed the general impression that aircrews and air
traffic controllers are reluctant to file official reports of strange
aerial encounters. As she rightly points out, such an attitude is not
beneficial to the cause of air safety.
        This is definitely a book for the nuts-and-bolts ufologists to read and
criticise, but it is not written to please the ETHers.

Bruce Rux. Hollywood Vs. the Aliens: The Motion Picture Industry's
Participation in UFO Disinformation, Frog, Ltd., Berkeley, California,
1997. =9C16.99
Any readers who have enjoyed Martin Kottmeyer's articles in Magonia on the
influence of science fiction films on UFO close-encounter and abduction
stories will appreciate this book. It is rather like a very long Kottmeyer
article.
        Rux takes the opposite view to that of Kottmeyer. He tells us that,
instead of UFO stories aping SF films, the SF films imitate real UFO
accounts as part of a government-inspired disinformation project. Although
the blurb warns us that he is writing tongue-in-cheek, by mentioning his
"mock-serious tone", some of his ideas are interesting.
        For example, he asserts that films about alien invasion were either
serious or ridiculous, depending on the impression the government or the
intelligence agencies wanted to create at the time. He points out that Ed
Wood's notorious Plan 9 from Outer Space (1959) was so bad that it had to
be deliberately bad, and his analysis of the film certainly seems
convincing on that score.
        Anyone who wishes to investigate the connection between SF films and the
content of UFO reports will find this book a very useful reference manual.

   LETTERS

In your "Walton Again" article (No. 7, September 1998), you assert one of
the sticking points for those who think the Walton incident was a hoax is
the behaviour of his fellow woodsmen in the wake of his disappearance. You
suggest they would have to have been brilliant actors to fool the lawmen
who investigated, implying such folks aren't likely to have such talent.
        The truth is, however, highly credible performances by ordinary people a
re
quite common in criminal/hoax situations, even high-profile ones. For
example, recently the US television magazine show 20/20 reported on the
rapid burgeoning of hoaxed hate crimes - ethnic, race, and gay bashing and
the like. This is a growth field for people perpetrating insurance fraud,
promoting a cause, seeking attention and sympathy, etc., because of our
mutual reluctance to call into question the veracity of victims of such
despicable crimes and the revulsion civilised people feel for those who
commit them.
        20/20 illustrated the problem with four cases - a Jewish couple whose ho
me
(ultimately torched), car, and other property had been repeatedly defaced
with swastikas, etc., over a period of months; a black man whose car had
been spray-painted with anti-black slurs; two gay room-mates whose
apartment had been trashed and defaced with anti-Semitic graffiti; and a
black-white couple whose home and other property had been defaced with hate
slogans and set afire. Television news clips and other video were shown,
the "victims" tearful, shaken, indignant - tremendously convincing. Similar
clips of investigators were aired, leaving no doubt they were certain of
the sincerity of these people. Neighbours and friends were equally
convinced, and lavished donations of food, clothing, money and more on
them. The defaced-car crime sparked a major anti-hate demonstration.
        In the first case, FBI agents launched an investigation and were stunned
when they caught the couple on surveillance video setting fire to their own
home. (These two are in prison, and she's now quite convincingly claiming
they were framed.) The defaced car case was solved only when the
perpetrator bragged to an associate that he'd done it himself so he could
get his car repainted at insurance company expense. A similar gaffe exposed
the allegedly bashed gays, and the other arson case was cracked only when a
sharp-eyed insurance investigator noticed a strong similarity to previous
cases and discovered the couple involved had pulled the same trick before.

        Believable behaviour by crime victims and UFO witnesses is one of the
weakest elements of supporting evidence. While its absence is a warning
flag, its presence should never be given any great weight. Yet it's all too
easy to fall into that trap - and I speak from experience, for example,
having fallen into it with Glenn Dennis of Roswell fame.
        That said, however, I agree it's highly unlikely all six of Walton's
fellow woodsmen could have been in on a hoax and yet appeared so
convincing, not to mention keeping their stories straight under the close
scrutiny they received. If - IF - the Walton incident was a hoax, at least
most of them were among the hoaxed.
Karl T. Pflock, Placitas, New Mexico

Thanks for sending me the ETH Bulletin. I have certainly enjoyed the debate
it has encouraged. The striking thing about the issues you have raised is
that people tend to think in terms of PSH versus ETH yet, as your September
editorial notes, the PSH helps us understand popular beliefs about the
subject. Even keen ETH supporters must acknowledge that the PSH can be a
useful tool in separating the "signal" from the "noise". Instead of that
appreciation, ETH supporters tend to dismiss any PSH out-of-hand as
ridiculous, yet they can believe that abductees can be transported through
solid walls!
        People who should know better refer to an abductee being ""clean" i.e.,
was not directly familiar with the abduction phenomenon" (John E. Mack,
Abduction, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 18). That is like saying a US citizen
is not familiar with the appearance and characteristics of a motor vehicle.
It is also noteworthy that out of Mack's 76 abduction cases he had only 4
extensively tested by PhD psychologists because such work is
"time-consuming and expensive" (ibid., p. 17). Out of the 4, 1 of the
abductees had to be hospitalised and the other 3 tested within normal
ranges. If 1 out of 4 of his better cases is dismissed in this manner it
doesn't say a lot for the other 72 cases.
        Mack concludes that he is dealing with a phenomenon that "could not be
explained psychiatrically" (ibid., p. 20) yet this is on the basis of 4
thorough tests. Furthermore, what are the similarities and differences
between "normal" abductees and those who are suffering from some sort of
psychiatric disorder? Mack insists that you have to "stretch and twist
psychology beyond reasonable limits" (ibid., p. 20) to explain the abductee
phenomenon, yet, on the basis of a few verbal accounts, that have not been
subjected to rigorous testing, he is willing to discount the whole of
prevailing Western science.
        Psychology and sociology can at least be used to deal with our world in
a
scientific and testable manner; the ETH is just a belief system that, as
the controversy stirred up by this bulletin has shown, is not inclined to
accept explanations or even detailed examination of hallowed UFO cases.
Nigel Watson, Plymouth

Christopher Allan is fully right in rating the Gill case the best
multiple-witness case on record in the sense of it being to all appearances
reliable and a hard one to construct a prosaic explanation for that will be
satisfying and compelling. When he asks if this is "really unanswerable
evidence of ETH", however, he is confusing insolubility with evidence for
aliens. In the documents of the case Gill clearly states of the figures on
the craft, "no doubt they are human". When Cruttwell probed for details,
Gill indicated that the parts he could see had the "outlines of normal
human beings". Similarly problematic, the beings are walking on top of the
craft while apparently aloft. This runs counter to all the cases in the
literature that have the beings inside their craft behind doors and windows
instead of up on deck. The upward-angled beams of the craft have no close
parallel to other alien craft reports and they have no obvious function.
They don't seem to be tracking birds or aeroplanes. Nothing of the case
makes sense from an ETH perspective. Parts of the case involve
misinterpretations of astronomical objects, but the parts of the case that
involve multiple witnessing of figures on the deck of some sort of craft
cannot reduce to such an explanation without invoking some hefty
improbabilities about suggestibility. I advanced a theory in an earlier
Magonia that it probably involved a boat involved in night fishing. It did
not go down well with a number of UFO buffs and criticism by one fellow has
been endless. At the end of the day when all the thrashing of minutiae is
over, this idea may not convince, but it still seems to me better than the
alternatives.

Martin S. Kottmeyer, Carlyle, Illinois

____________________________________________________________________________
______________
MAGONIA ETH Bulletin is available on the Magonia web site and printed
copies are available only for the favoured few. Please address all letters,
articles, etc. to the Editor: John Harney, 27 Enid Wood House, High Street,
Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 1LN  UK
=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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
Mark Pilkington
------------------------------------------------

Magonia Online



http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk

The nearest simile I can find to express the difficulties of sending a
message is that I appear to be standing behind a sheet of frosted glass...
which blurs sight and deadens sound, dictating feebly to a reluctant and
somewhat obtuse secretary.  A feeling of terrible powerlessness thus
burdens me... it is a dark road.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:35:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:58:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:57:14 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees<

Hi Max

>M.E Is nothing to do with kidney infections!

I realise this but it is still a common trait among abductees.

>I don't know, but from what I know I doubt it

Can you elaborate as this would help in the research I'm
undertaking at the moment.

>the illness M.E. and the fact that over fifty percent of one
>abducte group in the UK has been medicaly diagnosed with the
>ilness, which is well over the UK national average?

Has there been a logical explanation for the cause of M.E. yet?
The reason I ask is because various locations in the UK have
above normal averages for certain illnesses, i.e. in London
there are more Asthmatics than say in Lowestoft. Therefore a
national average wouldn't be the most proficient to use in a
particular area.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:53:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:51:39 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>List,

>I thought this may be of interest.

>Leanne


>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>Subject: UFO name change.

>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>natural unidentified objects.

>>What do you all think.

>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.


Hi Leanne

How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:08:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:54:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:45:22 EDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:50:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

Earlier, I had written:

>>I don't know. They say the best place to hide a tree is in the
>>forest. Perhaps, if Mt. Rainier was as desolate a volcano as you
>>describe, it would have been THE ideal place to test the
>>accuracy and impact characteristics of missles. After all,
>>there'd be hardly anyone around to notice; even if they did, the
>>explosions could be attributed to volcanic activity!

Kathleen's response:

>Good point Rog. Mt. Rainier is only isolated by her sudden
>altitude climb from sea level to her crest (over 14,000 ft.) She
>can be seen from Oregon to the Candian Border. If one of those
>missiles were the least bit off track, they could have possibly
>killed  (only estimates for 1947), over 50,000 people in Yakima
>which is only 30 mintues away, 100,000 people in Tacoma which is
>only 30 minutes away to the west or/and 250,000 plus in Seattle
>which is less than 60 minutes away.

If the military's missles can't hit something that big, then
they _definitely_ need more testing, just to avoid
embarrassment.

>I could be wrong. I am not a military expert. I do know
>Vandenberg in California which test missles is very close to
>major populations.

<snip>

To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
figure.

>Anything is a possibility but again I ask how
>could it be that in the 40 years after his sighting, he could
>not find anything that looked like it or a logical answer to
>what he had seen? The man kept scrap books on news items and
>aviation news from all over the world. He was a good researcher
>and keen on news. He would have looked for the obvious.

All I know is that I still can't find my remote control for the
TV and I _know_ it's somewhere in the living room....

>Not sure what Boeing was up to back then. I do know someone who
>worked there in the 40s and will ask his opinion. We did have
an >incident in Seattle around the late 50's I believe, where
some >men from the power company witnessed a saucer shaped craft
>flying out of a hanger at Boeing Field and crashing into a
hill. >Seattle Times reported the incident but no conclusion.

If confirmed, that would be really useful information. I really
don't know what Mr. Arnold saw. And you're right, you'd think
something would have surfaced to fill in the blanks.
Unfortunately, the myth of Arnold is becoming somewhat of a
multi-headed beast; everyone seems bent on giving different
interpretations to what he said and even how he said it.

I find his sighting credible, since his was really one of the
first and not prone to "get on the band wagon" of UFO dogma. The
fact that he saw several objects in formation and not one is
interesting, in itself. Maybe the future will reveal the truth
of what he saw. Until then all we
can really do is guess about what he didn't see.

Take care,

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:45:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:59:33 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:22:05 +0100
>From: Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. <aura@telekabel2.nl>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

Hi Andy

>Indeed kidney - or other physical problems are often reported by
>abductees. But if it would be _a side-effect_ of _an_illness_ we
>still have no explanation for the other cases. But if it was a
>side-effect of being ill in general, than we'd have a lot more
>people reporting abductions.

If the subjects are in some way psychic then the medical
problems may find a way of manifesting in their subconscious.
With bad aliens being brought in by the media this gives the
subjects an escape with a relatively plausible and half
respected explanation. This could also account for non-psychics
to gain attention by the non-medical profession. To be honest I
haven't documented my findings on this but at a glance at raw
data this seems to be a plausible explanation and should be
investigated further.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:00:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:06:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:56:07 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Geoff Dittman <gdittman@autobahn.mb.ca>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>><snip>

>>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

It appears to me more likely the aliens would be appalled that
we are breeding ourselves and the planet into oblivion. Think we
still have quite a while yet on this planet before we have to
worry about the effects of sterility. Especially in some parts
of the world.

Less people might also allow a few trees to grow back. P'raps
the aliens are tired of hunting thru the subdivisions trying to
find a field to land 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

               Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:55:52 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:04:01 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:04 -0400
>From: Bob Durant <70232.17@COMPUSERVE.COM>
>Subject: NBC-Series "Project UFO" and Col.Bill Coleman
>To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>List:

>Here is what I know or think I know about the planned NBC
>program on UFOs.

>I was contacted by the producers early this year. They
>discovered that I had done an investigation of the August 1997
>Swissair UFO sighting, and that I seemed to be the only person
>in contact with the captain of that flight. The producers wanted
>to include the sighting in their show, but needed the captain on
>camera. I said I would do my best, provided I knew something
>about the program, or knew enough so that in good conscience I
>could recommend cooperation to the Swissair captain. This caveat
>took the form of my usual five minute speech about how shoddy
>UFO programming has always been.

>The production assistant went to great pains to tell me the
>following. Whether it is true, or was true but by air time won't
>any longer be true, and so on, is beyond me. So, without
>endorsement, here it is.

>The producers are independent contractors who have done many
>documentaries over the years, and are under contract to NBC for
>a single UFO "special" of two hours duration. The working title
>is something like "UFOs -- Confirmed." The general editorial
>slant is reflected in the title, meaning that they intend to
>take a positive position on the issue of UFOs as a serious
>topic.

>What I found interesting was the insistence that this was being
>done because of marketing studies that showed (1) great success
>with UFO topic programming in terms of drawing audiences, and
>(2) an understanding that the public already believes in UFOs
>and wants that belief reinforced. Consequently, from the
>television entertainment business vantage, putting on a
>skeptical show did not make sense to the producers or to the
>ultimate authority, NBC. This is a very cynical position to
>take, but in a sense it is good to hear, given some of the
>"mainstream" treatments I have suffered through.

>Also, NBC asked for and are getting high level "production
>values." I believe this means they will spend more money than
>shows like Sightings and Encounters typically spend on scenery,
>recreating incidents, actors, and the rest. The idea is to have
>something that, regardless of content, will at least look very
>slick and professional. This is intended for prime time viewing,
>and will almost certainly be preceded by much advertising.
>Because of the belief that it will draw a very large audience,
>it will be run during a special "sweeps" rating period.

>I asked for some names from the UFO community who were being
>interviewed or were giving background info, and though I can't
>recall the names now, remember being pleasantly surprised.
>Instead of groaning, I mean. I was told that the Sturrock Panel
>would be covered.

>The Swissair captain decided not to cooperate with the show.
>Probably a smart move, given the history of these things.

>--Bob Durant


I have been saying for many years that rather than the
government trying to let out the truth about UFOs slowly be
encouraging all the documentaries, that what drives Hollywood is
greed.

UFO shows tend to be very cheap since they don't pay the talent.
I think Bob's discussion sounds right on.

However, when I talked to one of the people involved she told me
she was talking to Steven Hawking. I pointed out that he knew
nothing about UFOs. She commented that he could talk about the
universe..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                            Re: Pine Bush Updates

From: Vinny Polise <UfoContat@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:24:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:20:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Pine Bush Updates


November Pine Bush Paranormal and UFO Updates are up!!!


Internet Users Click:

http://members.aol.com/ufocontat/pinebush

Greetings all. Well the pages are up and back in full swing. I
hope you all enjoy what these pages offer. I did a little
remodeling over the past month so please check them out.

Any questions, feel free to ask.

Peace and light,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

               Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 16:27:15 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:26:52 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- C-E: NBC-Series 'Project


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:04 -0400
>From: Bob Durant <70232.17@COMPUSERVE.COM>
>Subject: NBC-Series "Project UFO" and Col.Bill Coleman
>To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>List:

>Here is what I know or think I know about the planned NBC
>program on UFOs.

>I was contacted by the producers early this year. They
>discovered that I had done an investigation of the August 1997
>Swissair UFO sighting, and that I seemed to be the only person
>in contact with the captain of that flight. The producers wanted
>to include the sighting in their show, but needed the captain on
>camera. I said I would do my best, provided I knew something
>about the program, or knew enough so that in good conscience I
>could recommend cooperation to the Swissair captain. This caveat
>took the form of my usual five minute speech about how shoddy
>UFO programming has always been.

>The production assistant went to great pains to tell me the
>following. Whether it is true, or was true but by air time won't
>any longer be true, and so on, is beyond me. So, without
>endorsement, here it is.

>The producers are independent contractors who have done many
>documentaries over the years, and are under contract to NBC for
>a single UFO "special" of two hours duration. The working title
>is something like "UFOs -- Confirmed." The general editorial
>slant is reflected in the title, meaning that they intend to
>take a positive position on the issue of UFOs as a serious
>topic.

>What I found interesting was the insistence that this was being
>done because of marketing studies that showed (1) great success
>with UFO topic programming in terms of drawing audiences, and
>(2) an understanding that the public already believes in UFOs
>and wants that belief reinforced. Consequently, from the
>television entertainment business vantage, putting on a
>skeptical show did not make sense to the producers or to the
>ultimate authority, NBC. This is a very cynical position to
>take, but in a sense it is good to hear, given some of the
>"mainstream" treatments I have suffered through.

>Also, NBC asked for and are getting high level "production
>values." I believe this means they will spend more money than
>shows like Sightings and Encounters typically spend on scenery,
>recreating incidents, actors, and the rest. The idea is to have
>something that, regardless of content, will at least look very
>slick and professional. This is intended for prime time viewing,
>and will almost certainly be preceded by much advertising.
>Because of the belief that it will draw a very large audience,
>it will be run during a special "sweeps" rating period.

>I asked for some names from the UFO community who were being
>interviewed or were giving background info, and though I can't
>recall the names now, remember being pleasantly surprised.
>Instead of groaning, I mean. I was told that the Sturrock Panel
>would be covered.

I was flown to Los Angeles this past July (if memory serves) to
be interviewed for the show. The interview focused on UFO
history. I knew some of the people from previous dealings with
such shows as Unsolved Mysteries and Sightings. My previous
experience with them has been good. I found them to be nice
people who made a serious effort to get the facts straight.

Beyond that, I was told that they were working on some really
sensational case which the director told me (I'm paraphrasing
his words here) would be "big enough to be a long entry in the
next edition of your encyclopedia." I couldn't get any more
details, and I have no idea if their hopes were realized in
terms of the case's significance. I am fairly sure this was not
the Swissair case, which (as I recall) I was told was not going
to be used.

At the time the show was scheduled for October or November. Now,
I understand (though I haven't heard from any show-associated
people in a while), it will be featured on prime-time television
in February.

How it turns out, of course, remains to be seen. All we can do
is hope for the 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:44:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


Forwarded from James Easton at his request - thanks Errol

-----

Regarding...

>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Ed wrote:

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:41:15 PDT

>>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these are
>>>some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the Summary
>>>Report of the Scientific Review Panel:

>>>"On the other hand, the review panel was not convinced that any of
>>>the evidence involved currently unknown physical processes or
>>>pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial intelligence."

>>Of course that was not the panel's intention. It was making
>>judgments from the limited number of cases it looked at. It found
>>those cases impressive and worthy of further scientific inquiry, at
>>the end of which - presumably a long process - it would be possible
>>to come to a far more firm judgment about the nature and origin of
>>UFO phenomena.

>The above is a pure fabrication by Jerome Clark. We all know where
>the report is online. The quotes come from the part of the report
>directly attributed to the Scientific Review Panel, not Peter
>Sturrock's rendition. The viewpoints of the Scientific Review Panel
>are the only ones relevant of consideration, not the paid home team
>announcer's.

>>But haven't we gone through this before?

>Yes we have. It is known as intellectual dishonesty on your part.
>Give a specific chapter and quote to support your allegation that the
>review panel was impressed with the cases and they were worthy of
>further study? You can't quote the scientific review panel because
>they said just the opposite.

Ed,

We note that Jerome Clark has replied to your posting, yet doesn't
address this fundamental point.

Are we to take it that his resultant waste of bandwith verbals on
yourself - the messenger - is tantamount to an observation of
'Friedman's laws for debunking'; if you can't attack the data...

Whilst Mr Clark claims the 'best evidence' presented to the 'Sturrock
Panel', resulted that the panel "found those cases impressive and
worthy of further scientific inquiry, at the end of which - presumably
a long process - it would be possible to come to a far more firm
judgment about the nature and origin of UFO phenomena", like yourself,
others note the panel's reported conclusions that, "Further analysis
of the evidence presented to the panel is unlikely to shed added light
on the causes underlying the reports...".

In other words, the purported 'best evidence' (although that is
comprehensively debatable) accumulated during the past fifty years
wasn't deemed a promising basis of further scientific study.

What could be more disappointing... presumably only if it wasn't
considered worthy of any further analysis at all.

Mr Clark, expending similar inconsequential diatribe as yourself and
consequentially all other UpDates subscribers have had to endure, has
previously disputed my observation that the panel's report read as you
also surmise.

It was an issue I asked if some of the panel members might clarify,
and which Francois Louange responded to, writing on 27 July:


Dear Mr Easton,

Back from holidays, I find your interesting message and I try to
give you quick answers:

[My mail shown in inverted commas]

"I have been discussing the implications of the 'Sturrock panel'
report, particularly with the more credible representatives of
'UFO related' research and who are close colleagues of those who
presented data to the panel.

One question which is the focus of debate relates to the panel's
conclusion, as the press release summarises:

'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'.

I would take this to confirm the panel's conclusion that there
was no value in further studying the 'best' evidence presented
and that the focus should be on new data, which was
'scientifically acquired', as opposed to the well intentioned,
but unscientific methodologies which have existed.

Prof. Eshleman's comments seem to reiterate this, when he
writes:

'The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
causes of the reports. However, the panel considers that new
data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well
documented, recurrent events), could yield useful information.
In this case, physical scientists would have an opportunity to
contribute to the resolution of the UFO problem.'

Is it an accurate interpretation to say the panel agreed that
further appraisal of _any_ historical 'UFO related' data was
considered to be unproductive and that new methodologies are
required before data can be scientifically evaluated?"

The panel stated that no progress was to be expected from
further analysis of the cases presented in Pocantico, and I
share this point of view.

It does not necessarily mean that ALL pre-existing data are to
be discarded : most of the panel's members know very little or
nothing about OTHER cases than those presented there.

"Essentially, should a line be drawn under the past 50 years or
so of 'unscientific' research and a thorough scientific study
begin afresh?

Alternatively, is there any historical evidence which should be
re- evaluated as the basis of a thorough scientific study?".

The main point raised by the panel is that an active effort
should be undertaken in order to gather new physical evidence
through adequate instruments, even simple (wide angle cameras or
video-cameras,...). Faster reaction should be obtained thanks to
a dedicated structure, so as to collect fresh undistorted
testimonies and/or recordings. If you take the example of
Hessdalen, a significant effort has obviously been done, but
methods and operational procedures lack rigour and
professionalism : with a very limited effort, scientists could
implement the necessary complements in order to be in a position
to obtain exploitable data on lights, associated spectra,....

My personal conviction is that we have to proceed along with
priorities. If the means are given to work professionally, there
is still an interest in re-visiting several of the existing
cases and the related evidence, either on a case by case basis
(e.g. photographic documents), or from a statistical point of
view. But the choice (good or bad) of the cases presented in
Pocantico was such that effectively little would have to be
expected from new studies of those cases, of which many are
already pretty old.

[End]


This elucidation hasn't previously been published and now seems
an appropriate time to do so.

Peter Sturrock also kindly replied to my questions about the
genesis of the 'Sturrock Panel, how the members were chosen, by
whom and the thorny issue of funding being open to suggestion of
'influence'.

I will shortly publish this material in the second issue of my
'Pulsar' newsletter.

If Mr Clark still believes that the 'Sturrock Panel' found the
'best UFO evidence' presented was "impressive" and considered
"worthy of further scientific inquiry", perhaps he can, as you
asked, cite some factual, substantive evidence which we might
all consider further.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research <iufor@frii.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:07:14 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:09:33 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:20:56 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>>I thought this may be of interest.

>>Leanne

>>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>>Subject: UFO name change.
>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:29 +0930

>>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>natural unidentified objects.

>>>What do you all think.

>>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

>Salutations list,

>I speak only for me here, but 'OWC' sounds like a rap group. No
>disrespect intended.. :) Actually, 'Off World Craft' implies
>that the object is not of this world. Presumptions are being
>made here.. :)

>Perhaps another acronym is needed, something like; CUO - Craft
>of Unknown Origin or WHITT - What the Hell Is That Thing.. <BG>

>DonnieS

Don't make the mistake of asking a military person if they have
ever seen a UFO. If they want to evade the question, they can
truthfully answer no, because they don't call them that. They're
UCTs (uncorrelated targets) and probably other names, depending
on where you work and what month it is.

Actually, UAO (Unknown Aerial Object) might come the closest for
accuracy. Craft isn't very good, because we don't really know
which ones (if any) are craft. And they're not always flying
objects, either. Sometimes they just park up there without
moving. And if they land, does their name change? Do they just
become UOs?

Come to think of it, WHITT actually does have a certain
universal applicability...

Regards,
Bob


 I N S T I T U T E  F O R  U F O  R E S E A R C H
--------------------------------------------------------
   Bob Thrift      |  Editor, UFOCUS Magazine
Webmaster, IUR Web Site  | http://www.frii.com/~iufor/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                              HOT GOSSIP - OCT

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:31:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:03:51 -0400
Subject: HOT GOSSIP - OCT


HOT GOSSIP UK - OCTOBER 1998
www.hotgossip.co.uk

THE "UNEXPLAINED" SECTION by Georgina Bruni
http://www.hotgossip.co.uk/unexgoss.html

MORE BAD FEELINGS BETWEEN RESEARCHERS
NICK POPE WANTS A ONE TO ONE WITH AN ALIEN
CENTRAL TV UFO DEBATE
THE HOAX PROGRAMME -WHAT HAPPENED TO IT?

----------------------------------------------------------------

THE NICK POPE COLUMN
Stupid Cults
The Sturrock Report
Rendlesham - The Unresolved Mystery
RAF Fylingdales
Bad Moos For The Irn-Bru Cow
Spontaneous Human Combustion
_______________________________________________

MORE BAD FEELINGS BETWEEN RESEARCHERS

Alan Alford has been busy this year writing another book titled
'The Phoenix Solution', which was published this August. Alan
says he was determined to see his major discovery published
before somebody else discovered it!

Alford claims he has opened an entirely new dimension to the
ancient mysteries, and tells me that the answer to just about
everything can be found in ancient Egyptian religion. It's
interesting to note that he's now totally rejected the Sitchin
thesis. He's also very critical of Robert Bauval and Graham
Hancock, and understands that Hancock is said to be mighty
pissed about his latest publication of 'The Phoenix'.

A well-informed source recently reported that Graham Hancock is
livid about the fact that Alford has introduced radical new
ideas [the exploded planet theory] which conflict with his own,
thus confusing the issues.

Who is that source?

Says Alford: 'Bauval told me so; said GH thought I was confusing
the issues. Yeah right, but possibly because GH is barking up
the wrong tree ;-)'

Woweee, I thought it was only ufologist who fought amongst
themselves.

On 15th September, Alford placed a statement on his website
calling Bauval and Hancock a new age gang. The full statement
and details on how to order his books can be found at
http://www.eridu.co.uk

Graham Hancock recently published a new book and Channel 4 TV
are currently screening his 'Quest for the Lost Civilisation'
presented by Hancock and his wife.
_________________________________________________________

NICK POPE WANTS A ONE TO WITH AN ALIEN

I was interested to hear that HOT GOSSIP UK editor Nick Pope has
recorded a radio commercial for Mercury One 2 One mobile phones.
Nick used to investigate UFOs for the Ministry of Defence, and
the ad deals with his desire to have a one to one with an alien!

The high profile advertisement is currently being played all
over the country, and Nick tells me that friends and colleagues
at the NOD have been talking about little else since they first
heard it. As well as showing that Nick is a good sport, the ad
is an interesting pointer to the way in which ufology is
becoming increasingly mainstream, and part of popular culture.

Who would you like to have a one to one with?
_________________________________________________________

 CENTRAL TV UFO DEBATE

I recently agreed to appear on a Central TV live UFO debate with
a bunch of believers and sceptics. Well, I got a jolly nice fee
and a chauffeured driven car to take me to Nottingham [or
thereabouts] and back home. It was also good to meet up with
James Diss again: I've always had a soft spot [clearly platonic]
for him since we both worked as SYSOPS on the Compuserve UFO
forum for awhile, and although we do not share the same beliefs
- he's a notorious but charming sceptic - we are friends - I
think!

Unfortunately, there was one very cranky guest on the show who
was so OTT. Even before the show aired he was trying to be
noticed for whatever it was he was promoting.  I found him
totally irritating, so much so that I can't even remember his
name.  It's people like that who give serious research a bad
name.

There was also the Andy Roberts fan club. He appears to be God
amongst the sceptics these days. Knowing the way Andy operates,
no amount of "creeping up his ........." will deter him from
critising you if he thinks he's got something horrible to write
about you in his latest "Armchair Ufologist Newsletter". But it
does help to be sceptical. Reading some of the fan mail sent to
e-mail groups was very disturbing - almost cultish. Please God
he doesn't start his own dedicated group.

It was nice to finally meet up with scientist Dr David Hughes,
who I had a
heated debate with on air. Nick pope was also a guest.
__________________________________________________________

THE HOAX PROGRAMME -WHAT HAPPENED TO IT?

Early this year I did an interview for a Bob Kiviat Fox TV
production about classic hoaxes. The programme, I thought, was
due to run in June, then July, then August, then September, and
now it's October and it still hasn't been screened. From what I
gather it 's an interesting look at claims of some of the best
alleged hoaxes. This, as many of you will know due to messages
posted by one of the researchers, also includes the Santilli
Autopsy Footage. I leave you with that thought.

Georgina Bruni

----------------------------------------------------------------

THE NICK POPE COLUMN

Stupid Cults

Cults prey on the vulnerable and the gullible, sometimes using
ufology and the paranormal to get their message across. Some of
them are harmless, but some rather more insidious.  I found a
nasty little leaflet on the London Underground the other day,
telling the story of somebody who had a Near Death  Experience,
glimpsed hell, and then found salvation through Christ. I=92ve got
nothing against Christianity in general, but I object to people
selectively quoting from the Bible to scare people witless. And
the leaflet I found was racist, implying that belief in Allah
was insufficient to save people from hell, and stating that only
Jesus could do this.  Mainstream Christianity would, I hope,
want to disassociate itself from such offensive, obnoxious
scaremongering.

The Sturrock Report

Readers may recall some recent media articles about a group of
scientists who concluded that some UFO sightings were
accompanied by physical evidence [e.g.radar returns or landing
traces] that deserved proper scientific study. The review was
led by Professor Peter Sturrock, Professor of Applied Physics at
Stanford University. The report can be viewed at
www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock  and is well worth a look.

Rendlesham - The Unresolved Mystery

I hope all my regular readers saw my paper on the Rendlesham
Forest case, which was reproduced in last month's column [if
not, check out back issues]. It=92s caused something of a stir,
and has already been widely distributed. One of the places to
pick it up was CNI News, which always contains a wealth of
fascinating UFO stories. It=92s edited by respected US researcher
Michael Lindemann, so check out < www.cninews.com > for a closer
look.

RAF Fylingdales

The September edition of FOCUS, the Ministry of Defence house
journal, featured an interesting article on RAF Fylingdales,
which contained the following bizarre disclaimer: 'RAF
Fylingdales is a Ballistic Missile Early Warning Station - not a
secret UFO spotting establishment'. Hmm.

Bad Moos For The Irn-Bru Cow

My eye was caught by a recent poster campaign promoting the soft drink
Irn-Bru. It showed a photograph of a cow, accompanied by the slogan =93When
I=92m a burger, I want to be washed down by Irn-Bru=94. Interested in the=
 fate
of the cow, I discovered that it wouldn=92t be made into a burger, as this
would be illegal under the BSE rules, which preclude using any cows over the
age of 30 months.  A spokeswoman for Barr Soft Drinks confirmed that the cow
used in the advert is still alive. However, having researched the situation
I=92ve discovered that once it reaches the end of its useful productive=
 life,
it will almost certainly be shot and incinerated. Barr Soft Drinks were not
interested in a suggestion that the farmer be asked to let the cow live at
the farm even after it gets past its useful production age. Boo!

Spontaneous Human Combustion

Can people really burst into flames without any apparent cause?
A recent QED documentary dealt with the subject in a scientific
way, and concluded that there might just be a rational
explanation. The theory is that these deaths might be caused by
people setting themselves on fire with cigarettes or candles,
then perhaps dying of a heart attack before they can extinguish
the blaze. Experiments with a pig=92s carcass showed that
temperatures hot enough to destroy bones can be generated, with
the fat from the body acting as a fuel, so that the body burns
like a candle. These flames were not sufficiently extensive to
spread the fire more widely. This was just one theory, so
doubtless the debate will continue.

NICK POPE

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

Permission to distribute text providing the authors and
publication are credited. Photographs may be copyright and
cannot be used without consent.  =A9 Hot Gossip UK 1998
www.hotgossip.co.uk The above text is taken from "The
Unexplained" section

Georgina Bruni: Editor-chief Hot Gossip UK Magazine. Published
by Camelot International Ltd. E-mail: 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Nancy White <njw@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:27:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:16:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:18:53 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>Hi All,

><snip>

>>She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
>>experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

>>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

>>This is the first I've heard of anything as widespread
>>as what that lady said. I would appreciate any info
>>that any of you can provide.

>>It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
>>are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!

>>Peace,

>>John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Hi John,

>When he was younger, my brother Evan got many, many women
>pregnant (he worked in a private fertility clinic here in
>Toronto) so I forwarded your question to him for his comments
>(see below).

>Evan did not make any comment to my suggestion that because
>certain groups have gone on record as saying that their goal is
>to strive for an ideal population of 500 million (about 5
>billion less than what it is now!) so the environment can be
>protected and resources not be depleted, could they be using
>"alien abductions" as a cover for achieving this goal?

>Evan wrote:

>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:08:30 -0400
>From: Evan Balaskas (evan.balaskas@bloodservices.ca>
>To: nikolaos@YorkU.CA
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Need infor -R U Shooting Blanx?- (fwd) -Reply

><snip>

>As for the infertility question, couples are considered to be
>infertile if they have gone at least 1 year without conceiving a
>child, without the benefit of birth control. There are many
>reasons for this, including not having sex at the right time of
>the cycle (for couples not having much sex). Two other very good
>reasons (which I believe to be the main culprits) are sexually
>transmitted diseases which when left untreated (most are
>undetected until it's too late) cause severe scaring resulting
>in infertility, and multiple abortions and or certain
>contraceptives which cause problems with the female reproductive
>system. Wearing tight underwear and chemical pollution are also
>know culprits. When I worked at the fertility clinic, 1 out of 7
>couples were infertile, so I'm not surprised with your numbers.

>Better get back to work.
>Bye for now,
>Evan

Actually, the earth would be a lot better off if we were not
breeding like rats all over it.  If there are groups out there
who are trying to reduce the population(assuming,of course, we
are not talking about genocide or ethic, religious or racial
reductions based on bigotry)more power to them.  If there is no
stopping of the exponential population grouth, it's not only the
earth and it's innocent, non-human populations that will suffer,
but humanity will also fall victim to the various pestilances
and deprivations that will occur.  Think about cancer and
toxins, etc.

Admittedly, I'm radical, but I believe that a 2000 yr old
redwood has more right to live than for Mr and Ms. Redneck to
have a picnic table... and that goes for tree frogs surviving
instead of off the road vehicles with drunk assholes playing
he-man, etc.

I don't know why any alien would want us, given the manifestly
incompetant way we have behaved---if 'they' want to take custody
of this planet in order to protect it's ecosystem and to control
our breeding, I'll hand them the keys, myself.

Nancy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                               Re: Colleagues

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:34:36 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:24:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Colleagues


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Colleagues


Jim,

Presumably Herr Hesemann doesn't hold your own Ph. D. in very
high regard either, except when it serves his own purposes.

To tout Hesemann as some sort of worldwide, hot shot UFO
investigator -- when he is nothing short of a shameless
self-promoter and exploiter of the subject -- reveals you for
what you are: the single stupidest professor emeritus of
atmospheric physics in the country, if not the entire world.

I'm sorry to have to say that, but anyone who takes Hesemann's
"research" seriously is at least two dollars short of a dollar
bill.

You seem to think that simply because Hesemann went somewhere,
with a commercial camera crew in tow, that his mere physical
presence at the scene somehow validates the entire case (Mexico
City video, Santilli autopsy film, Billy Meier, etc.), when
virtually all those cases have been cast into serious doubt if
not outright dispute.

You've been had, Jim. What's worse, you've had yourself. You're
not going to have this list.

Hesemann is an unmitigated fool. If you support him as the
greatest thing since sliced bread, then you're an unmitigated
fool as well.

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:04:59 -0400
>>From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: Colleagues
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>I was always glad to join this list not only because of its
>>mostly objective atmosphere and the lack of too heavy personal
>>injuries.

>>As an example how it goes in different newsgroups and lists I
>>would like to quote something I found in the Compuserve forum
>>"The Issues" fom Thu, Oct. 15th. The author is a Mr. Hesemann.

>>Begin of quote: "Anyway, I just used the card as an example that
>>a PhD has no more use than a credit card. It impresses naive
>>people but that=B4s it. What really counts is RESULTS. We have a
>>certain number of PhDs in the UFO community, from Rick Boylan to
>>David Jacobs, and, although I highly respect all of them
>>(or better: most of them), I doubt that anyone in the field
>>covers it on such an international range as I do and is able
>>to present the results of so many international field
>>investigations." End of quote.

>>Sincerely

>>Joachim Koch, Berlin

>Hello Joachim,

>That quote from Michael Hesemann shows that he's not a
>particularly modest guy. Like some I've seen on this list.

>But what he said could well be true. He went to South Africa and
>video-taped the testimony of some of the school children who had
>the encounter with the entity and its UFO, thus providing an
>independent account from what John Mack had obtained much
>earlier.

How independent, if he only interviewed the same people Mack had
previsously? All Hesemann did at best was a follow up interview.
And why the "encounter with the entity and its UFO" as opposed
to a stated or alleged encounter?

>He went to Varghina and video-taped a reenactment of the events
>by the three girls who had the encounter with the alien there.


So? And by videotaping a reenactment, I'm assuming that you
agree that the videotape was staged? So by videotaping a staged
reenactment of a case, you somehow thinks this validates it?

>He visited Socorro, NM, when the cameraman's film was a hot
>topic, searching for the site of the alleged May, 1947 UFO
>crash, and visited Santilli concerning the film.

BFD. Any number of people have "visited Santilli concerning the
film" and they've all come away with the same evidence -
nothing. Honest researchers admit it, Hesemann continues to make
money off it. I can't believe you support this kind of crap.

>He went to Mexico City and located 7 more witnesses to the Aug.
>1997 UFO there, different ones than the 20 or so who Jaime
>Maussan & the Elders had located.

BFD again. Internal evidence in the video itself indicates it's
a hoax -- unless you prefer to believe Hesemann himself.

>Of course he's been to England more than once to video-tape the
>crop-circle formations. I haven't kept close track of where all
>he's been, but these spots are some that come to mind.

I've been there twice myself. Odd that I came away with
different conclusions than Hesemann, isn't it? And I'm not
alone.

>Also he visited Jerusalem last summer searching for the tombsite
>of Joseph of Arimathea as best recollected by Meier from 35
>years ago -- the tombsite in which the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel'
>document was discovered, and succeeded in pinning it down to an
>area he later learned contains 1st century tombs. This
>interescts my own major area of inquiry, so I have more to say
>on this in my web site. He visited Meier's place around then
>also and obtained about a dozen sets of statements in support of
>the genuineness of Meier's experiences, including from Meier's
>two sons, now grown up; this nicely augments all the testimony
>that Wendelle Stevens and Gary Kinder obtained years ago.

Yes, and you're one of the translators and/or promoters of the
'Talmud of Jmmanuel', aren't you? And just what does the latter
have to do with UFOs, anyway, although I'm already sorry I asked
because it will just give you another excuse to spout more Meier
nonsense.

>I think ufology needs investigators like him who go out and get
>witnesses' testimony, as well as those who analyze data on film,
>video-tapes, radar returns, etc. I also think he's right not to
>pay too much attention in this field to one's advanced degrees,
>especially if they should get in the way of openminded
>intelligent inquiry.

>Jim Deardorff
>Corvallis, Oregon

The last thing ufology needs is another investigator of
Hesemann's repeatedly demonstrated unambiguously gullible
caliber, of which we have too many already, yourself included.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                       Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:35:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:08:55 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

>>Concerning Bruce Maccabee's calculation that these lights were
>>at a distance of some 70 miles from Phoenix, I queried Bill
>>Hamilton on his findings. By comparing one of the Phoenix videos
>>of the lights with a daytime video shot taken from the same
>>camera and place, he determined that the lights had actually
>>appeared a little below the crest of the background Estrella
>>Mts. This would make them closer than 7 to 9 miles away. His
>>superposition on this is depicted in his web site, whose address
>>I unfortunately failed to save.

>Bill is referring only to his sighting with Tom King at
>Blonder's house. His calculations do not apply to Krzyston, L or
>Rairdon. See

>www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html.

>If I have located Blonder's house correctly, the distance to the
>mountain is 14 miles, not 7, according to the geological survey
>map: about 3 1/2 inches on a map with a scale of 4 miles to the
>inch.

<snip>

Bruce,

Thanks for posting the response and information. I visited that
website with your analysis in it, and got to see the pictures,
but was unable to print out the larger, triangulation map-out,
your Fig. 18; and in your discussion I could not get past about
Table 5 of the Jan. 14th case before my computer or modem
data-transfer bogged down.

Did you somewhere present the time intervals between the
beginning and end position determinations of some of those
lights, so as to be able to estimate an average fall velocity
for them?

   Jim D.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                               Re: Colleagues

From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:23:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:43:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Colleagues


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Colleagues


Re: The travel log of Michael Heseman.

>He went to South Africa.
>He went to Varghina
>He visited Socorro, NM,
>He went to Mexico City
>he's been to England more than once
>he visited Jerusalem last summer
>He visited Meier's place

So I want to know who his banker is! I think Mr. Heseman has
every UFO investigator dream job.

>I also think he's right not to pay too much attention in this
>field to one's advanced degrees.

I agree Jim, I'd rather take the trips. Who cares about the
degrees!

Kathleen Andersen
Just Seattle





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:20:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:38:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

Mark's message was simply too long to address in one siting.
These are my observations on the second part of his message.

>Conclusion

>It is difficult to summarize such a complex and wide-ranging
>debate. However, I will restate my positions in summary:

>1) Ufology lacks the infrastructure which would enable it to
>censor fringe positions. The only answer to the problem is to
>develop that infrastructure.

Go for it.

>2) The unwillingness of science to look at the problem of UFOs
>was initiated by the position of governments and important
>scientists. The residue of their efforts, lack of effort, and
>their clearly stated positions continue to discourage scientific
>interest.

The old my-hands-are-tied-and-I-can't-seem-to-get-up school of
ufological wisdom. Never mind that after 50 years the best
ufologists with the best ufological cases can't even mount a
compelling argument before a scientific review panel hand
picked, selected, chosen, administrated and funded by a pro-UFO
group.

>3) The consequence of this unwillingness has been the
>proliferation of fringe viewpoints among interested amateurs.
>These viewpoints also discourage scientific interest by
>increasing the stigma of association with the subject. However,
>as is clear from (1), there is no mechanism by which responsible
>researchers may censor such viewpoints, or even avoid the
>appearance of guilt by association.

The old
turn-your-back-and-ignore-embarrasing-associates-and-maybe-they-
will-go-away school of ufological wisdom. Ufological definition
of responsible researcher = embarrasing associate that happens
to be in agreement most of the time.

>4) Efforts to examine the subject on a short-term basis by
>inexperienced scientists relying on a small subset of UFO data
>are fraught with problems, and generally lead to tentative or
>negative conclusions, or significant conflicts within the
>examining group.

That is akin to stating that the only scientists qualified to
examine UFO data are long term ufologists.  The above is part of
the
ufology-requires-special-dispensation-from-rigorous-and-critical
-analysis-because-it-is-special school of ufological wisdom.

>5) The MHH as a hypothesis has had negative results. These
>results cannot be defended on the basis that MHH requires
>proving a negative, since taking up the MHH requires taking up
>its burden of proof.

Best you learn first what constitutes an hypothesis. If you
can't falsify it, you don't have an hypothesis in the first
place. And the MHH is not falsifiable. Of course, I could be
wrong. I don't have a Ph.D. after my name like so many of Jerome
Clark's associates like Swords, Rodeghier, Maccabee, and some
other long term ufologists that happen to be on this mailing
list.  Why don't just one of you show how the MHH can be
falsified? Please!

>Moreover, the pattern of failure of MHH
>indicates that the residual cases cannot be explained by the MHH
>even were more data available on those cases, since those cases
>already tend to be those with the most data.

Which means that what follows above is an irrelevant conclusion.

>6) Epistemological attempts to discount UFO data are
>contradicted by the studies which show consistency in the
>accounts and their patterns on geometric, behavioral, and other
>grounds. Studies which indicate statistically different
>universes for knowns and unknowns have been made and so far no
>contradicting studies seem to exist.

So what? An unknown will always be an unknown. No one can make
more out of it than what is is. One cannot say we have here in
this bag 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000 unknowns therefore UFOs are ET
space cruisers.

>Finally, I can only say that we have a long way to go, but there
>are people in this field and on this list who have the potential
>to do the organizational, quantitative, and qualitative work
>required to attain the desired end - a scientific understanding
>of the cause of UFO reports.

Maybe the first thing to do is to read up more on what the
process of science is all about.

>We can have debates on the best way to accomplish this end. but
>in debating we must focus on the facts, philosophies, and
>methods which will allow us to accomplish it - not personality,
>not spelling or grammar, and, most of all, not our own
>frustration and anger.

I am afraid that when you suggested to remove Roswell on the
first part of your message and downplay abductions, you lost
most of your sympathetic audience --- even though I agree.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:40:23 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:31:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:48:13 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:28:33 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>In responding to my comments on this thread, Ed snips the most
>important part of my argument - that "ufology" lacks the
>infrastructure to do what he insists is important - "clean up
>its act".

I was in agreement and had no comments to make.  So what?

>So I will say it again -

<snip>

>The corollary is therefore, if Ed or anyone else is truly
>interested in both attaining progress in the development of
>ufology and in "cleaning up its act", they, who are the better
>part of ufology, must dedicate themselves to the development of
>this infrastructure, and to ensuring that the fringe is left out
>of that process.

Unfortunately, it is not being done. Everyone seems to claim
that its the other guy that is part of the so-caled 'fringe'.

>Some of this is underway. The Fund For UFO Research is an
>example of a responsible funding source for our community, and
>their publications are high quality.

Example: Thousands of dollars to Stanton Friedman for him to
write a report on the reality of MJ-12.

>There are some good and serious books - Jerry Clark's reference
>work, Paul Hill's book, and the reissue of The UFO Evidence
>among them.

Conservatively, I can list at least 50 good and serious books,
but Jerry Clark's encyclopedias are not among them.

>There are also problem areas. The Journal of Scientific
>Exploration publishes some excellent UFO related papers, but
>they are mixed in with papers on crop circles and cold fusion,
>and other areas unrelated to UFOs, reinforcing public perception
>that these are actually related, and reinforcing scientific
>opinion that the relationship lies in their fringe nature.

JSE is not a UFO journal but a peer-reviewed journal where they
can explore topics in a diversity of topics not easily
publishable in the regular peer-reviewed science journals. The
question of how reliable the peer review process within JSE
comes to my mind when I saw and read in its publication Robert
M. Wood's initial review of "Top Secret/Majic, by Stanton T.
Friedman", Vol 11, Number 1, Spring, 1997. My anxiety was
somewhat relieved by the next issue that brought letters of
concern to the editor from Vallee and Randle with the
accompanying responses by Wood and Friedman.  Unfortunately,
that is as far as the process allowed the matter to be discussed
and in a tougher peer-review environment, a positive book review
may not even seen publication. Bottom line is that peer-review
is not an iron clad feature for reliability.

>The MUFON conferences often feature excellent papers - but they also
>allow speakers with wide ranging conspiracy theories, fringe
>claimants, and topics of a fringe nature. Local MUFON groups
>often have such wide-ranging membership, including fringe
>theorists and claimants, that it is difficult or impossible to
>use such groups as a focus for recruiting local scientific
>resources.

Then why do you support MUFON or CUFOS or even FUFOR?  They are
all guilty of the above? Why don't the top leadership of those
organizations clean house? Maybe because they would loose the
support of dues payers and contributors? No? And they rely on a
wider base of support in order to survive.  Maybe opinion polls
dictate their positional arguments, and  the results of alleged
research.

>In bookstores, one finds UFO materials next to books
>on astrology and witchcraft (lumped into so-called "metaphysical
>studies"), which probably keeps all but the hard-core from ever
>approaching them.

Books are marketed to sell. They are merchandised to sell where
they sell best.

>And, of course, the vast majority of UFO
>books, which are hardly worth the paper on which they are
>printed, and which are filled with pseudoscientific and mystical
>material that hardly even rises to the level of speculation.

Someone will always be there to meet the demand of the gullible
public. You know who they are.

>Now perhaps Ed will place these comments in the category of
>whining about unfair treatment. Frankly, I don't think problems
>can be addressed without recognizing what they are. But that's
>only half the story. The other half is - "what do you want to do
>about it?"

Recognize the problem before anything else and assume the
responsibility needs to exist within ufology to ever correct the
problems facing it.

>Let's look at the problem realistically. What do we have a hope
>of changing and how?

>1) Doing our own work - we need to make sure that we are doing,
>on an individual basis, good and serious work, and that we are
>making that available to the public, through journals, web
>publications, books, and conferences. We need to extract every
>piece of quantitative data from existing sightings and patterns
>and publish it. We need to drop Roswell, MJ-12, government
>conspiracies, crop circles, psychic research, black helicopters,
>etc. We need to de-emphasize abductions and emphasize RV,
>CE-1/2/3 cases, especially CE2s.

You are apparently a demon waiting to be knighted. Every
advocate of the above will now see you for what you really are,
a debunker in disguise. <grin>

>2) Debating whether or not we should continue to participate in
>"contaminated" venues. There are good arguments to be made
>pro-and-con as to whether serious workers should publish in
>journals and conferences that include fringe subjects or papers
>by fringe claimants and advocates, and whether we should support
>by membership and by attendance, organizations which allow
>themselves to be contaminated in this way.

I am no longer contributing towards CUFOS, MUFON or FUFOR.  I
don't see any of them as being part of the solution.

>3) Development and support of non-contaminated venues. There is
>no question that we need serious conferences and journals and
>serious local organizations which exclude the fringes. We need
>to be discussing ways to create these and make them available to
>serious researchers and both public and media.

Demand is against you. People  want sensationalism in their
lifes, not dry serious pursuits. They much prefer to have smoke
blown up their asses as long as it keeps reinforcing their
beliefs. There are people in ufology that have a full
appreciation for where the market is and will direct their
energies and resources in maintaining the popularity of that
market. They know where the money is.

>...So, enough said for the moment on this subject. I hope Ed
and >others will take these topics seriously and engage in
useful >discussions on them. Otherwise we are fated to simply
stand >paralyzed by the voices of doom while chances slip past
us.

You forget the most basics.

Establishing a solid foundation of good science. Understanding
that science is a process, slow and painfull but will yield
useful results in the long run, not a process for the impatient.

Anyone can do good science if they take the time to understand
and participate in the process.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:28:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:47:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:42 PDT

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]

>>>Was the elevation angle of the lights as viewed on the tapes, or
>>>in the video tape taken in the Phoenix area, as large as 10
>>>degrees? If so, the lights were at an elevation of 65,000 feet
>>>or more.

>>>What do you think the military had in mind dropping flares at
>>>that great an altitude? At that height the air density is over
>>>10 times smaller than at ground level, and flares suspended by
>>>parachute would fall that much faster.

>>>Jim Deardorff

>>Hi Jim,

>>First of all, if indeed flares were released at that altitude,
>>they weren't released by anything from the nearby base. To my
>>knowledge, none of the aircraft stationed there are capable of
>>flying at that altitude. FL650 is way up there.

<<<snip>>>

>>In other words, can we determine how fast the plane would have
>>to be moving at that distance from the camera for flares to be
>>released in the manner shown in the videos? This information
>>might be pertinent for ruling out types of aircraft at the very
>>least.

>>Greg

>Greg, Bruce & List,

>Surely the 'natural' distribution of the dropped flares would
>also show variances in height.

>They would also, therefore, show more notable pattern changes
>during their descent.

>Where are the dead flares recovered by the curious who surely
>would have been aware of the issue?

>Regards,
>Leanne.


hmmm...  Look, myriad thoughts using children playing at a make
believe tea party as an analogy to the wild eyed postulates
still spouted about the late night lights over Phoenix swirl
about my mind. But with 60 updates to read tonight, there is no
time...

Baseless speculation from shallow knowledge to compose wildly
creative conjecture is little more than a form of public self
stimulation.  I say this not to be insulting but to give some
stinging support to bring our discourse around to more
constructive efforts.  After all, perhaps this big blue marble
coated with six billion toiling humans floats in an endless
universe that is in reality nothing more than a spec of
glittering dust just cast off of the toe bell of the Blue Queen
as she prances across her courtyard fretting over the next
maddening inconvenience from the Red Queen...  Well, just
perhaps.

On their own, the late night videos of the Phoenix lights were
perfectly congruent with the dropping of flares...  The only
unknown at the time was the location of the lights.  And we all
guessed wrong. Now that one of the more trusted writers here has
taken time to analyze the vids and placed the lights just where
the flares should be, as have other experts, lets just call them
flares.  It doesn't diminish my life for that to be true.

But then again, in the unexpected rustle of a sudden breeze, I
swear I can almost hear the ethereal rumbling of an old woman
crying out, "Off with her head..."

Bye...  Ted..






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                   Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:06:18 -0400
Subject: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed


Dear Colleagues,

I am looking for any, Kent Ufo research group, particulary in the
Gravesend area for the following reason.

Do you have any witness information,to an event which took place on
the evening of 17th July 1998 in the Gravesend area?

If any Gravesend / Kent researcher can contact me ASAP, this would be
most apreciated.Please contact me on the above address.

Thanks






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Victoria Alexander on #Visitations

From: Angela Shilling <ashill@dswebnet.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:08:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:03:39 -0400
Subject: Victoria Alexander on #Visitations


Victoria Alexander  Abductions Researcher

Will be available to answer your questions on #Visitations

Saturday, October 24th
7pm Pacific / 9pm Central / 10pm Eastern / 3am GMT

Where: #Visitations on the Undernet

How to Get to IRC: http://www.visitations.com/irc/

_________________________________________

BIO:

Victoria Alexander is an Abduction Researcher. She is the wife of
John Alexander.

Articles about and by Victoria Alexander:
        http://www.visitations.com/victoria.htm


>From Brother Blue John Alexander Page
http://www.brotherblue.org/brethren/penguin.htm

John Alexander, Ph.D. in Death Sciences; Col. U.S. Army
Intelligence and Security Command, which is undoubtedly the
military cover for the National Security Agency, Col. Alexander is
director of the Non-Lethal Weapons Department, Los Alamos
National Laboratory, and has been reportedly involved in
counter-intelligence remote viewing, psychic warfare,
psychotronic and mind-control projects with military/security
applications.

UFO Mind Page on John Alexander
http://www.ufomind.com/people/a/alexander/

_________________________________________






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                Re: Laura Lee Show E-News - October 24, 1998

From: The Laura Lee Show <webmaster@lauralee.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:50:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:01:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Laura Lee Show E-News - October 24, 1998


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is your WEEKLY E-NEWS from THE LAURA LEE SHOW and
www.lauralee.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laura Lee E-News is sent by subscription only. If you wish to
unsubscribe go to:

http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello. Hope you had a great week! Thanks for subscribing to
Laura Lee E-News.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GUEST/TOPIC LINE UP for Saturday, October 24, 1998
By Laura Lee

Mary Jane Ryan and Flor Fernandez

Mary Jane Ryan, editor of "The Fabric of the Future: Women
Visionaries Illuminate the path to Tomorrow"  and Flor
Fernandez, a Seattle based psychotherapist, engage in a dialogue
on our future.

Dr. Jeffrey Mishlove

Dr. Jeffrey Mishlove, recipient if the only doctoral diploma in
"Parapsychology" from an accredited, American university, will
present  the results of a decade-long investigation into the
phenomena produced by Ted Owens - a man who purported to be
half-human and half-alien.

According to Mishlove, "the phenomena that I witnessed and
documented were so uncanny, bizarre and unbelievable that I have
not felt comfortable going public with this data until now."

In Order to support his claim that he was in telepathic contact
with "space intelligences" from another dimension, Ted Owens
produced many demonstrations of unusual powers.

Among the phenomena documented by Mishlove include the
prediction of a UFO appearance, seen by hundreds of witnesses,
directly over the campus of Sonoma State University.

Other documented phenomena include apparent control of
hurricanes, lightening strikes, power blackouts, droughts, freak
weather conditions, as well as interference with aviation,
radar, and space flights.

Mishlove reports that Owens made specific, written predictions
of these events in letters to himself and other scientists.

The actual events were generally then documented through
newspaper clippings and witness testimonials.

Mishlove's investigation showed that Owens' remarkable claims to
be able to produce extremely unusual phenomena were confirmed
over fifty percent of the time.  In addition, Owens also
exhibited the ability to train others.

More info at http://www.lauralee.com/mishlove.htm

John Hogue
John Hogue, author of "The Last Pope: The Prophecies of St.
Malacy for the New Millennium" reveals the prophecies of St.
Malacy, a 12th century sage, left in 111 Latin mottoes and
doomsday coda that tell the story of the grand succession of
popes unto Judgement Day. According to St. Malacy, only two
Popes remain. Church authorities reject these prophecies as
fraudulent, but Hogue says the mottoes remain accurate, with a
99% accuracy rate. More info at:

http://www.lauralee.com/hogue.htm

THIS WEEK'S POLL:
Do you believe that it is possible, such as Ted Owens claims, to
be in telepathic contact with space intelligences from another
dimension.

TO VOTE go to: http://www.lauralee.com/poll.cfm

After voting give us your feedback on the Laura Lee Bulletin Board:
http://www.lauralee.com/bulletin.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ALSO: Friday Night, October 23, 1998
Join us on LAURA LEE ON-LINE (Internet show only) for the following topics:

Phyllis Curott,"Book of Shadows"
Phyllis Curott is both a corporate lawyer and a Wicaan High Priestess.
She serves as the President Emerita of the oldest and largest international
religious organization in the Wiccan tradition.

Marilyn Childs
The NW Regional Director of MUFON, Marilyn will share her
accounts of ancient astronauts and the upcoming conference of
the Ancient Astronaut Society, that convenes every two years.

David Chace
Portraits of aliens from eyewitness reports.

To join us and FOR INFORMATION on the internet only show Laura Lee Online:
go to http://www.lauralee.com/talkspot.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS FOLLOW.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE LAURA LEE SHOW WEBSITE:
http://www.lauralee.com/index.cfm

REAL AUDIO ARCHIVES:
Posted in full by Sunday Noon Pacific for the previous nights show. Now
formatted in REAL AUDIO. The Audio Archives will remain
on our website indefinitely. http://www.lauralee.com/archives.htm

AUDIO CASSETTES:
Should you need an audio tape of same to send to a friend, or to listen to
when you are not at your computer, call 1-800-243-1438. Tapes are edited of
commercial and news breaks, are often on 90 minute cassettes, and only $7
each. More info at:  http://www.lauralee.com/cassette.htm

LIVE WEBCAST:
If you cannot get radio reception, try the webcast during live show hours.
To join the webcast, click the AUDIO button on our homepage,
and follow directions from there.
Or go direct:  http://www.lauralee.com/aud_live.htm

BULLETIN BOARD SECTION for YOUR REACTION TO GUESTS:
We named it "And the Conversation Continues"
This new feature is a bulletin board segmented by date, then guest,
to gather your musings and reactions to the various guest and their research.
Offer as well as read the musings of others, including Laura Lee.
http://www.lauralee.com/bulletin.htm

LIVE  RADIO SHOW HOURS:
Saturday  7 PM to Sunday 2 AM Pacific
Saturday  8 PM to Sunday 3 AM Mountain
Saturday  9 PM to Sunday 4 AM Central
Saturday 10 PM to Sunday 5 AM Eastern

RADIO STATION LIST:
For a complete list of stations carrying the Laura Lee Show,
click on the TIMES & STATIONS button. Please note that not every station
takes all of our show hours. And if your local station does not, you can
always direct an email message or postcard to the Program Director, requesting
that he/she add the missing hours of our show to their lineup.
That simple gesture can work wonders!
http://www.lauralee.com/stations.htm

WEEKLY BOOK GIVEAWAY:
Books, videos and audio tapes are given away from a random drawing of entries.
To enter, go to:  http://www.lauralee.com/contest.htm

SEE SOME INTERESTING PHOTOS
Weve got "must-see" photos of Chinas pyramids, and Japans
underwater stone mysteries. View photos at: http://www.lauralee.com/mystery.htm
And a few personal photos of Paul, Laura Lee, and dog Chance at:
http://www.lauralee.com/photoalb.htm

LAST MINUTE CHANGES OFTEN OCCUR:
The list above of posted guests/topics represent what is scheduled when
this is sent. Last minute and often unavoidable changes can occur. When
a scheduled guest  is unable to join us, well include a rescheduled
time/date in the next email message to you. We apologize for any inconvenience.

TO SUBSCRIBE:
 If you wish receive these weekly updates, and you are not already on our list
(perhaps someone kindly forwarded this message to you) simply
return this message with "subscribe" as the subject, and we
will add you to our email list.  Or go direct to
http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm

TO UNSUBSCRIBE:
If you receive this message without subscribing, it means that someone
else has entered you for subscription. If you wish discontinue receiving these
updates, simply return this message with "unsubscribe" as the subject, and we
will take you off our email list.  Or go direct to
http://www.lauralee.com/cfdocs/laura/mailinglist/enduse.cfm

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT
We appreciate it! Please tell your friends and colleagues around the world
about our website, the radio show, and our audio archives to which they can
listen at any 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:37:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:14:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 22:18:31 PDT

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:22:30 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Most of the Sturrock report is actually written by Sturrock and
>>his team, and not by the Scientific Review Panel. The Scientific
>>Review Panel consisted of the following people:

>>      V.R. Eshleman, T.E. Holzer, J.R. Jokippi, F. Louangee,
>>      H.J. Melosh, J.J. Papike, G. Reits, C.A. Tolbert, and
>>      B. Veyret

>>and are credited for writing the section entitled "Summary
>>Report of the Scientific Review Panel" located online at:

>>      http://www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock/3.html

>>Read their credited report and compare it to the Stanford press
>>release. Can anyone seriously suggest that they are saying the
>>same thing?

>Interesting that none of these panel members have come forward
>to protest what Stewart and Klass want us to believe was the
>utter distorting of their conclusions. Maybe these guys need
>Stewart and Klass to tell them what they think.

Your intellectual dishonesty never seizes to amaze me.  If you
had the intellectual honesty and capacity to address this
discussion properly and in context, you would not keep in denial
from the fact that I have introduced the comments of H.J. Melosh
made on the BBC which supports my arguments. That archived
message and available to readers is:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/oct/m15-013.shtml

The original source can be found in the Oct. 5th archives to
this mailing list by Jimmy Marinkovicc "BBC: A Question of
Science".

Since you seem to be computer impaired below is the relevant
comments from my previous posting up above:

----
Not only that, but there is already one voice of dissent on the
public record from the participating group of scientists in the
panel, Dr. H.J. Melosh, a meteorologist who was interviewed for
BBC. Dr. Melosh is reputed to have said that the panel wasn't
independent because they had connections with the UFO community
and it was allegedly clear to him that the panel was not clean.
Dr. Melosh went on allegedly to say that the so-called evidence
was not convincing and it was un-scientific with no hard
evidence available. He went on to say that he for one was not
going to spent any more time on the subject of UFOs.
----

Also, pay close attention to James Easton's interview of
scientific review panel member F. Louangee in a separate post.
That is the real world, not your lame ufological wisdom and
falacious appeals to the gallery.

>>Since Jerome Clark has been unable to provide supporting quotes
>>from what he alleges the report to say, I have included not only
>>the online links to the Sturrock report and the Scientific
>>Review Panel summary, but also the much favored Stanford press
>>release. The difference between them is indeed bizarre.

>I urge everybody to read the report in its entirety and judge
>for himself or herself which of us has read it correctly.

Don't worry.  Readers are doing just that by the email I am
receiving.

>If you don't respect intellectual dishonesty and intellectual
>bullyism, obviously you have no respect for yourself. Sad
>indeed. Perhaps that explains the sources of your rage.

You are truly amazing. I pity you.

>Which reminds me, O Mean-Spirited One: When exactly are you
>going to step evading my challenge to you to cite reviews that
>trash me for all the intellectual and personal crimes you claim
>(or pretend) to see in my UFO Encyclopedia? You can run, dude,
>but you can't hide on this one.

This dude is not going anywhere.  Your intellectual dishonesty
is recorded right here on this continuing thread much to the
chagrin of the ufological gullible that has held you in high
steem up to now.  You keep making a fool out of yourself and
showing everyone how lame Jerome Clark actually is. Book reviews
are not relevant to the intellectual dishonesty you have
displayed online.  I am sure the book you 'disowned' also had
favorable book reviews. After all, George Eberhart flagged it as
a must read book himself in his bibliographical masterpiece. You
now want everybody to ignore those book reviews.

You have more on your hands right now than your lame ufological
wisdom can handle. Two members, that I am aware, of the
scientific review panel, Melosh and Louangee, are on record that
does not support your intellectual dishonest spin of the
Sturrock panel. And they certainly didn't need me to tell them.
Be careful of what you wish for. More to
follow.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                 Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:16:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:26:46 -0400
Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -


>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:07:23 -0400
>Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:14:40 -0400
>Subject: Re: -[For The Record]- 'Cleveland Video' -

Previously, I proclaimed:

>>1) FOX is a UHF and not a VHF network.

Steven wisely informed us (me):

>Not correct, but generally true.

(Do I get points for being only half wrong?)

>There is no such thing as a UHF
>or VHF network. Channel 5 in Washington, DC is the FOX
>affiliate, being a former Dumont (How many remember the Dumont
>Television Network?) and later an independant television
>station. Of course, the concept of an over the air "network" is
>becoming meaningless with the proliferation of cable channels
>that are available to anyone who has access (and with DSS that
>includes just about everyone).

Further, I insisted:

>>2) Regarding the number of FCC call letters; down here in
>>Houston, the local FOX station goes by KRIV, NBC goes by KPRC,
>>ABC goes by KTRK, CBS is KHOU, etc, etc, etc. Obviously the
>>above information regarding FCC call signs is incorrect. Ms.
>>Yanak may have been thinking of network call signs as opposed to
>>affiliates.

Steven returns with a well placed shot:

>The Communications Act of 1932 set up the framework we live by
>today in broadcasting. Call signs used in the US all begin with
>a "W" or a "K", with most stations east of the Mississippi using
>"W" and those on the other side using "K". KDKA in Pittsburg is
>one of the major exceptions. Three letter call signs were given
>out until it became clear that four would be needed for the
>number of stations that would eventually go on the air, so they
>soon began assigning four letter call signs.

Finally, I got something right:

>>3) The "number" such as channel "2" may have been the local
>>cable listing and not the "RF" placement on the tuner. For
>>instance, NBC's Houston affiliate, KPRC, is actually called
>>Channel 2 on the TV dial. However, it comes in on channel 12 via
>>Warner Cable. We have several different cable companies across
>>the city and different stations come in on a variety of odd
>>channels via the cable box.

Mr. Kaeser was kind in his treatment of me:

>Very true. There is a lot of confusion, which is why most people
>use the network (or cable channel) name to establish its
>identity.

Smugly, I had warned:

>>Ms. Yanak should take her own advice:
>>
>>"Be more carefull and PERSONALLY check your info next time."

Steve, full of sage, put everything in perspective when he wrote:

>Good advice for all of us.

What can I say? I've been busted! This all the more embarrassing
since my father worked as a video engineer for NBC's number two
affiliate (KPRC) for 45 years! I got lazy and didn't do all my
homework when the answers were a phone call away.

I walk in shame...

Thanks Steve.

Roger Evans,
(licking his wounds in Houston)

P.S. Actually, I do remember the Dumont network. I think "The
Honeymooners" started out there. They also had some funky video
cameras with a design slightly different than others of the 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 02:18:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:41:47 -0400
Subject: Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?
>Date: 22 October 1998 20:53

>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO MAG Nazi Nonsense?
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 05:42:15 +0100

>'UFO Magazine' (UK) New Nazi-Et Lie - A Lesson In GCSE History!

>Yes, the new 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is on the stands (hidden at the
>back where sensible people will be able to avoid it).

>One article - UFO crash at Czernia - is a hilarious brand of
>Nazi pseudo history, factual inaccuracy and a desperate attempt
>to shore up the 'ET recovered' technology myth. Graham Birdsall
>seems to have completely lost his sense of objectivity This kind
>of thing serves only those who wish to distort the truth about
>flying disc technologies. All I can say is that I hope the
>spooks pay well for such marvellous disinformation..

>The story has it that a UFO 'crashed' in Poland on land owned by
>Eva Braun's parents no less...

>............in 1937.

>So far so bad but what else?

>It was recovered - not by the Polish cavalry, at this stage
>still on horseback, but by a detachment of Waffen SS troops!

>18 months before Gleiwitz and the subsequent invasion of Poland
>by Hitler's troops! Oh dear oh dear!

>Oh dear indeed, a course in GCSE history might be in order for
>the masters of Quest MegaTowers newly situated in the leafy
>suburbs of Ilkley, West Yorkshire, where one of the biggest UFO
>hoaxes of the 1980s was born - the 'Ilkley Entity' otherwise
>known and understood to be a plastic dummy placed on a hillside
>and photographed for posterity.

>Now I wonder who passed the photograph on to researchers in the
>North West?

>Anyway back in Poland the 'recovered UFO' taken by (non-existent
>SS troops) was no doubt back engineered and converted by means
>unknown into a flying disc. All this in three years and Rudolph
>Schriever must have lied when he claimed to have adapted his
>VTOL disc idea from those of William Horton Zimmerman in the
>USA. Even more unusually, he employed jet engines which,
>although in their infancy were no match for alien hardware no
>doubt deciphered by a latter-day Jarod via telepathy.

>ET and Hitler link up?
>
>Only in your wildest dreams people.

>The author of this terrible article - a disgrace to Ufology in
>fact - then finishes off the piece with a load of old (very old
>and very sad) crap about "Vril", "Haunebu" discs etc. etc.

>As I pointed out the "V" designation relates to "Versuchs" - the
>German word for experimental.

>You might remember that some time ago I predicted the new
>Nazi-ET lie; and here it is - sadly lacking in reality or
>evidence.....

>This Nazi/occult stuff is the fall back position for those
>unhappy and/or unconvinced by the ever-so-shaky Roswell case. It
>is desperate stuff totally lacking in _any_ evidence and
>entirely without a factual basis. But idiots will believe it and
>idiots will buy it. Sales of Peter Moons' ridiculous 'Black Sun'
>Nazi/occult/Mountauk right-wing propaganda may even be
>encouraged as a result.

>This nonsense will not deter us from seeking both truth and
>reality.

>Tim Matthews.

Hi again,

I note an even bigger mistake in the 'Czernia' article featured
in UFO Magazine (UK).

The Waffen SS was not even formed until 2nd March 1940. So what
was it doing in Poland three years before? Time travel?

A quick check on the Internet was all it took to find this





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 02:09:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:16:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 10:07:02 PDT

>I like Barry Greenwood, who's a gentleman and a friend. But his
>powers of analysis have failed him here, as he highlights the
>central problem of the Sagan approach, which would not even be
>thought of (or, if thought of, laughed out of court) if applied
>to any other scientific question, namely:

>With practically no scientific work conducted to answer the
>question one way or another, Sagan uses the absence of "proof"
>(whatever that is) of ET visitation - something that could be
>found, if it is there, only at the end of a serious, well-funded
>investigation - as a reason not to conduct scientific research
>on UFOs. Incredible.
>
>Imagine a scientist in the early days of the AIDS epidemic
>confronting people who come to him with strains of a deadly
>illness which does not, to surface appearance, look like any
>known illness. Some victims and observers insist that a new and
>dangerous disease has appeared on the scene. The medical
>scientist sneers; there's no "proof" of that, he says, so why
>bother to investigate?

I thought it would be interesting to share some comments I've
been collecting, which relate to this "prove it and we'll
investigate what can't be proven without investigation"
attitude. It isn't an anomaly restricted to the relationship of
scientists to UFOs alone, but also occurs in "conventional"
fields. These also relate to the idea of whether the nature of
ufology is such that it operates differently from the way
science operates, whether it is appropriate to depend on the
structure of evidence from other fields, and why ufology should
not expect a cordial response from mainstream science no matter
how compelling its evidence.

(All quotes are from 'The Arrow of Time' ISBN 0-449-90630-2,
Peter Coveney and Roger Highfield; this is a serious
non-technical book on the role of time in physics and other
sciences)

To frame the discussion, this quote from Boltzmann:

"The most ordinary things are to philosophy a source of
insoluble puzzles... With infinite ingenuity, it constructs a
concept of space or time and then finds it absolutely impossible
that there are objects in this space or that processes occur
during this time... To call this logic seems to me as if
somebody for the purpose of a mountain hike were to put on a
garment with so many long folds that his feet became constantly
entangled in them and he would fall as soon as he took his first
steps..."

"Lorentz curious tranformation was overlooked as being of
marginal interest until the advent of Einstein's special theory
of relativity in 1905..."[p66]

"Ernst Mach and the German chemist Wilhelm Ostwald maintained
that there could be no meaning in statements concerning a
putative atomic theory, since we have no means of directly
verifying the existence of atoms and molecules..." [p67]

"Unfortunately, just as literary critics squabble over the
interpretation of the Shakespeare's plays, so scientists
fiercely dispute the meaning of the Second Law... The subject
highlights the absurdity of popular ideas about scientists
forming a po-faced coterie of like-thinking men in white coats.
In fact, differences of opinion between scientists are so strong
that they often surface as personal sniping and stormy rows. The
American philosopher David Hull has recently pointed out that
physicists can readily compile a list of 20 or more formulations
of the Second Law. The appearance of consensus that so impresses
outsiders, wrote Hull, is largely due to each scientist's
insistance that his own view is correct." [p 148]

"It was... Alan Turing... who was the first to envisage [the]
possibility [that autocatalytic reactions have all the
ingredients necessary for self-organization]... in 1952...For
the next fifteen to twenty years, Turing's work went largely
unnoticed by chemists and biologists... [partially because] no
one knew of a chemical reaction for which any aspects of his
theory would work... two key developments ... have led to an
explosion of interest in the subject [since the
1970s]."[p190-191]

"Unfortunately for Belousov, the [chemical] reaction was so
peculiar that he had great trouble in convincing the scientific
establishment of its veracity. In 1951 a manuscript of his work
was rejected. The editor told him that his 'supposedly
discovered discovery' was quite impossible. Belousov submitted a
more comprehensive analysis 6 years later but the editor would
only offer to publish a savagely cut version in the form of a
brief communication. Belousov's work eventually appeared as an
obscure contribution in the proceedings of a symposium on
radiation medicine... The scientific establishment was so
besotted with the simplistic interpretation of the Second Law...
that no one was prepared to accept Belousov's reports of the
spontaneous emergence of self-organizing features in a chemical
system."[p198]

"Chemical chaos was first proposed by Ruelle as long ago as
1973... Ruelle recounts why deterministic chaos was anathema to
classical science. Traditionally, a scientist looks for patterns
and regularities in data because there is a good chance of
making sense of them. In 1971, Ruelle asked a chemist who
specialized in oscillating reactions if they were ever found to
have a chaotic time dependence. 'He answered that if an
experimentalist obtained a chaotic record in the study of a
chemical reaction, he would throw away the record, saying that
the experiment was unsuccessful.' Things fortunately have
changed, and we now have several examples of non-periodic
chemical reactions."[p 208]

"Darwin became the butt of cruel characactures by cartoonists
for his 'monkey theory' enduring severe criticism from
scientists and savage attacks from the religious
establishment....The theory was more a hypothesis than a hard
and fast description of the way the world is: there were no
conclusive proofs which could be adduced in its favor. Its
strength lay in the claim that it fitted the facts better than
any other theories." [p 252]

"According to Zeeman, there are no grand  theories of biology as
there are in physics: 'The grand general theories of physics are
useless in biology, save that gravity might affect embryo
development or something like that. You want to bring a large
chunk of machinery which does not really lead to predictions of
interest to biologists...'"[p 253]

"A common reaction to the problem of the interpretation of
quantum mechanics is that of the physicist who says that QM
works and that is all that matters. The question of the meaning
of QM is not one that physicists should worry about. However,
this is not an attitude we are happy to adopt elsewhere... The
whole scientific enterprise is based upon the rejection of the
view that if it 'works' then that is good enough..." [p263]

These comments speak for themselves. We can see the denial of
theory, the denial of evidence, work later shown to be important
being suppressed, and the contentious nature of science.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 06:24:31 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:51:54 -0400
Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment


>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:36:16 -0500
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: TNT KGB Files Show - The Pilots' Segment

>Hi Bob, Errol and list,

>I have been reviewing that segment again. Has anyone noticed
>that perhaps three objects are seen the first 50 or so
>frames(*);

>1 - At 12 frames, an object is above and to the left of the F16

>2 - At frame 30 you can see the an object ahead and to the left
>of the F16 then disappearing behind the clouds. At frame 37 the
>object in question moves out of the clouds then back in.

>3 - At frame 46 another object appears ahead and below on the
>left side of the F16.

>I just wonder if anyone has really looked at this footage? Is it
>film? No one in the show (KGB Files...) seemed to know that
>those objects were there. It wasn't spoken about in the show.

>* - Not sure but a frame on video 1/32 of a second? I think it
>is.

>[Nope - 30 fps - 60 cycles actually allows each frame to consist
> of _two_ frames interlaced on alternate scan-lines..... uh,
> I think I'll just leave it at that..... bag o' dirt time at
> Errol's - damn fall-type flu..... --ebk]

>Casual observer,
>DonnieS

>PS I don't want a crusade on this. My point is that when someone
>researches, UFOs, Newspaper and footage to make a tv show, they
>gather what marterial they can to make a point. I wouldn't want
>to rule out that the researchers for KGB Files..... may have
>gathered good and bad footage for the show. Not knowing what
>they have.

>Good day.

Good point, Donnie, and I am not disputing it.

But until these producers are more forthcoming we don't really
know just what they have or where they got it.  The program is
very lacking in any sort of details about anything.

To me that footage is the most interesting part of the show, and
if anything in the show is real this is the most likely bit.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:29:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:49:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:18:28 -0400
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>Hi All,

>>A doctor in New York (a fertility expert) was busted
>>for filing false insurance claims so that his clients
>>could be artificially inseminated and get 'coverage'
>>for it. That's not why I'm writing though.

>>The reporter also interviewed a representative of
>>the Health insurance outfit that was being bilked.
>>The woman made a comment that shocked me and
>>left me numb.

>>She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
>>experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

>>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>>implications are  frightening/staggering. One out
>>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

>>This is the first I've heard of anything as widespread
>>as what that lady said. I would appreciate any info
>>that any of you can provide.

>>It'd go a long way towards explaining why aliens
>>are harvesting so much sperm and ova though!

>>Peace,

>>John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>John,

>Sadly John this is not new, news.  One of the earliest writers
>to bring this information to the public attention of the UFO
>community was Val Germann, many years ago (1992).  Raymond
>Fowler acknowledges Germann as the source of this information
>and extensively quotes from the reports that Germann had
>prepared in the "Andreason Legacy" pages 410-414 by Raymond
>Fowler, 1997 Marlowe & Company, New York, $24.95.

(snip)

>Gary

Hi Gary,

I just wanted to thank Gary and _all_ who responded to my
request for info. It is disturbing to think that 6 out of 10 (or
7 out of 10 couples as one of the respondants reported,) are
experiencing fertility problems. I also don't understand why
this isn't a _major_ issue!

If this widespread infertility is real, and I have no reason
to doubt the feedback I have gotten, then the little Grey
bastards may in fact be doing us all a favor by rat holing
gallons of human sperm and ova. All of a sudden that aspect
of the abduction scenario starts to make (real world) sense!

It's time to take a serious inventory and reorganize our
priorities. The world that our grandchildren will inherit is
_our_ responsibility. If we don't stop poisoning the environment
and ourselves, our children and our childrens' children will pay
the awful price for our ignorance, self indulgence, and
laziness. Not fair to them, and it's not fair to us either.
People are sleeping man. Crying shame. No one knows, no one
cares.

Amerika 1998 - Rome burns while 'Nero' (you and me) just sit
around and play with our limp fiddles!

Thanx again guys,

Peace,

John Velez,  Sperm donor to the stars!

________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                            Re: Art Bell is Back

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:33:46 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:13:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Art Bell is Back


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:57:56 +0200
>Subject: [CAUS updates] -  Art Bell is Back--Hip Hip Oy Vay!

>Dear CAUS Subscribers:

>CAUS just received the following e-mail from a subscriber in the
>know:

>"Well Peter, it's official. Art Bell just signed a new contract
>and should be returning to the air waves shortly. As I
>understand it, Art's new contract will be announced October
>26th, or he'll be back on the air that date. That's the good
>news! The bad news is that Art's claim that his family is
>threatened is phoney baloney. His family is just fine."

>"Art has told us that if we were in his shoes, we'd do the same
>thing. I suppose he means by that if there was that much money
>at stake, we'd lie to America like he did. You know .... he may
>just be right. I suppose most of us would gladly sell our soul
>if the money was right. I guess in his case, it was."

>Peter A. Gersten
>Director


I think this rumor mongering is disgraceful.

Why not just wait and let Art tell everyone what happened. He
said he would, and I believe he will.

I don't think it was a publicity stunt, or just a ploy to get
more money.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                       Re: Crop Circles and Ley Lines

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:40:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:45:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles and Ley Lines


Dear Rob, Sue, Su and all:

>From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:10 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:16:52 -0400
>>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>> Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:38:26 +0900
>>>From: Su Walker <suwalker@ames.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

>Sue,

>>The circle makers are human (some wouldn't agree <g>) and dowse
>>the field for earth energies and Ley lines before creating the
>>crop formation.

>I asked this before, but of the wrong person - apologies to
>them. What's your source on this curious snippet of information?
>(The last part, rather than the 'issue' of whether people are

>Rob

I've heard about crop circles.

Can someone tell me what "ley lines" are?

Are these simply lines on a map connecting various anomalous
places, or something more substantial, something measurable?

Thanks in advance

-  Larry Hatch






                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                  Arnold, Roswell and US/Nazi/Japanese Tech

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:46:36 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:44:13 -0400
Subject: Arnold, Roswell and US/Nazi/Japanese Tech


Hi List,

There are 'some suspicions' that there might be a connection
between the Arnold sighting, the Roswell incident and the US
military's use of new or self developed technology, or captured
from the Nazis and/or Japanese after the war.

Much of this hidden info. is likely to be revealed when
reviewing US military documents that nowadays - many years after
the early post-war area - are being declassified, and also
available on The Web.

In this connection I came across some articles regarding the
Roswell incident on the web:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9707STSPM.html

This article seems to be written by Mr. Jim Wilson in 1997; a PM
(Popular Mechanics) journalist.

I don't know whether any of you have read or heard about this
article and the author before, and I don't know anything about
the author's credibility and objectivity - just read it and make
your own conclusion about it.

In this article he's mentioning the following (regarding
the Roswell incident):


"Suspecting there was more to the Roswell story, Popular
Mechanics undertook its own investigation to learn if anything
new had emerged in this 50- year-old techno-mystery."

"After interviewing witnesses who had seen and handled
crash-site debris, and reviewing documents that were still
classified when the GAO undertook its investigation, we have
concluded that there really was a crashed disc, dead bodies and
a secret that could have been politically deadly to presidents
Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower."

Since mid-May, America had been in the grips of what historians
would later call the great UFO craze of 1947. By some counts, as
many as 800 sightings of strange objects were reported. At the
bars, lunch counters and dinner tables in Roswell, airmen retold
stories of mysterious "kraut balls" and "foo fighters" that had
played tag with bombers and fighters as they flew missions over
Europe and the Pacific."

"There is one more important, but often overlooked, historic
fact to keep in mind. In the years immediately after the war,
the term 'flying disc' did not necessarily mean a flying machine
from another planet."

"Randle's claims were largely based on a series of interviews
that he had conducted with a former U.S. Army
counterintelligence agent who at various times has been
identified as either Frank McKenzie or Joseph Osborne. Now, as I
spoke with this former spy in the back dining room of Roswell's
Sally Port Restaurant, I wasn't quite sure he could be trusted.
People I do trust had vouched for him. He showed me documents
that confirmed he had been assigned to the 509th. At the time of
the Roswell incident, he had been a civilian employee assigned
to intelligence duties. It was a job that could have givenhim
access to the impact site."

"At that point, I decided to wrap up the interview by asking the
spy an innocuous question: "What do you think of the crash-site
dioramas in the UFO museums?" "They got it wrong. It wasn't
round. It was heel-shaped," he said, tracing a pattern with his
finger. With my curiosity rekindled, because the city's two UFO
museums both depicted circular craft, I slid my notebook across
the table and asked him to sketch what he allegedly saw. The spy
then drew side, top and bottom views of what I immediately
recognized as a wingless lifting-body airframe. It was a dead
ringer for the X-38, which NASA and the U.S. Air Force are
planning to use as a mini-space plane."

"So, I decided to give the spy one last test, and asked, "Are
these heatshield tiles?" "No," he said, ignoring the bait. "They
made it invisible to radar." I signaled the waitress for another
round of drinks, sat back and listened as the spy his real name
is Frank J. Kaufmann told me how he helped to engineer the
"great Roswell coverup."

"Acting on what he said were orders from Brig. Gen. Martin
Scanlan of the Army's Air Defense Command (or 'Temple'; AWS)
Kaufmann told me he returned to Roswell. Here, he roused the
base commander Col. William Blanchard and intelligence officer
Marcel. With a small contingent of men, they drove north through
the sleeping city and onto what is now Route 285 north. Near
mile marker 132, they turned off the road and began driving
across the desert, stopping from time to time to cut the
barbed-wire fencing. Around 3 am, they found a heel-shaped craft
measuring about 25 ft. long and 12 ft. wide embedded in a cliff.

It was split open. One of its four small passengers was thrown
clear. Another was partially out of the craft. Two more were
inside. All were dead, their bodies intact and unburned.
Kaufmann said he watched as a crew from the airfield worked
feverishly beneath searchlights to load the fractured craft and
bodies aboard a flatbed truck before dawn. Meanwhile, a second
team hastily created two diversionary sites to confuse the
curious."

"As the Sun boiled up from the east, the tarpaulin-covered Army
truck rolled slowly south through downtown Roswell. Unnoticed by
residents who had long ago grown used to the sight of military
traffic, it made its way past the base gates and into a hangar,
which was promptly surrounded by armed guards. Before evening,
the wreckage and bodies were loaded aboard a military transport
and flown first to Fort Worth, Texas, and then on to Wright
Field in Ohio"

"It is a compelling story, spiced with some verifiable
information, but upon closer examination, the former spy's tale
is fraught with inconsistencies. The most obvious of these being
a lack of burned wreckage or charred bodies at a crash that
allegedly produced suf-ficient illumination to alert residents
miles away. It is also filled with factual errors, says Stanton
T. Friedman. A University of Chicago-trained nuclear physicist,
he was the first civilian to investigate the Roswell incident"

"I was all but ready to trash Kaufmann's story when a nearly
foot-thick package of documents obtained via Freedom of
Information Act requests arrived on my desk. As I read their
badly photocopied pages, I came to realize that my judgment of
Kaufmann's story might have been overly hasty. The more I read,
the more credible Kaufmann's tale--except for his conclusion
about extraterrestrials--became."

"Using key words and technical descriptions in the Silver Bug
report, PM was able to trace the origin of these remarkable
aircraft to Germany. And here, in half-century-old intelligence
files stamped "secret," we learned that the U.S. government had
mounted a massive search for engineers and scientists who had
worked on the so-called German saucer project.

Contrary to UFO literature, which claims the Germans were
attempting to reverse-engineer a crashed alien vehicle of their
own, these documents show a more practical reason for interest
in saucers: They could take off without runways. Months of
around-the-clock bombing by the allies had reduced German
runways to rubble. The Third Reich's only hope of using its
newly perfected jet-engine propulsion system to regain air
superiority would be to install it in a
vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) aircraft."

"The documents also tell of Army intelligence officers combing
Europe for two brothers,

Walter and Reimar Horten.

Trained as pilots and engineers, they had close connections to
the Reich's high command. The information provided to Army
intelligence said they were believed to have persuaded German
leaders to construct a fleet of saucer-shaped bombers. U.S.
military historians acknowledge that the Horten brothers built
and flew prototypes of circular and flying- wing aircraft. But
they dismiss these craft as aeronautical curiosities with no
military value. Initially, PM discounted a possible connection
between the Horten brothers and Roswell. We began to think
differently after we obtained a copy of a long-secret field
report from an American intelligence officer stationed in
Germany. In response for a service-wide request for information
about the Horten brothers, he had apparently looked into the
most secret military files. There he discovered, and duly
reported to his superiors, that the Horten brothers already had
been found. "Paperclip records further show that the men were
released by the U.K. for exploitation and allocated to the U.S.
[on] 15 November 1946," the officer's report said."

"Operation Paperclip" was the code name for one of the Second
World War's most secret and ethically controversial projects.
Its mission was to put former Nazi scientists and engineers on
the U.S. payroll. The American public knew the secret of Los
Alamos weeks after the first atomic bomb exploded. They would
not be told of Paperclip until after men landed on the Moon, an
event made possible by Paperclip rocket scientists.

The reason for keeping Paperclip secret was that the
laboratories at which many of the former German scientists had
worked were also Nazi slave-labor and death camps. The fact the
Nazis had technology that American engineers could not duplicate
was deemed too harsh a message for a nation that had gone to war
for a higher moral purpose."

"Probing further into the fate of the Horten brothers, PM
learned that just prior to their capture they had been working
on the design for a new generation of circular-shaped
vertical-takeoff aircraft, with specifications much like those
described in the Silver Bug report. Other records indicate that
after the war, models of the Horten's designs--possibly
constructed by the brothers themselves--were tested in the wind
tunnel at Wright Field, now Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.
This is the same base to which the wreckage of the Roswell crash
was finally transported."

"The Air Force acknowledges the Germans were working on a
flying-disc craft, but says it was inherently unstable.
Officials point to the failed Avro flying car built for the Army
and a deteriorating plywood Horten wing, both on display in
museums. Declassified records obtained by PM in the course of
its investigation suggest that these marginally performing craft
were, in fact, shills intended to disguise the existence of more
formidable flying machines. One of the most potent of these
flying discs was developed under a secret program called Project
Pye Wacket. Its objective was to design a 5-ft.-dia.
liquid-fueled missile launch platform to protect U.S. bombers
penetrating Soviet airspace."

"In the end, the military would select conventionally shaped
planes and missiles. As for the Horten flying disc that the
Reich had hoped would turn the tide of battle, patent rights to
a remarkably similar craft configured to carry "passengers"
would be assigned to the Lockheed aircraft company."

"Despite this information, the possibility that the object that
crashed at Roswell was in fact one of the Horten brothers'
creations misses the mark on two important details. The craft
that Kaufmann claims to have helped recover was not round, but
as his sketches showed, a lifting body. Also, he claims there
was no fire damage, a virtual impossibility in the crash of a
jet-powered aircraft."

"PM suspects the craft that crashed at Roswell will eventually
be identified as either a U.S. attempt to re-engineer a
second-generation Fugo, or a hybrid craft which uses both Fugo
lifting technology and a Horten-inspired lifting body. In either
case, Japanese engineers and pilots brought to the U.S. after
the war to work on the project could have been the dead "alien"
bodies recovered at the
crash site."

In this context, the following URLs are also
referred to:

A)

http://www.popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/reportp.html

i.e., the following is cut from the report Joint ATIC-WADC
Report on Project Silver Bug, 1955:


"The subject of this report deals with a proposal for a new
type aircraft by one of Canada's most progressive members of the
aircraft industry, AVRO Aircraft, Limited, a member of the
Hawker-Siddley Group. This project should in no way be
associated with any science fiction or "Flying Saucer" stories
because of its external appearance. The configuration was a
result of an engineering investigation into the solution of a
particular problem."

- "The proposal is for the design of a supersonic research
aircraft having a circular planform and VTO characteristics. One
version provides for the use of several conventional axial-flow
engines, while the ultimate aircraft configuration utilizes a
new radial-flow type engine. Another unusual feature of this
proposal is that the control of the aircraft is accomplished by
selective direction of the exhaust gases which eliminates the
necessity of conventional aerodynamic control surfaces."

- " There is a USAF requirement to develop means of operation
from dispersed bases. This requirement stems from the growing
and possibly catastrophic vulnerability of conventional air
bases. The major feature of conventional air bases is the
runway, which has grown wider, thicker, and longer as aircraft
have become heavier and faster. The operational necessity of
runways leads to concentrations of aircraft which have become
critical targets. The logical approach to dispersed base
operation would then appear to be toward reducing the length of
runways or to their total elimination. Numerous schemes have
been proposed, investigated, and some developed to reduce the
take-off distance of aircraft. Among them are water ejection,
after-burning, and RATO. Drag chutes and methods of thrust
reversal have been developed for reducing landing requirements.
Attempts to eliminate runways completely have resulted in
helicopters, convertiplanes and what is known as VTO aircraft."

-  "There are two general types of VTO aircraft - "tail-sitters"
and "flat-risers." A flat-riser takes off in the vertical
direction in a normal horizontal flight attitude, while the
tail-sitter takes off vertically from a position which is 90
degrees to a normal level horizontal flight attitude. Examples
of tail-sitters are the United States Navy projects with
Lockheed and Convair which utilize a turboprop power plant, and
the USAF project with Ryan Aeronautical Corporation utilizing
turbojet power plants. Examples of the flat-riser are the
Rolls-Royce "Flying Bedstead" and the Bell VTO aircraft. The
basic design problem associated with any aircraft of this type
becomes one of achieving in a single vehicle VTO and military
performance capabilities. A possible solution to this problem
has been proposed by A. V. Roe, Canada, Limited, in the form of
their Project Y2
(Secret)."

-  "The cockpit is located at the center of the aircraft with
the orientation of the cockpit determining the fore and after
center- line of the aircraft as well as the normal direction of
forward flight. The airframe, fuel cells, and the gas turbine
power plant encircle the cockpit.  (See Figs 3 and 4.) This
aircraft is designed for vertical take-off and landings while in
the horizontal flight attitude, i.e., a "flat-riser". Since this
aircraft rises vertically from a horizontal position, it does
not require a landing gear of auxiliary landing devices. The
flat-riser flight take-off technique, the elimination of the
landing gear and auxiliary landing devices, are brought about by
the peripheral exhaust which produces a "powerful ground cushion
effect" (Fig 5). This is one of the fundamentals upon which this
new radical aircraft design is based."

B)

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/v01/rnd01_05.shtml

i.e.,  the following is cut from this report, regarding Frank
Kaufman's story:

"When the report of a crashed UFO came from Brigardier General
Martin Scanlan ('Temple'; AWS) on July 4, 1947, Kaufman and his
team of agents went out to the crash site, which he described as
"very rough country, no roads at all." They found the UFO,
shaped like a man's shoe heel, crashed into the wall of an
arroyo. The vehicle was split open, and the team found four dead
aliens... and one that was still alive!"

-Kaufman said the UFO was loaded onto a flatbed truck, brought
back to the base, and stored in Hangar 84, which had an armed
M.P. platoon all around it. The four dead aliens were laid out
on a tarpaulin before the ambulance took them to the base
hospital for the autopsy."

The overall conclusion which can be drawn from these articles is
that:

The whole thing seems to deal with the US military's 'frenetic
actions' involved in hiding new and recovered/captured aircraft
technology - something which is understandable, especially as
regards the Cold War area, and the "arms/tech. race" between
Soviet and USA/Allies in those days.

Regarding people's thoughts of 'intergalactic invasions' in
connection with these flying saucer/disc sightings in 1947
(e.g., Maj. Marcel, and possibly also Gen.Ramey), this is
possibly connected with Orson Welles' radio performance of H.G.
Wells' "War of the Worlds", involving invasions from Mars, which
took place some 10 years earlier, i.e.:

http://www.blackstoneaudio.com/html/books/b1513.html

Mr. F.Kaufmann has described (at least) two significantly
different discs at the Roswell crash site: The one presented for
Mr. Randle and Schmitt, and the other for PM's Mr.Wilson.

From the present interpretations of the Ramey message (as
already presented for The List) this _seems_ to indicate that
the disc described for Mr. Wilson might be correct, as he was
also mentioning the craft ('crash/disc/disk), 4 small passengers
('4 ... victims'), two/three 'sites' ('site one/two') and a
contingent ('extra powers') of men. (The word 'disc', or 'flying
saucer', was probably used by the military in those days to
indicate a craft having circular planform; a 'disk' could
indicate both circular and other planforms, like today's
computer disk.)

Four 'secret', American, military projects are mentioned:

1.   Project Silver Bug; re. design proposals for disc-shaped,
or radical, aircraft; a supersonic aircraft having a circular
planform (1955).

2.   Project Paperclip; the code name for one of the Second
World War's most secret and ethically controversial projects.
Its mission was to put former Nazi scientists and engineers on
the U.S. payroll

3.   Project Project Mogul; re. a balloon that was carrying
instruments to detect Soviet nuclear tests.

4.   Project Pye Wacket; the objective was to design a
5-ft.-dia. liquid-fueled missile launch platform to protect U.S.
bombers penetrating Soviet airspace.

The WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, or Wright Field, OHIO, is
mentioned in connection with the following 'incidents':

*    Wind tunnel tests of circular-shaped, VTOL aircraft

*    Models of the Horten's designs--possibly constructed by the
brothers themselves--were tested in the wind tunnel at Wright
Field, now Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.

*    The wreckage and bodies from the Roswell crash was finally
transported to this base

*    A declassified Air Force briefing paper titled "Report On
Project Silver Bug." It was prepared by the Joint Air Technical
Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in 1955

i.e., really 'interesting things' were going on at this base in
those days.

There were _proposed_ developments of aircraft having 'circular
planform' and VTO (Vertical Take-Off and Landing)
characteristics in 1955 (mentioned 'Flying Disc').

The reason we don't see these craft today (at least not very
often; and possibly - and correctly - observed as UFOs!) might
be because of problems with instability, expensive to produce,
and/or that they _are_ being used, but exist only as
experimental planes, used by the military for research and
'spying'/'special' missions only.

The inherent craft instability may - to an acceptable degree -
have been solved. (Many of the aircarft today are inherently
unstable, e.g., JAS Gripen, but this is compensated for
automatically by using many pressure sensors located on the
craft, and aided by powerful computers on board the plane to
help controlling and piloting.)

According to the article's contents, it seems (possibly correct
- as proposed by many) that, in connection with the Roswell
incident, we might actually be dealing with 'aliens', i.e., not
exactley ETs, but rather Japanese ('kamikaze') test pilots!
(They were often described as being 'small' - having 'children's
height' - and having Oriental features.)

In adition, the use of 'alien tech.' could also mean the capture
and use of Nazi and/or Japanese technologies. - which were
unknown for the US and the Allies till after the war.

In this context, referring to this PM report, could the
'hieroglyphs' detected on the beams on the Ramey office photos,
i.e.:

http://www.abduct.com/aaer/n53.htm

possibly be Japanese writing/imprints? I'm just wondering...(Any
Japanese readers of this list who can 'validate' this idea? Or
any others, having knowledge of Japanese writing?) Or, could it
just be some marks left from the assembling process; welding,
smoldering etc.?

It is well known that the US used ('alien') technology recoverd
from German scientists (but not necessarily _Nazis_) after the
war. This includes - at least - the rocket technology, fronted
by von Braun.

It is also well known that there were numerous sighting of
'flying saucers' the first years after the war - and most likely
- due to the intensive developments and tests of the new and
captured technologies, involving some exotic aircraft, missiles
and rockets.

Regarding some of the US captured tech. a reference is made to
the following web sites:

http://www.cris.com/~Danford/horten.htm

where the following is mentioned:

"Several nurflugels came to the U.S. as war booty,

 including the center section of the Ho 229. Four of them are
now back in Germany for restoration, with one to remain there
when the work is finished, while the other three rejoin the
collection of the National Air & Space Museum. A restored Horten
sailplane is on   display at Planes of Fame in Chino,
California, which also owns a Northrop N-9M, a technology
demonstrator roughly the size of the Ho 299, but much less
sophisticated."

"Construction of the H IX V3 was nearly complete when the Gotha
Works at Friederichsroda was overrun by troops of the American
3rd Army's VII Corps on April 14, 1945. The aircraft was
assigned the number T2-490 by the Americans. The aircraft's
official RLM designation is uncertain, as it was referred to as
the Ho 229 as well as the Go 229. Also found in the destroyed
and abandoned works were several other prototypes in various
stages of construction, including a two-seat version."

-"The V3 was sent to the United States by ship, along with other
captured aircraft, and finally ended up in the General H. H.
"Hap" Arnold collection of the Air Force Technical Museum."

"The all-wing aircraft was to have been brought to flying status
at Park Ridge, Illinois, but budget cuts in the late forties and
early fifties brought these plans to an end. The V3 was handed
over to the present-day National Air and Space Museum (NASM) in
Washington D.C."

Regarding the US Flying Wings by Northrop, this URL can be
checked:

http://www.cris.com/~Danford/album.htm

where the following is mentioned:

"In time, the team of Northrop, von Karman, and Sears tamed the
N-9M, but the Army was losing patience with the development
problems at Northrop and Consolidated. Development of the B-36
was behind schedule, and the XB-35, which was even more of an
engineering challenge, had yet to fly. So the production
contract was canceled, leaving only two X (experimental) and 13
Y (service test) B-35s on order.

 The XB-35 finally took to the air in June 1946, almost a year
after Japan had surrendered. Company pilot Max Stanley flew it
to Muroc Army Air Base. "No trouble," he reported. The same
couldn't be said of the XB-35 thereafter: Its engines
overheated, its propeller shafts vibrated, its propeller gearbox
broke down, and its auxiliary power unit (a gasoline-powered
electrical generator) failed."

Note the links to the Horten brothers,and note that they (the
Americans, and Hortens?) were testing the YB-49 in 1947 - being
very much like the Ho 229.

Jet powered versions of these Northrop craft could thus also be
realistic alternatives to the Arnold sightings; i.e., N-9M or
YB/XB-35; check:

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p79.htm

and,

http://www.flightonline.mcmail.com/northrop.htm

To conclude, based upon the available info. so far, the
following is proposed:

The Arnold sightings were most likely:

1.   Guided missiles, and/or,

2.   Some early experimental planes, possibly captured from
Germany just after the war, or possibly developed by Northrop or
some other American company - and not extra terrestrial (ET)
aircraft, and the reason being:

It is fairly unlikely that an ET tech. observed - e.g. by Arnold
- in those days, should be _nearly identical_ to an existing,
well known (however not yet really well-proven) and already
developed American/German aircraft technology. (At least, the
theory was well known.)

What is left here is to check unclassified US military records
of possible flying tests which took place in those days (e.g.,
located on the Web). (It is guessed that the military was
responsible for these kinds of projects.)

There is also a possibility that the sightings could be some
Soviet developed aircraft or missiles/drones, having shapes to
be nearly invisible on the radar screens, i.e., being
fast-flying, flat, tail-less and oval/saucer/crescent-shaped,
etc.

The Roswell Incident is possibly (at least) two incidents; one
involving (a) weather balloon(s) - either Japanese or American
(Project Mogul?)- the other involving an experimental aircraft,
possibly developed by an American company, in co-operation with
'alien' scientists (German, Japanese), or possibly some war
booty. The test pilots could, for instance, be Japanese, and
former 'kamikaze' pilots - 'hired' by the American military.

The imprints on the balloon remanents shown on Ramey office
photos may be some Japanese signs, indicating relics from a
Japanese balloon.

The message in Rameys hand, i.e.:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/ramey.html

is likely to be a  message from Brig. Gen. M. Scanlan ('Temple';
AWS), and the original of this message should (if not already
destroyed) be found in the archives at the US Army's Air Defense
Command, or at some other (uncertain) US archives (unclassified
now?).

So far, the Ramey message indicates that Scanlan was informed of
the 4, (Japanese?) victims from the crash of the test plane (or
ballon), and he started a 'cover-up' to keep this crash and the
aircraft wreck as a secret, and also involving some extra 'crash
sites', extra personnel, and some remains of a recent crashed
weather balloon - either Japanese or American (Project Mogul?).

In the USA there were many secret projects involving
experimental and 'exotic' aircraft just after the war, due to
the availibility of both the captured aircraft themselves, and
the designers and engineers, coming in from Gernmany and Japan
to the USA.

The Horten brothers were likely to be among these scientists.
There were thus numerous tests of these craft all over the USA
especially just after the war, but none of these test flights
were in no way official; they were 'non-existing', mainly
because of fear of possible Soviet espionage activities.

In my opinion, these claims or proposals shouldn't be very far
from the reality. And, at least, the proposals do not contain
more fantasy than previously releasd material in these areas -
and in my sense, they are NOT FAR FROM BEING REALISTIC.

In any case, I'm just making - from my viewpoint - some
realistic inferences based upon the info. I have available
through the Web. (Now, I'm well aware of that these claims and
proposals might be somewhat modified as more info. becomes
available - but that's what research really's about.)

Further, I'm thus presenting my personal views here, and they're
just intended to summarize and to present some fresh looks and
judgments into both the Roswell incident and the Arnold
sightings, though I guess there will hardly be an 100% answer to
the question of what was actually happening at Roswell, and what
Arnold actually did see.

It is realized that much of the hidden info. involving US
military activities, will be revealed to the public after
reviewing US and Allies' military documents that nowadays - many
years after the early post-war area - are being unclassified,
and finally - becoming available on The Web.

Yet, there are still too many suggestions and proposals (e.g.,
based upon my 'armchair theories'), and there's more to be
proven - though many of the conclusions just have to be based on
indices, and not only the hard evidence.

(Sorry. This was another long mail 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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:09:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:46:15 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:57:14 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:17:19 -0400
>>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>>Hi Max

>>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

>[Mialgic Encephalomyelitis?  See:

> http://freespace.virgin.net/david.axford/me/me.htm

> Also known as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome! --ebk]

>Max

From the time I was six years old until about age 45 I had
conscious memories of strange, frightening, unexplainable
experiences. It wasn't until recently that I learned about
peoples discriptions and belief in abduction scenarios. I have
never been hypnotized. About 15 years ago, the nightmares and
strange, apparent visitations stopped and I, along with several
family members, developed cronic fatique syndrom. Is there a
connection? I don't have a clue but it is interesting to ponder.

Best regards, Marie





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:45:06 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:48:37 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:53:05 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO Name Change?

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>>List,

>>I thought this may be of interest.

>>Leanne

>>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>>Subject: UFO name change.

>>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>natural unidentified objects.

>>>What do you all think.

>>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

>Hi Leanne

>How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?

>Don Ledger


A LONG time ago I wrote an article in Gnostica in which I
proposed that the term UFO had too much of a stigma attached to
it and that it implied things which were assumptions.

Both of these suggestions now use "Craft". We do not know that
this is the case. Nor do we know that they are "Off World" or
"Extraterrestrial". These are unproved assumptions, and may well
be wrong.

When I wrote the Gnostica article back in the early 70s, I
suggested that we all adopt the term UAP, "Unidentified Aerial
Phenomena", which carries no unfounded assumptions.

BTW, I do not take credit for coming up with this acronym. My
old friend Ivan Sanderson came up with it and promoted it as
well.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:14:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:59:10 -0400
Subject: Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 05:42:15 +0100
>Fwd Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:53:29 -0400
>Subject: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>'UFO Magazine' (UK) New Nazi-Et Lie - A Lesson In GCSE History!

>Yes, the new 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is on the stands (hidden at the
>back where sensible people will be able to avoid it).

>One article - UFO crash at Czernia - is a hilarious brand of
>Nazi pseudo history, factual inaccuracy and a desperate attempt
>to shore up the 'ET recovered' technology myth. Graham Birdsall
>seems to have completely lost his sense of objectivity This kind
>of thing serves only those who wish to distort the truth about
>flying disc technologies. All I can say is that I hope the
>spooks pay well for such marvellous disinformation..

>The story has it that a UFO 'crashed' in Poland on land owned by
>Eva Braun's parents no less...

>............in 1937.

>So far so bad but what else?

>It was recovered - not by the Polish cavalry, at this stage
>still on horseback, but by a detachment of Waffen SS troops!

>18 months before Gleiwitz and the subsequent invasion of Poland
>by Hitler's troops! Oh dear oh dear!

The story is so unbelievable to begin with, that it is suprising
it found a publisher.  Even so, it just continues to surprise me
that many people can't find the "tells" in these tall tales.  It
is similar to con-men sending out "get rich quick" schemes from
a company named "REKCUS, Inc."  The marks still send in their
money.

Waffen SS troops in 1937, indeed.  Perhaps it bodes well for us,
Americans, to know the educational systems in the rest of the
world have deteriorated as much as ours.

--
Jan Aldrich





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Adam Lowe <spookyfox@lowea.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:16:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:52:44 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:46:07 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees

I'm sorry its a bit off the UFO topic but I wanted to try and
explain what ME is because it has been asked a couple of times
in some postings. Anyone is welcome to contact me off list if
they want, Adam.

>Errol,

>I now have the correct spelling and the medical description,
>direct from a medical book for the terms used..

>The full medical name for the ilness known as M.E

>"myalgic encephalomyelitis

Hi all, I'll try and clear up some of the questions about M.E.
As I said yesterday I've had it for nearly 10 years but I forgot
to answer the question about the abduction/ME
interconnectedness. No ME doesn't have anything to do with
abductions as far as I know.

What is ME? It is an illness you get following some kind of
viral infection. With me it was an enterovirus but a lot of
people get it following something like glandular fever. There
have been many theories about the cause ranging from
enteroviruses to organo-phosphates. The most recent thinking is
that it is caused by reduced blood flow in the brain. My doctor
calls it Myalgic Encephalopathy which means the is a graze on my
brain. Some doctors say that ME doesn't exist but some just say
that Myalgic Encephalomyelitis doesn't actually mean anything.
The more precise name is Post Viral Fatigue Syndrome. ME is an
incurable illness, though not terminal, and there is no
treatment for it. It is supposed to go as soon as it came on.
There is no specific test to prove you have it but I'm lucky
because the virus was found in me. I think CAT scans can show
blood flow problems but it doesn't show up in many people and
most people go through their illness without any kind of
diagnosis or medical support.

>The symptons of the illness are lack of energy, aches and pains,
>a kind of drained feeling and some sufferers are almost bed
>ridden with this complaint. the medical fraternity have been
>unable to find any cause for the illness, and in the 1980's in
>the UK it was refered to as Yuppie flu.

The symptoms above are close but not really accurate but I am
not having a go at Max I just want to clear things up. For 'lack
of energy' and 'a kind of drained feeling' read exhaustion at
the slightest physical excertion. The muscle pain, with me, is
constant and I use a walking stick. The more you do the more
pain you are in. My arm hurts when I stir a cup of coffee, I get
out of breath walking from one room to the other and getting
dressed and undressed. Further symptoms include food
intolerance, food allergies, alcohol intolerance (I don't have
this one :)), lack of concentration (which includes the more you
concentrate the more you become exhausted), a terrible memory,
if you talk for a period of time the harder it becomes, eyes
cannot focus because the muscles in them become worn out (I'm
having trouble reading over this because of the concentration
and the eye problems), sleep problems (unable to sleep,
nightmares. To help me sleep I am on a dosage 3 times higher
than what is used to keep manic depressives sedated), muscle
spasms and twitching, constant colds and somehow my hair can
hurt. There are a couple more but I'll stop now.

>The illness has also been known to last up to >4 or 5 years in
certain cases.

If it lasts only 4 or 5 years you are quite lucky. I know
someone who had it for 31 years and as I said I'm on the way to
10 years (I got ill in Jan 89 which means I have not had a
healthy day in the 90s). When I got ill the average was said to
be 3 years. The estimate I heard was that it occurs in 1 in
150,000 people and the vast majority are women.

Adam.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:03:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:45:22 EDT
>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:50:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

<snip>

>To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
>what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
>Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
>company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
>the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
>I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
>permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
>every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
>cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
>figure.

I could find no reference to "Attilla the Hun" or "Hun, the
Barbarian" but did find "The Conqueror" made in 1956. Can we
really say that "every last person on the film crew and cast has
since died of cancer"? Wasn't John Wayne's cancer attributed to
smoking cigarettes?

Just wondering.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:29:00 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:46:07 EDT
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>The symptons of the illness are lack of energy, aches
>and pains, a kind of drained feeling and some
>sufferers are almost bed ridden with this complaint.

The 'Yuppie Flu' or CFS (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) shares
symptoms similar to the chronic illness known as Fibomyalgia.
Katharina Wilson wrote an interesting article:

http://www.alienjigsaw.com

last year suggesting there might be a connection between this
illness and abductions. She made no conclusions, as the medical
community has yet to become involved in any formalized study.
This is her hypothesis. To my knowledge, there is still no
formalized interest by the medical community. That's a shame,
because until there is, all we can do is collectively spin our
wheels and hypothesize until we drop.

I'd also like to mention that I hope you take John Velez's
recent comments and questions about your post in the spirit that
they were intended. I had a similar questions, but John got to
you first.<g> No offense to you, or anybody here, but in a field
where the BS alarms are background music, the healthiest
attitude Abductees can take is a firm 'consumer-beware'attitude.

Regards,

Ann Mulvey







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:39:48 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:19:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:00:00 -0400

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:56:07 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Geoff Dittman <gdittman@autobahn.mb.ca>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>><snip>

>>>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information
>>>that would corroborate this? If this is true, the
>>>implications are frightening/staggering. One out
>>>of six is infertility of epidemic proportions. Is
>>>mankind going sterile and no one is paying attention?

>It appears to me more likely the aliens would be appalled that
>we are breeding ourselves and the planet into oblivion. Think we
>still have quite a while yet on this planet before we have to
>worry about the effects of sterility. Especially in some parts
>of the world.

Appalled? From what I have read, the "aliens" do not care about
anyone or anything other than themselves and their interests.
What good thing has any "alien" done for us lately?

It is funny, but there were serious concerns about
overpopulation and scarcity of resources as far back as ancient
times when the world population was estimated at about
200,000,000 at the time of Christ - about 25 times smaller than
it is now. Although there will always be things we can do to
make our lives on Earth safer and more comfortable, our world is
not really closer to oblivion than at any other time in our
past, despite the seemingly new and increasing number of "the
end of the world is coming soon" rumours we hear about.

>Less people might also allow a few trees to grow back. P'raps
>the aliens are tired of hunting thru the subdivisions trying to
>find a field to land in.

Isn't it more difficult to land on a tree than someone's
backyard? If the "aliens" are not happy with what they find here
on Earth, (possibly their worlds are even more overpopulated)
then I suggest that they go look somewhere else and leave us and
our home alone.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:16:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Forwarded from James Easton at his request - thanks Errol

>---

>Regarding...

>>Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:53:03 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Ed wrote:

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>

>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 15:41:15 PDT

>>>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:18 -0700
>>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>>After hearing the best ufology from the best ufologists, these are
>>>>some of the conclusions of the Sturrock panel. From the Summary
>>>>Report of the Scientific Review Panel:


>Whilst Mr Clark claims the 'best evidence' presented to the 'Sturrock
>Panel', resulted that the panel "found those cases impressive and
>worthy of further scientific inquiry, at the end of which - presumably
>a long process - it would be possible to come to a far more firm
>judgment about the nature and origin of UFO phenomena", like yourself,
>others note the panel's reported conclusions that, "Further analysis
>of the evidence presented to the panel is unlikely to shed added light
>on the causes underlying the reports...".

I was addressing the curious argument, made by some, that the
panel offered a final - and negative - conclusion about the UFO
phenomenon and its origins. Such was not the case. The cases
presented to it convinced panel members that further UFO study
is worthwhile, though some (not all) expressed pessimism about
what more could be learned from existing cases. The quoted
material below confirms as much.

>In other words, the purported 'best evidence' (although that is
>comprehensively debatable) accumulated during the past fifty years
>wasn't deemed a promising basis of further scientific study.

>What could be more disappointing... presumably only if it wasn't
>considered worthy of any further analysis at all.

It's worth remembering here that Easton and (it is clear)
Stewart have essentially a negative view of the UFO phenomenon
which participants in the panel did not share, at least by the
end of the meeting. How the two of them draw negative
interpretations from the panel is a mystery, but to each his
own.


>'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'.

One of the problems, of course, is that the cases were old,
the trails cold in many cases. Panel members expressed
interest in these cases and were clearly puzzled by some, yet
frustrated for the reason just stated.

On the other hand, these cases would not have been investigated
at all if not for the dedicated (though institutionally
unsupported) work of heroic civilian researchers - whose
efforts, by the way, McDonald validated as he reviewed the work
of civilian researchers when he got interested in UFO study. It
is certain that he would have disagreed with the pessimistic (or
cautious) assessments of some on the Sturrock panel on these old
cases. It is also true that McDonald's involvement was far more
extensive than that of anyone on the panel. McDonald, after all,
spent an immense amount of time investigating and
reinvestigating cases, retracing the steps of both civilian and
military inquirers, and he expressed the highest regard for the
documentation top-flight investigators such as Walt Webb, Ray
Fowler, Bill Weitzel, Ted Bloecher, and others produced.

Here, I think, McDonald was more likely to be correct than the
panel members, but I certainly don't object in principle to
their caution. It's just that on this particular matter,
McDonald was the one with the expertise and, consequently,
probably the one we should be listening to. In any event, no
doubt a moot point at this stage. Still, Phillips's forthcoming
work on the Delphos CE2 and Sparks's on the RB-47 radar/visual
are powerful evidence of what a dedicated investigator can do
with even an old case.

 What is crucial, as is said above, is that new cases - when the
experience and evidence are fresh - be investigated
_immediately_, this time with the full institutional support of
science. That's what the panel wants, and that's what all
serious ufologists want. See panel member Prof. Eshleman's
remarks, which all of us can endorse, below:

>'The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
>presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
>causes of the reports. However, the panel considers that new
>data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well
>documented, recurrent events), could yield useful information.
>In this case, physical scientists would have an opportunity to
>contribute to the resolution of the UFO problem.'

>The main point raised by the panel is that an active effort
>should be undertaken in order to gather new physical evidence
>through adequate instruments, even simple (wide angle cameras or
>video-cameras,...). Faster reaction should be obtained thanks to
>a dedicated structure, so as to collect fresh undistorted
>testimonies and/or recordings. If you take the example of
>Hessdalen, a significant effort has obviously been done, but
>methods and operational procedures lack rigour and
>professionalism : with a very limited effort, scientists could
>implement the necessary complements in order to be in a position
>to obtain exploitable data on lights, associated spectra,....

>My personal conviction is that we have to proceed along with
>priorities. If the means are given to work professionally, there
>is still an interest in re-visiting several of the existing
>cases and the related evidence, either on a case by case basis
>(e.g. photographic documents), or from a statistical point of
>view. But the choice (good or bad) of the cases presented in
>Pocantico was such that effectively little would have to be
>expected from new studies of those cases, of which many are
>already pretty old.

Note the remark about "revisiting several of the existing cases
and the related evidence," indicating that panel members found
such cases intriguing and even, all the cautious asides aside,
conceivably amenable to further, potentially profitable study.
These remarks underscore the point that the panel did not
dismiss out of hand the significance of these reports, as (or so
I gather from a not very clearly stated argument) Stewart and
Easton would want us to believe.

As I have repeatedly urged, go to the insiders' account in the
current issue of IUR (available from CUFOS, 2457 West Peterson
Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60659, for $6 postpaid). The authors,
Mark Rodeghier and Michael D. Swords, address the problems of
scientific verification and related matters that the panel
report raises. The report, if it has done nothing else so far,
has sparked a valuable discussion about where we go from here
and what we can do now.

In the meantime, we can eagerly await the appearance of Ted
Phillips's definitive report on the Delphos CE2, bound to be a
seminal document in scientific UFO investigation. There is, the
naysayers notwithstanding, cause for hope these days. I must say
I feel better about ufology's prospects than I've felt in quite
a while. Reading Prof. Eshleman's remarks above gets my day off
to a happy start. Thanks, Ed and James, for sharing them.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 12:21:23 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:32:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:37:11 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 22:18:31 PDT

>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:22:30 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Howdy do, Mr. Sunshine,

>>Interesting that none of these panel members have come forward
>>to protest what Stewart and Klass want us to believe was the
>>utter distorting of their conclusions. Maybe these guys need
>>Stewart and Klass to tell them what they think.

>Your intellectual dishonesty never seizes to amaze me. If you
>had the intellectual honesty and capacity to address this
>discussion properly and in context, you would not keep in denial
>from the fact that I have introduced the comments of H.J. Melosh
>made on the BBC which supports my arguments. That archived
>message and available to readers is:

>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/oct/m15-013.shtml

>The original source can be found in the Oct. 5th archives to
>this mailing list by Jimmy Marinkovicc "BBC: A Question of
>Science".

>Since you seem to be computer impaired below is the relevant
>comments from my previous posting up above:

>Not only that, but there is already one voice of dissent on the
>public record from the participating group of scientists in the
>panel, Dr. H.J. Melosh, a meteorologist who was interviewed for
>BBC. Dr. Melosh is reputed to have said that the panel wasn't
>independent because they had connections with the UFO community
>and it was allegedly clear to him that the panel was not clean.
>Dr. Melosh went on allegedly to say that the so-called evidence
>was not convincing and it was un-scientific with no hard
>evidence available. He went on to say that he for one was not
>going to spent any more time on the subject of UFOs.

Mr. Sunshine's intellectual sloppiness never ceases to amaze me.
He is passing on what is clearly a rumor, perhaps generated by
the wishful thinking to which Mr. S is susceptible. Note the
following in the above account:

"reputed to have said"
"allegedly clear to him"
"went on allegedly to say"

Pretty impressive, Mr. S. Thank God you're not attempting to do
UFO history.

>>Which reminds me, O Mean-Spirited One: When exactly are you
>>going to step evading my challenge to you to cite reviews that
>>trash me for all the intellectual and personal crimes you claim
>>(or pretend) to see in my UFO Encyclopedia? You can run, dude,
>>but you can't hide on this one.

>This dude is not going anywhere.

Of course not. You can't get any reviewer to validate your weird
charges. They just keep on praising the book, God bless 'em.

Your friend and admirer,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:31:05 _0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:18:31 -0400
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:45:49 _0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:22:05 +0100
>>From: Andy Denne _ A.U.R.A. <aura@telekabel2.nl>
>>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>Hi Andy

>>Indeed kidney _ or other physical problems are often reported by
>>abductees. But if it would be _a side_ effect_ of _an_illness_ we
>>still have no explanation for the other cases. But if it was a
>>side_ effect of being ill in general, than we'd have a lot more
>>people reporting abductions.
>
>If the subjects are in some way psychic then the medical
>problems may find a way of manifesting in their subconscious.
>With bad aliens being brought in by the media this gives the
>subjects an escape with a relatively plausible and half
>respected explanation. This could also account for non_ psychics
>to gain attention by the non_ medical profession. To be honest I
>haven't documented my findings on this but at a glance at raw
>data this seems to be a plausible explanation and should be
>investigated further.

>Sue

Hi Sue, hi Andy, hi All,

I'm appalled at what tries to pass for 'intelligent' dialog
about abduction and abductees. I am not going to debate the
above compilation of confused gobbledygook because it would
dignify it with undeserved attention. Suffice it to say that the
kind of pure crapolla being dished out here should be a source
of embarrassment to the writers and explains why so many are of
a mind that most people connected to ufology are crackpots and
loonies. I have never read a more pretentious and ludicrous set
of statements since I joined this list.

At least not since the "unmentionable one" left the list anyway!
The stuff up above is _on par_  with the best of the
(unmentionable one's) posts/rants.

OK, here it is: Sue, Max, and hesitantly Andy. "Riddle me this
please!"

Show me the results of the investigations that justify the
following statements that you are making. I just want to know
_who_where_and when._  It's simple, if you're going to make
blanket statements such as the ones above, you're going to be
asked to _substantiate_ them. This is the real world guys. You
just can't "say anything that you want to" and have it go
unquestioned by anyone. I get mad when I see people spreading
disinformation. Especially about abduction. The worst offenders
are _usually_  (not always) those who profess to be
'investigating.'

Could you please substantiate the following statements;

1. (From Andy)
>>Indeed kidney - or other physical
>>problems are often reported by abductees.

Source please!

2. (The rest are Sue's)

>If the subjects are in some way
>psychic then the medical problems may find a way of
>manifesting in their subconscious.

Duh, hah, wha? I almost don't want to know how you
got there. Nah, I'm sure I don't want to know. Skip this
one Sue.

3. >>With bad aliens being brought in by the media this
>gives the subjects an escape with a relatively plausible
>and half respected explanation.

Duh, hah, wha? I almost don't want to know how you got there.
Nah, I'm sure I don't want to know. Skip this one too Sue.

4. >This could also account for non-psychics
>to gain attention by the non-medical profession.

Whaaaaaat? Oh, I get it! Ha, ha, ha, haaa, weee, ha, ha,
haaa, ha, (tears streaming down face, pants wet, help!)

5. >To be honest I haven't documented my findings on this

That much is _patently clear_.  No need to respond to this
one either Sue. Skip on to the next gem.

6. >but at a glance at raw data

_What_ raw data?

>this seems to be a plausible explanation and should be
>investigated further.

There is absolutely _nothing_  "plausible" (or even
intelligible) in any of your statements and it appears that the
only thing that needs to be investigated further is the current
state of your 'CRITICAL' mind!

C'mon guys, please. If you are going to discuss abductees and
abduction show us the respect that our situation deserves. I
consider the kind of purely speculative and unsubstantiated
statements (such as you have made) to be disinformation and
disrespectful to those who have to live with this. I don't know
if you can grok where I'm coming from and to tell you the truth
I don't much care.

I do promise you this, every time you make any claims or
statements about abductees and abduction such as those up above
I'm going to call you on it and ask you to show us the
sources/data for them. This is a very public forum and I don't
want folks to think that you represent the current state of
abduction research. Or, that _any_  of what you have said has
_any_  substance whatsoever.

Think _before_  you write. Disinformation only breeds confusion.
Knock it off please. You're not helping, you are in fact making
it much harder for those who are trying to do credible and
serious work and research.

"Ex_ spurts," . . .there are none!

Peace,

John Velez, Alien Spawn
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                       UpDates Off-line 'til pm Oct/25

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 18:58:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 18:58:45 -0400
Subject: UpDates Off-line 'til pm Oct/25


My body is protesting very loudly about the bug it's
carrying between my bed and computer.

I'm taking a couple of days off - to try and get rid
of it.

Please hold your mail until late Sunday evening,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                      Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:35:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:06:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


In a related link that we are all too familiar with, "Failure Of
The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking", Ed Stewart has feverishly
protested Jerry's writings with his usual gusto and panache:

>This dude is not going anywhere.  Your intellectual dishonesty
>is recorded right here on this continuing thread much to the
>chagrin of the ufological gullible that has held you in high
>steem up to now.

Is this what's bothering you Ed? If it is, then you make one
hell of an assumption about the UFO community! I, for one, don't
hold Jerome Clark in high "steem" or even "esteem". No offense,
Jerry, but I could care less what your opinions are or Ed's. I
keep clicking on the topic "Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian
Debunking" hoping that there might be some new information
instead of the bickering and fingerpointing that seems to have
infected that thread. Why don't you guys just rename the thread
"Why I Hate Jerry" and "Why I Hate Ed."? It would sure save us
readers a lot of time.

>You keep making a fool out of yourself and
>showing everyone how lame Jerome Clark actually is. Book reviews
>are not relevant to the intellectual dishonesty you have
>displayed online.

Nor are they revelant to the intellectual honesty displayed,
presumably, by you or anyone else! As you have pointed out many
times, we have no proof about anything regarding UFOs.
Therefore, one can't be "dishonest" regarding an opinion, which
is all that's left. If there was a documented crash site of a
real UFO and Jerome said it was in another place than it was,
then that would be dishonest. Otherwise, he's giving his opinion
about a topic that has, ultimately, _only_ opinions and second
hand information to populate it and keep it alive.

>You have more on your hands right now than your lame ufological
>wisdom can handle. Two members, that I am aware, of the
>scientific review panel, Melosh and Louangee, are on record that
>does not support your intellectual dishonest spin of the
>Sturrock panel. And they certainly didn't need me to tell them.

More to the point, Ed; we don't need you to tell us anything.

Again, let's try to get this all into perspective:

Despite your lifetime of effort collecting data, there is no
proof regarding UFOs; maybe that's got you a bit chapped, who
knows. But the fact is that (because of the lack of real
evidence) the Sturrock panel is nothing more than a group of
opinions by people that have fancy degrees on their walls. Now I
don't mean anything disrespectful, but 'who' they are means
nothing if the only result is a non-conclusive opinion, as only
opinions _can_ be. If Jerome Clark wants to interpret their
opinion one way, great. If you want to interpret it another way,
then more power to you!

But understand this:

We don't care. We don't care. And further more, we really don't
care.

Why? Because there is no bigger waste of time than arguing about
the correct interpretation of another person's interpretation of
another group's unqualified opinion. I mean, have we really run
out things to discuss, guys, or what?

Jerry, you may be pursuing this because you think it's fun.

But Ed, you're choking on an empty grudge.

By the way, did I mention to either one of you that we don't care?


Giving up,
Roger Evans
Houston, Texas





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Roger Evans moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:56:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:10:27 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:45:06 -0400 (EDT)
>Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:48:37 -0400
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

Earlier, Leanne Martin wrote:

>>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>>natural unidentified objects.

Later, Don Ledger offered:

>How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?

Bob Shell, in my opinion, made the best suggestion:

>A LONG time ago I wrote an article in Gnostica in which I
>proposed that the term UFO had too much of a stigma attached to
>it and that it implied things which were assumptions.

<snip>

>When I wrote the Gnostica article back in the early 70s, I
>suggested that we all adopt the term UAP, "Unidentified Aerial
>Phenomena", which carries no unfounded assumptions.

My observation:

"OWC" is akward to me, personally, and suggests the feeling that
it stands for "Ontario Women's Conference" or something....

"Extra-terrestrial" Craft might work unless, of course, we ended
up saying ETC, etc, etc, etc.

"Unidentified Aerial Phenomena" is pretty much right on the
money, in my book. And, despite the fact that "UAP" sounds like
a news wire service (sorry, Bob), its description is accurate
for what it describes. Concise and to the point.

Now, a new name MIGHT shake some of the stigma associated with
UFO research. On the other hand, it carries the risk of making
truly great strides in UFO sightings and research seem invisible
to the general public. As it stands, for better or for worse,
people recognize the term "UFO" to symbolize one thing and one
thing only: Aliens. Like a magnet, it draws their attention in
all media; tv, radio and print. Anything else might go
un-noticed.

Is this good or bad? Who knows?

But dogging UFO research wasn't always the case. Remember, when
sightings first started, the public couldn't get enough about
the subject. The current stigma has more to do with politics,
budgeting, dismal results and questionable "experts" than
anything. We can call it what we like, but until hard proof is
discovered (or uncovered!) the public won't give UFO, OWC or UAP
research any more respect than it already receives. You know; a
rose by any other name...?

Can "UFO" overcome its current "career slump"?

When I think of John Travolta, I certainly get encouraged. All
Ufology needs is just one good hit....

Where's Quinton (Pulp Science Fiction) Tarentino when you need
him, I
ask?

Later,
Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri 23 Oct, 1998 13:46
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:56:10 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:28:26 +0100
>From: Adam Lowe <spookyfox@lowea.freeserve.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

><snip>

>>Is there a link between the abductions and M.E.?

>>Could M.E. be a side effect of the abduction?

>Hi Max,

>I have been suffering with ME for nearly 10 years and this
>subject came up on a ME mailing list about 3 years ago. It
>wasn't taken seriously and some people submitted names of people
>who should be taken. There is a similarity between ME and UFOs
>and that is some people still insist that ME doesn't exist. I
>have seen a specialist who told me that "there is no such thing
>as ME" and that "its all in your mind" but the next one I saw
>diagnosed me as having ME. I have never met anyone with ME who
>has said anything about abductions but with the battle we have
>to go through to be recognised as being ill I can understand if
>it wasn't mentioned.

>When the Sturrock report was released it had accounts of how
>UFOs effected some people and I did recognise some similarities
>with some ME symptoms. However, ME has a lot of symptoms and
>they can show up in many different circumstances. My life has
>been devastated by ME and my thoughts go out to those who have
>ME and have to cope with the abduction experiences as well.

Excuse my ignorance for medical acronyms, but what is ME?

Roger R. Prokic
Telecom Design Lead
Mars Surveyor 2001 Program
Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Denver, Colorado USA

-=[ sent from a 3Com Palm III palm PC  & Multimail Pro v2.1b1]=-





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Sony 'Dream Factory'

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:05:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:08:16 -0500
Subject: Sony 'Dream Factory'


Those with an interest in the paranormal may wish to visit:

http://www.forteantimes.com/artic/115/sonypsi.html

to read an article about the closing of SONY's "Dream Factory",
a research laboratory on ESP!  The results of their efforts seem
to have proven the validity of the phenomenon beyond a shadow of
a doubt.  Quoting:

The ESPER lab's greatest success, Sako went on to explain, had
come in the field of clairvoyance, the ability to get
information about physical objects or distant events that is
beyond the reach of the ordinary senses. In one series of
experiments, clairvoyance was defined as the ability to "see"
letters and drawings on a target piece of paper without the use
of sight. One subject was a 10-year-old schoolgirl. Children,
Sako explained, are better at such things as clairvoyance than
adults. Sako then described his amazing experiment. He would
take a piece of paper about 1.5in (3.8cm) square and write or
draw something on it. He would then fold it once, twice, three
times and then crumple it up. Afterward the experimenter would
hand the tiny wad of paper with the target on it to the subject
to hold pinched between two fingers, or place the piece of paper
in the subject's ear. Sako did not smile. Was he pulling our
legs?

At first I thought this must be a relic behaviour from using a
Sony Walkman but, after further reflection -- and a look at a
paper written by Sako on 'Clairvoyance and Synesthesia' in
Journal of International Society of Life Information Science
(March 1997) -- I concluded that this experimental method must be
based on the belief that clairvoyance could be due to
syn=E6sthesia, a crossing of the senses [see FT113:28-31]. Perhaps
the ear could 'see' what was written on the paper? But Sako's
own research on the subject showed only the slimmest evidence of
syn=E6sthesia in clairvoyance. In a total of 20 trials, there were
only two examples for which the first sensation of the target
was not visual, but hearing and smell.

The best method, Sako told the audience, was "in the ear." We
were into deep weirdness here. And when Sako said best, he meant
best. In 35 trials, the recognition rate was an astonishing 97.1
per cent; a success rate unheard of in western parapsychology
experiments. There were 18 perfectly matching responses, noted
Sako, including the equation "1+ 2=3D 5" (a result which led Sako
to comment "It's wrong, but right".) Sixteen responses were so
"closely matching" that most western experimenters would likely
call them perfect hits. There was
one false response. It was too good to be true.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:14:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:16:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 11:17:35 PDT

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:43:21 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>You seem to think that it is
>>such a great thing to receive a favorable review by the Journal
>>of Scientific Exploration. Let me bring attention to another
>>favorable review published by JSE shortly before yours. Stanton
>>Friedman's "Top Secret/Majic" was reviewed in JSE by Wood and
>>received a very favorable and sympathetic review.

>Actually, dude, none of the reviews of my Encyclopedia (or other
>books) in the Journal of Scientific Exploration were written by
>Bob Wood.

Your propensity for being unable to comprehend words and
sentences when linked together and placed in a paragraph is the
most amazing example of mental masturbation I have ever seen
anywhere. You also did not write "Top Secret/Majic", but it and
your book both received favorable reviews in the pages of JSE.
So much for the quality of book reviews that the editor of JSE
allows in its journal.

>You know, you'd think that if my work suffered from the
>egregious flaws and cravenness our good-humored friend claims to
>find, _somebody else_ in the reviewing business would have
>noticed it. So far, nobody has, and in response to that simple
>fact, all Ed can do, when that fact is pointed out, is to get
>meaner and louder -- nothing new there.

You know as well as I do that book reviews tend to be generous.
But, you have yet to mention Hilary Evans review in Magonia. Any
reason you failed to bring attention to that review? Would you
like for me to quote from it?

>>Every claim I have made about your intellectual dishonesty, I
>>have documented it online with your exact quotes and challenged
>>you to show otherwise - including I might add to substantiate
>>your comments on the Sturrock Panel. The fact you have chosen
>>not to provide supporting documentation suggests you can't
>>substantiate your positional arguments.

>If the views of the scientists on the panel were hideously
>distorted, as you want us to believe and may or not believe
>yourself, it should be easy to prove as much.

Their views are not "hideously distorted". It is your
intellectual distorted spin that the scientific review panel has
validated ufology that is in your words "hideously distorted"
and at issue here.

>The scientists
>involved should have howled in protest and made their
>unhappiness known in no uncertain terms when their report was
>represented as arguing that scientists should conduct UFO
>investigation because puzzling UFO data exist. Right? Seems
>simple enough, even for you. Okay, then, Mr. Sunshine, please
>cite chapter and verse on where they've protested this gross
>misrepresentation of their views. You don't need to tell them
>what they think; let _them_ do it this time, okay?

See separate post of mine (information presented for the second
time) and James Easton's post. Any questions?

>And while you're at it, since participants in the meeting
>provide such a radically different account from the one you, a
>nonparticipant, provide, are we to believe that these people are
>liars?

The positive spin of the Stanford press release is not
commensurate with the printed summary of the scientific review
panel. Addressing comments by Sturrock and his team are
irrelevant to what the scientific review panel members said and
wrote. That is the essence of the panel that needs to be
addressed. People are not stupid. The scientific and academic
communities will see right through the unsupported spin placed
on these proceedings by the Stanford press release and
Sturrock's and his team's JSE report.

>Are, for example, Rodeghier and Swords lying in their
>account in the current issue of IUR?

I have yet to read their account, but if they don't separate the
scientific review panel summary comments and address them
separately from the Sturrock comments and address only the
Sturrockk comments they will be perpetuating a spin that is not
supportable and ultimately it will backfire on their faces as
well as IUR, CUFOS, and the whole of ufology.

Someday, maybe the masters of ufological wisdom will come to
understand that they can't keep hyperboling their contentions
and expect the real world to pay attention. But if they assume
the conservative position that can be argued effectively, they
will lose the support of the ufological gullible and that,
unfortunately is their bread and butter.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:42:33 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:13:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
>Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:03:32 -0400
>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

Previously I had written:

>>To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
>>what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
>>Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
>>company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
>>the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
>>I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
>>permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
>>every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
>>cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
>>figure.

Kevin, ever so quick, was on me in a flash:

>I could find no reference to "Attilla the Hun" or "Hun, the
>Barbarian" but did find "The Conqueror" made in 1956.

Man, I've been busted twice in one day!

Frankly, I didn't think anyone would have the interest to look
it up (obviously, I didn't). Geesh....

I believe you're right. I think it's real name was "The
Conqueror". Although I do have a copy in Spanish that translates
to "Hun, the Barbarian". (even more bizarre)

Sorry, Kevin. It was my pathetic attempt at humor. I figured
most people would find it amusing that John Wayne played Attilla
the Hun but didn't think they'd make "The Conqueror" connection.

Moving on you asked:

>Can we
>really say that "every last person on the film crew and cast has
>since died of cancer"? Wasn't John Wayne's cancer attributed to
>smoking cigarettes?

Wayne definitely liked his cigarettes. He probably lit quite a
few while in Nevada, working on the film. Bet he didn't even
need matches.

Or maybe he was insightful; decided to combine cigarette smoking
_and_ radiation therapy into one, just to save time.

Later, Pilgrim.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                                Re: Colleague

From: Roger R. Prokic <rprokic@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat 24 Oct, 1998 9:07
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:01:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Colleague

>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:23:34 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Colleagues


>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Colleagues

>Re: The travel log of Michael Heseman.

>>He went to South Africa.
>>He went to Varghina
>>He visited Socorro, NM,
>>He went to Mexico City
>>he's been to England more than once
>>he visited Jerusalem last summer
>>He visited Meier's place

>So I want to know who his banker is! I think Mr. Heseman has
>every UFO investigator dream job.

>>I also think he's right not to pay too much attention in this
>>field to one's advanced degrees.

>I agree Jim, I'd rather take the trips. Who cares about the
>degrees!

It's his magazine he sells.  Unless he's got a new job with the
National Enquirer. He's a sensationalist writer, not really in
search for the truth.


Roger R. Prokic
Telecom Design Lead
Mars Surveyor 2001 Program
Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Denver, Colorado USA
-=[ sent from a 3Com Palm III palm PC  & Multimail Pro v2.1b1]=-





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                 Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:42:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:17:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Dear Colleagues,

>I am looking for any, Kent Ufo research group, particulary in the
>Gravesend area for the following reason.

Roy,

I do not have details of any groups in Kent, but do have the
following all in Kent:

ASTRASEARCH
David Quickenden
61 Eaton Road
Margate
Kent

Phone: 01843 221015



NORTH KENT UFO RESEARCH TEAM
Herne Bay
Kent

Contact: John Jenkins on 01227 365079


SIGHTINGS
Mr Nigel Grainger
22 Hastings Avenue
Margate
Kent
CT9 2SG

Phone: 01843 290152

UFO MONITORS EAST KENT (UFOMEK)
c/o Jerry Anderson
'Ivydene'
Wingham Well Road
Bramling
Canterbury
Kent
CT3 1NN


UNISPEC UFOLOGY RESEARCH GROUP
Kent

Contact: Paul Richards on 0850 607986 (mobile phone)


Regards,


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/
UFOICQ Australian UFO Reports and Experiences:-
        http://ufoinfo.com/ufoicq/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:48:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:24:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:29:01 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:18:28 -0400
>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:52:43 -0500
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>Subject: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>>Hi All,

>>>A doctor in New York (a fertility expert) was busted
>>>for filing false insurance claims so that his clients
>>>could be artificially inseminated and get 'coverage'
>>>for it. That's not why I'm writing though.

>>>The reporter also interviewed a representative of
>>>the Health insurance outfit that was being bilked.
>>>The woman made a comment that shocked me and
>>>left me numb.

>>>She said, "One out of six couples in the US is
>>>experiencing problems with infertility." ! ! ! ?

>>>Is this so? Does anyone else have any information

<snip>

 >>Peace,

>>>John Velez, -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>(snip)

>>Gary

>Hi Gary,

>I just wanted to thank Gary and _all_ who responded to my
>request for info. It is disturbing to think that 6 out of 10 (or
>7 out of 10 couples as one of the respondants reported,) are
>experiencing fertility problems. I also don't understand why
>this isn't a _major_ issue!

<snip>

>Peace,
>
>John Velez, Sperm donor to the stars!

=============================================>
John, Gary and List:

The citizens of this fair country are lemmings, John.
Everything they ever wanted to know replaces everything they
need to know. And everything they need to know is controlled by
senses in lieu of sensibility. Someone might actually believe
all this to be a conspiracy, but no one but the Great God Among
us could be _that_ prescient. Can't pin this one on any one or
agency or even agencies. Maybe on Grays?? Let me explain,
please.

We've become a nation of intellectual illiterates, people who
vote for pigs, the person with the biggest ad budget, the best
TV presence, or the biggest advertising budget, without benefit
of logic and reason. Our parents and grandparents worked their
buns off to give to their children what they never had. And we
got spoiled rotten.

"Give them what they want..." is the hue and cry of those
controlling what we see, hear, smell, touch and taste. Doesn't
matter whether or not it's good for us, as long as it sells
"What we don't make here nomore!!" Give them what they want" is
the excuse for the degradation of truth,honor, self respect and
integrity. Forget about imagination and intellect or that killer
of all killer demons, "spirituality."

Throw away your New Age Killer gun, John. I don't subscribe. But
spirituality exists not. It is being discontinued due to lack of
interest. It is replaced by a society imbued with the attitude
that each person is "owed" everything they want in lieu of
working for it. And what they want is what they can see, touch,
feel, etc.

If God forbid something terrible should happen in this country,
most men couldn't support their testicles, let alone the well
being of those who depend on them for food and shelter. If you
took away their computers and their televisions, they would go
find a warm, wet place where the sun don't shine in which to
hide from the realities of existence.

So _why_ are those scumbucket pasty bastards are taking our
seed?

I read a story about an abduction experience (I cannot recall
who) during which the abductee complained over the theft of his
semen. The alleged response was, "Why should this matter to
you, you (mankind) are always spilling your seed?" Meaning what
we do to ourselves is just as bad (or good) as what they do to
us, presumably.

You ask the best question, John.  But there are others. For
example...

Why is science seemingly oblivious to the terror which we are
inflicting on our environment?

Why do we not respond to what the environment is telling us?

Why are we (apparently) doing nothing about the possibility of
Y2K literally destroying our infrastructure of services?

Why are we continuing to remove from our world's surface, the
very elements which are required for life here?

What are these entities doing with our seeds of life?

Why don't they explain why they need it, or is it that they
merely want it?

Why don't they merely ask us to donate sperm and ova?

They've had the sperm of little boys and men and ova of girls
and women for decades, if not longer.  When we complain, we are
relegated to the cast of circle-jerk freaks who "think" they've
been abducted and we all get Klass Gassed for all the trouble
we've suffered. "Laugh and point!" is what the result of Klass
Gassing is. And he aint' even _GOOD_ at it!

John, why ask why? When even our own kind keeps us in the
ghetto where we can be observed en mas by those in the know.
Instead of breaking out of the ghetto, we stay here and wimp
among ourselves over our lot in life. Gads, we are even more
visible in the ghetto are we not? The "ghetto of fools!" Yes,
ghetto of fools because here in the ghetto we are neighbors to
Chupacabras and Big Foot and Nessie and swamp gas.

And we stay here in the ghetto waiting to be delivered.
"Johnny's in the basement mixin up the medicine, I'm on the
pavement, waiting for the guvament ..." to tell us when to eat
and when to sh--t. That's what it's coming to. Control... we
are coming closer and closer to the time when we will no longer
have our freedoms.

Wouldn't it be interesting if all this were to turn out to be a
way for us to be subjugated?  Why NOT take the seed of those
who can be fools faster than spit spreads is a vacuum? Heck,
there could be a universe full of fools eiher serving or being
served by slant eyed pasty bastards.

It dawns on me that all I've done is ask questions. I haven't a
clue as to the answers. In fact, all you did to me by your post
was create more questions.

Thanks! That's just what I needed! *@##!&%&&^!!!

Jim Mortellaro





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:10:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:32:00 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:45:06 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:53:05 +0100
>>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO Name Change?

>>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>>>List,

>>>I thought this may be of interest.

>>>Leanne

>>>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>>>Subject: UFO name change.

>>>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>>>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>>natural unidentified objects.

>>>>What do you all think.

>>>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

>>Hi Leanne

>>How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?

>>Don Ledger


>A LONG time ago I wrote an article in Gnostica in which I
>proposed that the term UFO had too much of a stigma attached to
>it and that it implied things which were assumptions.

>Both of these suggestions now use "Craft". We do not know that
>this is the case. Nor do we know that they are "Off World" or
>"Extraterrestrial". These are unproved assumptions, and may well
>be wrong.

>When I wrote the Gnostica article back in the early 70s, I
>suggested that we all adopt the term UAP, "Unidentified Aerial
>Phenomena", which carries no unfounded assumptions.

>BTW, I do not take credit for coming up with this acronym. My
>old friend Ivan Sanderson came up with it and promoted it as
>well.

>B
===========================================>

Jeeze Louise, I really hate to throw a monkey wrench into all
this fun you people are having...

_NOT_!!

But ... you guys remind me of the so-called "peace talks" during
that "Korean Conflict" back in the fifties. You know, the one
were the participants were arguing over the height of the
stinking flagpole or where the combatants should sit at the
table? This must be Korea all over again. I got shrapnel in me
older than most of you must be so if you never heard of Korea,
look it up on the WWW. It's right there along with Kate Smith
and the Dumont TV network.

Jeezus K. Cripes alive. What dribble. What horse hockey, what
a blemish on the ass of society! I _can't freaking believe_
this string or the one before which suggested we post our CV's
so people could respect or disrespect our opines all the more or
less.

What the hell does this B-S- have to do with _anything anyway?_
I mean Klass Gas and Swamp Gas and all that crappola is gonna
lead the way of this ship of fools we call the earth anyway
right? It seems that every once is a while, I read things which
convey the idea that the sum total of human knowledge is
detracted from by the subjects some of us get excited over.
Damn!

OK, OK.

I feel much better now that I've unburdened my colon of this
load.

No! REALLY.
HONEST!

Please continue with this shred (I mean thread). I promise not
to go ballistic for at least a week.... maybe more, as I am
resuming my Prozac this evening at double dose levels.

Dr. Jaime Gesundt,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: John Rimmer <magonia@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:06:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:26:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:00:00 -0400

>It appears to me more likely the aliens would be appalled that
>we are breeding ourselves and the planet into oblivion. Think we
>still have quite a while yet on this planet before we have to
>worry about the effects of sterility. Especially in some parts
>of the world.

These wouldn't happen to be parts of the world where people are
perhaps rather less white than most of the posters to this list,
would it? Sounds a rather dubious statement, IMHO.

>Less people might also allow a few trees to grow back.

A few thousand years ago the British Isles was as covered with
trees as the Amazon rain forest (still) is now. Nowadays there
are considerably fewer trees and about 57 million more people,
all of whome enjoy a rather better standard of living than our
hunting fathers did. I know in which era I'd rather live.

> P'raps
>the aliens are tired of hunting thru the subdivisions trying to
>find a field to land in.

And last time I ventured a couple of miles away from Magonia
Towers in the heart of downtown Mortlake, I saw an awful lot of
fields full of nice green stuff that the UFOs could land on,
even in overcrowded little England! All those corn-circles don't
grow on on concrete you know.

There is no threat of overpopulation on this planet. Alarmist
eco-doom prophets from the 'sixties have already been shown up
for the inaccurate scaremongers they were. Remember the great
U.S. famine in the 'eighties that was predicted in "The
Population Bomb"? Me neither.

And seven out of ten couples infertile? C'mon, where d'you get





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:38:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:40:29 -0500
Subject: Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO MAG Nazi Nonsense?
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 05:42:15 +0100

Tim

In my humble opinion this is a shocking condemnation of a
sensible magazine article.

>'UFO Magazine' (UK) New Nazi-Et Lie - A Lesson In GCSE History!

>Yes, the new 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is on the stands (hidden at the
>back where sensible people will be able to avoid it).

I agree in as much as the magazine should be given a more
prominent position so that sensible people can find it more
readily! The 'New' magazine has been around for a while now .I
have a copy somewhere from 1995! Hardly new,but it sets the tone
for the rest of your comments.

>One article - UFO crash at Czernia - is a hilarious brand of
>Nazi pseudo history, factual inaccuracy and a desperate attempt
>to shore up the 'ET recovered' technology myth. Graham Birdsall
>seems to have completely lost his sense of objectivity This kind
>of thing serves only those who wish to distort the truth about
>flying disc technologies. All I can say is that I hope the
>spooks pay well for such marvellous disinformation..

As most people will know Graham Birdsall is the editor of UFO
Magazine. He did -not- write this particular piece.The Author
was Robert Lesniakiewicz! I might be wrong but something tells
me that he is unlikely to be a Nazi Historian writing.

>The story has it that a UFO 'crashed' in Poland on land owned by
>Eva Braun's parents no less...

>............in 1937.

>So far so bad but what else?

Perhaps you did not read the opening paragraph to this
article,part of which reads (Polish Researcher Robert
Lesniakiewicz addresses whether the town of Jenenia Gora was
called Hirshbeberg in 1938 and part of Germany,not Poland)

The article does not make it clear as to whether or not it was a
German or Polish town at this time. Perhaps some one on the list
can help?

>It was recovered - not by the Polish cavalry, at this stage
>still on horseback, but by a detachment of Waffen SS troops!
>
>18 months before Gleiwitz and the subsequent invasion of Poland
>by Hitler's troops! Oh dear oh dear!

I refer to my comments above.If the town was German then a troop
of Polish Lancers would, IMHO, hardly of taken part in any
claimed recovery.

>Oh dear indeed, a course in GCSE history might be in order for
>the masters of Quest MegaTowers newly situated in the leafy
>suburbs of Ilkley, West Yorkshire, where one of the biggest UFO
>hoaxes of the 1980s was born - the 'Ilkley Entity' otherwise
>known and understood to be a plastic dummy placed on a hillside
>and photographed for posterity.

>Now I wonder who passed the photograph on to researchers in the
>North West?

It is of course just possible that it might be you that needs a
course in Geography.

Even so just what the hell has your comment got to do with this
particular Magazine article? If you have a particular axe to
grind, then grind it at the right time and place,not in the
middle of something totally unrelated.

>Anyway back in Poland the 'recovered UFO' taken by (non-existent
>SS troops) was no doubt back engineered and converted by means

>unknown into a flying disc. All this in three years and Rudolph
>Schriever must have lied when he claimed to have adapted his
>VTOL disc idea from those of William Horton Zimmerman in the
>USA. Even more unusually, he employed jet engines which,
>although in their infancy were no match for alien hardware no
>doubt deciphered by a latter-day Jarod via telepathy.

>ET and Hitler link up?

>Only in your wildest dreams people.

No,I am sorry but only in-your -dreams has this comment anything
to do with the Magazine article in question. Perhaps you are
getting confused with the recent article in 'Focus' Magazine
which relates to both Schriever and Zimmerman?

>The author of this terrible article - a disgrace to Ufology in
>fact - then finishes off the piece with a load of old (very old
>and very sad) crap about "Vril", "Haunebu" discs etc. etc.

>As I pointed out the "V" designation relates to "Versuchs" - the
>German word for experimental.

Perhaps  you once again never read the appropriate passage
correctly, so here it is:


   "We are almost one hundred per cent certain that the
Vril,Hannebu and V-7 disc planes really did exist in Germany
during WWII."


That is all that the Author said! He makes no mention of the
meaning of the word Vril, only you do.

>You might remember that some time ago I predicted the new
>Nazi-ET lie; and here it is - sadly lacking in reality or
>evidence.....

>This Nazi/occult stuff is the fall back position for those
>unhappy and/or unconvinced by the ever-so-shaky Roswell case. It
>is desperate stuff totally lacking in _any_ evidence and
>entirely without a factual basis. But idiots will believe it and
>idiots will buy it. Sales of Peter Moons' ridiculous 'Black Sun'
>Nazi/occult/Mountauk right-wing propaganda may even be
>encouraged as a result.

Once again I ask you to explain just what this comment has to do
with the magazine article.There is no mention of the Occult,
Satan, not even Roswell.Only your ridiculous nonsense.

Where is the mention of Peter Moon? Right-wing propaganda may be
encouraged? Who regards Roswell as shaky? You? Why not explain
yourself?

>This nonsense will not deter us from seeking both truth and
>reality.

You are at least right with regard to this comment. This
nonsense, your nonsense, will not deter us from seeking both
truth and reality.

I have to say that this is one of the most disgraceful critiques
of a magazine article I have yet read.

It bears little to do with what has actually been written in the
article and appears to reflect more on what you wish the List
readership to read regarding your own 'strange points of view'.
Be a skeptic by all means, I can live with that, but do not
twist something that is plainly not there to make a very labored
and contrived point. Yes there are a number of questions that
need asking regarding this article but Get real!!

If anyone on the List requires a precis of the article I will be
happy to provide one bearing in mind the copyright laws etc.


Keith.....Keep the faith.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:22:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:45:31 -0500
Subject: Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 02:18:43 +0100

<snip>

>Hi again,

>I note an even bigger mistake in the 'Czernia' article featured
>in UFO Magazine (UK).

>The Waffen SS was not even formed until 2nd March 1940. So what
>was it doing in Poland three years before? Time travel?

>A quick check on the Internet was all it took to find this
>out......

Tim,

You really should take more time with your research. You are
right when you say that the'Waffen'SS was formed in March of
1940. However you neglect to say that it was the result of a
name change.

Prior to that date they were known as the SS-Verfugungstruppe.
They had been in existence, as an armed force,since around March
1935. Of course the start of the SS goes back a little further
to Hitler's armed body guards.

Ask most people to give the prefix to the SS and I contend they
will say Waffen. How many would say Verfugungstruppe? Would you?
I suggest in the context of the Czernia Report the Author has
possibly done the same thing.

Perhaps a Military Historian amongst the List members can give a
location to the SS Units around that time.

Keith.....Keep the faith!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:17:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:14:55 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:16:44 +0100
>From: Adam Lowe <spookyfox@lowea.freeserve.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:46:07 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>I'm sorry its a bit off the UFO topic but I wanted to try and
>explain what ME is because it has been asked a couple of times
>in some postings. Anyone is welcome to contact me off list if
>they want, Adam.

<snip>

>What is ME? It is an illness you get following some kind of
>viral infection.

<snip>

>Adam.

Hello Adam,

Thank you for providing us with this information regarding ME.
My only problem was with the speculative terms and assumptions
that {surrounded} the original question. Not the question
itself.

Peace,

John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:05:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:24:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com
>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:45:22 EDT
>>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:50:17 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

><snip>

>>To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
>>what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
>>Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
>>company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
>>the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
>>I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
>>permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
>>every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
>>cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
>>figure.

>I could find no reference to "Attilla the Hun" or "Hun, the
>Barbarian" but did find "The Conqueror" made in 1956. Can we
>really say that "every last person on the film crew and cast has
>since died of cancer"? Wasn't John Wayne's cancer attributed to
>smoking cigarettes?

>Just wondering.

Kevin and Kathleen,

at:
http://isir.kaist.ac.kr/yeyoung/md/faq/list-movie-trivia-faq.html

[a must-have for every film maniac ;) ]

You will find the following:

"
# Conqueror,

The (1956) - On-site filming took place at a nuclear test site,
and some of the radioactive sand was even carted back to the
studio lot for further scenes. This radiation managed to kill
off a substantial number of actors, and probably contributed to
'John Wayne' (qv)'s lung problems.

"

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 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 07:20:50 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:16:58 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au

From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
To: D Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?
Date: Saturday, 24 October 1998 13:54

The following have been suggested:

UAA = Unidentified Aerial Anomaly---- Mine--.Peter J. :>)
CUO = Craft of Unknown Origin      ---------------Donni S.
UAO = Unidentified Aerial Objects ---------------Bob Thrift
UCT = Uncorrelated Targets *---------------------- Military
UAP = Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon ------- Bob Shell
WHITT = What The Hell is That Thing - my favourite! --Donni S.

It seems that what we should do is leave it how it is UFO, I
doubt whether we could get the majority vote on any one Name.

Where did the name UFO come from anyway?

Peter J. :>)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:38:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:41:40 -0500
Subject: Re: UK UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO MAG Nazi Nonsense?
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 05:42:15 +0100

Tim

In my humble opinion this is a shocking condemnation of a
sensible magazine article.

>'UFO Magazine' (UK) New Nazi-Et Lie - A Lesson In GCSE History!

>Yes, the new 'UFO Magazine' (UK) is on the stands (hidden at the
>back where sensible people will be able to avoid it).

I agree in as much as the magazine should be given a more
prominent position so that sensible people can find it more
readily! The 'New' magazine has been around for a while now .I
have a copy somewhere from 1995! Hardly new,but it sets the tone
for the rest of your comments.

>One article - UFO crash at Czernia - is a hilarious brand of
>Nazi pseudo history, factual inaccuracy and a desperate attempt
>to shore up the 'ET recovered' technology myth. Graham Birdsall
>seems to have completely lost his sense of objectivity This kind
>of thing serves only those who wish to distort the truth about
>flying disc technologies. All I can say is that I hope the
>spooks pay well for such marvellous disinformation..

As most people will know Graham Birdsall is the editor of UFO
Magazine. He did -not- write this particular piece.The Author
was Robert Lesniakiewicz! I might be wrong but something tells
me that he is unlikely to be a Nazi Historian writing.

>The story has it that a UFO 'crashed' in Poland on land owned by
>Eva Braun's parents no less...

>............in 1937.

>So far so bad but what else?

Perhaps you did not read the opening paragraph to this
article,part of which reads (Polish Researcher Robert
Lesniakiewicz addresses whether the town of Jenenia Gora was
called Hirshbeberg in 1938 and part of Germany,not Poland)

The article does not make it clear as to whether or not it was a
German or Polish town at this time. Perhaps some one on the list
can help?

>It was recovered - not by the Polish cavalry, at this stage
>still on horseback, but by a detachment of Waffen SS troops!
>
>18 months before Gleiwitz and the subsequent invasion of Poland
>by Hitler's troops! Oh dear oh dear!

I refer to my comments above.If the town was German then a troop
of Polish Lancers would, IMHO, hardly of taken part in any
claimed recovery.

>Oh dear indeed, a course in GCSE history might be in order for
>the masters of Quest MegaTowers newly situated in the leafy
>suburbs of Ilkley, West Yorkshire, where one of the biggest UFO
>hoaxes of the 1980s was born - the 'Ilkley Entity' otherwise
>known and understood to be a plastic dummy placed on a hillside
>and photographed for posterity.

>Now I wonder who passed the photograph on to researchers in the
>North West?

It is of course just possible that it might be you that needs a
course in Geography.

Even so just what the hell has your comment got to do with this
particular Magazine article? If you have a particular axe to
grind, then grind it at the right time and place,not in the
middle of something totally unrelated.

>Anyway back in Poland the 'recovered UFO' taken by (non-existent
>SS troops) was no doubt back engineered and converted by means

>unknown into a flying disc. All this in three years and Rudolph
>Schriever must have lied when he claimed to have adapted his
>VTOL disc idea from those of William Horton Zimmerman in the
>USA. Even more unusually, he employed jet engines which,
>although in their infancy were no match for alien hardware no
>doubt deciphered by a latter-day Jarod via telepathy.

>ET and Hitler link up?

>Only in your wildest dreams people.

No,I am sorry but only in-your -dreams has this comment anything
to do with the Magazine article in question. Perhaps you are
getting confused with the recent article in 'Focus' Magazine
which relates to both Schriever and Zimmerman?

>The author of this terrible article - a disgrace to Ufology in
>fact - then finishes off the piece with a load of old (very old
>and very sad) crap about "Vril", "Haunebu" discs etc. etc.

>As I pointed out the "V" designation relates to "Versuchs" - the
>German word for experimental.

Perhaps  you once again never read the appropriate passage
correctly, so here it is:


   "We are almost one hundred per cent certain that the
Vril,Hannebu and V-7 disc planes really did exist in Germany
during WWII."


That is all that the Author said! He makes no mention of the
meaning of the word Vril, only you do.

>You might remember that some time ago I predicted the new
>Nazi-ET lie; and here it is - sadly lacking in reality or
>evidence.....

>This Nazi/occult stuff is the fall back position for those
>unhappy and/or unconvinced by the ever-so-shaky Roswell case. It
>is desperate stuff totally lacking in _any_ evidence and
>entirely without a factual basis. But idiots will believe it and
>idiots will buy it. Sales of Peter Moons' ridiculous 'Black Sun'
>Nazi/occult/Mountauk right-wing propaganda may even be
>encouraged as a result.

Once again I ask you to explain just what this comment has to do
with the magazine article.There is no mention of the Occult,
Satan, not even Roswell.Only your ridiculous nonsense.

Where is the mention of Peter Moon? Right-wing propaganda may be
encouraged? Who regards Roswell as shaky? You? Why not explain
yourself?

>This nonsense will not deter us from seeking both truth and
>reality.

You are at least right with regard to this comment. This
nonsense, your nonsense, will not deter us from seeking both
truth and reality.

I have to say that this is one of the most disgraceful critiques
of a magazine article I have yet read.

It bears little to do with what has actually been written in the
article and appears to reflect more on what you wish the List
readership to read regarding your own 'strange points of view'.
Be a skeptic by all means, I can live with that, but do not
twist something that is plainly not there to make a very labored
and contrived point. Yes there are a number of questions that
need asking regarding this article but Get real!!

If anyone on the List requires a precis of the article I will be
happy to provide one bearing in mind the copyright laws etc.


Keith.....Keep the faith.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:02:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:22:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:28:08 -0500

>hmmm...  Look, myriad thoughts using children playing at a make
>believe tea party as an analogy to the wild eyed postulates
>still spouted about the late night lights over Phoenix swirl
>about my mind.

Hi Ted,

Just got off recess, so I thought I'd respond to your warm
sentiments as expressed above.

I seem to recall my eyes retaining their natural shape while
typing the comments you condescendingly referred to. And I don't
much care for tea. Besides, I don't fit in those little chairs
anymore. In any case, I don't care much to have my ideas or
questions characterized as spouting.

I did look at Dr. Maccabee's analysis. It is impressive, but
hardly the final word (no offense Bruce). If you are satisfied
with the flare explanation, great. I'm pretty satisfied with it
as well.

I don't recall any of the writers in this thread saying or even
implying that the Phoenix lights were spacecraft. You apparently
assumed that our questioning of the flare theory automatically
implies a belief that the lights were spacecraft.

To wit:

>Baseless speculation from shallow knowledge to compose wildly
>creative conjecture is little more than a form of public self
>stimulation.

I wasn't speculating, I was asking questions. And I don't recall
anyone using "creative conjecture". Is that what you call trying
to gather more information? Or asking questions with the notion
that perhaps they might not have been asked yet? I would think
barging in on a polite conversation to inform the conversants
of their childish behavior would be more likely to be
defined as "public self stimulation".

Greg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:52:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:31:42 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:45:06 -0400 (EDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:53:05 +0100
>>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

>>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>>natural unidentified objects.

>>>>What do you all think.

>>>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

>>Hi Leanne

>>How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?

>>Don Ledger

>A LONG time ago I wrote an article in Gnostica in which I
>proposed that the term UFO had too much of a stigma attached to
>it and that it implied things which were assumptions.

>Both of these suggestions now use "Craft". We do not know that
>this is the case. Nor do we know that they are "Off World" or
>"Extraterrestrial". These are unproved assumptions, and may well
>be wrong.

>When I wrote the Gnostica article back in the early 70s, I
>suggested that we all adopt the term UAP, "Unidentified Aerial
>Phenomena", which carries no unfounded assumptions.

Hi Bob, Leanne and all,

Nice Bob! You wrote to Gnostica, try again but after you read
this, please...

Why is such an insistence to change the old UFO contraction? How
do you call then the objects that have been photographed in
space like Gemini, Apollo and many other missions? USP?
Unidentified Space Phenomena? Or those emerging/diving from
water areas? UWP? Come on!

Our main and principal objective must be _why_ those objects are
visiting our planet and expose our governments that are keeping
in secret the truth, the mankind's right to know, we must
defend! Let's join forces!

Why are we wasting precious time fighting between ourselves to
reach the "TOP of the line", feeding our ego, and not
investigating, compiling, searching for strategic witnesses,
joining groups that are working very hard to push the world
leaders to show us what for a long time has been a cover-up.

No! By the contrary, we like more to fight within ourselves and
that is what our governments want us to do, yes divide and
you'll win! Why do we have to play their game! let's play our
game against the real enemy, let's expose the ones that are
keeping the secret and help those who are behind the truth!

These are no assumptions Bob, this is reality!

>BTW, I do not take credit for coming up with this acronym. My
>old friend Ivan Sanderson came up with it and promoted it as
>well.

>Bob

Best regards,

Alex Franz






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:43:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:27:45 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:07:14 -0600
>From: Bob Thrift - Institute for UFO Research <iufor@frii.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>Perhaps another acronym is needed, something like; CUO - Craft
>>of Unknown Origin or WHITT - What the Hell Is That Thing.. <BG>

>>DonnieS

>Come to think of it, WHITT actually does have a certain
>universal applicability...

>Regards,
>Bob

Yup! WHITT!!! Its honest, it covers grounded objects, objects
seen in the ocean, as well as stuff in the sky. It covers what
could be crafts and it covers what might, (who knows) be of a
spiritual/nonphysical origin or any other type of sighting I
have ever heard of! And to be truthful, as I recall, when after
a fascination with these things for over forty years, when I
finally saw 'something' do 'something really weird', as I was
about to step off the porch about 10 pm one evening two years
ago, my immediate reaction was "What the Hell is that thing???".
I didn't even think to call my husband, sitting in the
livingroom only thirty feet from me, but through a closed door
admittedly. He doesn't believe, or just doesn't care, I'm not
sure which.

I can't honestly say it was any kind of space craft in a
physical sense. And I can't say if it was reflecting the large
goldish glow I saw, or was the source of it. Yes, it was
unidentified, but at first, it didn't move, so it wasn't a
flying object at all. But then when it broke up into four equal
pieces in a line, equal distance from each other, and then all
together rose up and then disappeared, I knew it was
unidentifiable and an object, but does that movement constitute
flying?

My vote goes to WHITT!!!! Heck, even skeptics and disbelievers
could grasp that!

Lesley


--
Lesley Cluff, Ontario, Canada manitou@fox.nstn.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 >
   Oct > Oct 25

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:21:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:18:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 12:21:23 PDT

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:37:11 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Your intellectual dishonesty never seizes to amaze me. If you
>>had the intellectual honesty and capacity to address this
>>discussion properly and in context, you would not keep in denial
>>from the fact that I have introduced the comments of H.J. Melosh
>>made on the BBC which supports my arguments. That archived
>>message and available to readers is:


>>Since you seem to be computer impaired below is the relevant
>>comments from my previous posting up above:

>>Not only that, but there is already one voice of dissent on the
>>public record from the participating group of scientists in the
>>panel, Dr. H.J. Melosh, a meteorologist who was interviewed for
>>BBC. Dr. Melosh is reputed to have said that the panel wasn't
>>independent because they had connections with the UFO community
>>and it was allegedly clear to him that the panel was not clean.
>>Dr. Melosh went on allegedly to say that the so-called evidence
>>was not convincing and it was un-scientific with no hard
>>evidence available. He went on to say that he for one was not
>>going to spent any more time on the subject of UFOs.

>Mr. Sunshine's intellectual sloppiness never ceases to amaze me.
>He is passing on what is clearly a rumor, perhaps generated by
>the wishful thinking to which Mr. S is susceptible. Note the
>following in the above account:

>"reputed to have said"
>"allegedly clear to him"
>"went on allegedly to say"

One point you seem to have neglected to notice.  The above
account is my own and not the BBC transcribed summary. I chose
to be conservative in my words because I have not heard the BBC
broadcast, only read a transcribed summary - source
documentation listed in the original link provided. Contrary to
practicioners of intellectual dishonesty and ufological
hyperbole, such as yourself, I will not overstate my position
and blow smoke up the ufological gullible asses. What you call
'intellectual sloppiness' is actually integrity in reporting, a
concept you need to pay more attention to.

My actual message which you ignored at first and now claim to be
an unsubstantiated rumor is at:

 http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/oct/m15-013.shtml

with the source message of the BBC summarized broadcast at:

 http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/oct/m05-022.shtml
 posted under the title "BBC: A Question of Science"

>Pretty impressive, Mr. S. Thank God you're not attempting to do
>UFO history.

I don't have to. Loren Gross does a remarkable and reliable job
with full integrity. In his acknowledgments he has this to say
about me:

        "...who gave advice on the manuscript but most of all
was instrumental in obtaining complete sets of important
publications, hard to find microfilm, various government
documents, and other items too numerous to list."


Loren Gross and I have been mutually assisting each other for
the last six years and I am confident that his history will
stand up as the source documentation for future generations
simply because there is no pretense or hyperbole in his writing
and it is not skewed towards any specific belief system. I am
just sorry that his history writing will end with 1959. At least
there will be one reliable accounting of the early days of the
modern UFO phenomenon for future generations.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:23:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:31:10 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>Hi Max, hi All,

>I read your post with interest. Before I respond I need to ask
>a few questions if that is ok. Sorry for length of my response
>but this is a subject that is very near and dear to me. <G>


John, I thank you for your intelligent response to the above.

I have a few questions for John Velez, any other abductees or
people who work with abductees.

Do any of you or medical professionals involved in groups such
as IF, AIC, MUFON, etc. have any evidence that people seeking
regressive hynosis are in better hands having the sessions witha
psychologist or psychiatrist rather than a hypnotist or
hypnotherapist? The sessions can be quite traumatic. I don't
know if hypnotherapists, etc. can make an accurate psychological
profile before the sessions start or are trained enough to help
the traumatized person enough when they are brought out of
hypnosis. What have you learned?

I also have no knowledge of M.E. What are its symptoms,
diagnosis, and prognosis?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:55:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:25:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Gravesend Sighting Kent UK? Info Needed
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi Roy,

>I am looking for any, Kent Ufo research group, particulary in the
>Gravesend area for the following reason.

Then you are looking for UFOMEK :-)

>Do you have any witness information,to an event which took place on
>the evening of 17th July 1998 in the Gravesend area?

Yup, got _the_ witness and video :-)

Research is still currently underway, which is why no details
have been given out as yet.

>If any Gravesend / Kent researcher can contact me ASAP,

Hi ;-)

>this would be
>most apreciated.Please contact me on the above address.

Please, email either myself or Jerry at:

ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk


yours



---
    In an infinite universe inifinitely anything is posible.
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:10:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:09:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com
>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:45:22 EDT
>>Fwd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:50:17 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

><snip>

>>To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
>>what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
>>Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
>>company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
>>the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
>>I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
>>permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
>>every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
>>cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
>>figure.

>I could find no reference to "Attilla the Hun" or "Hun, the
>Barbarian" but did find "The Conqueror" made in 1956. Can we
>really say that "every last person on the film crew and cast has
>since died of cancer"? Wasn't John Wayne's cancer attributed to
>smoking cigarettes?

>Just wondering.

>KRandle

Hello Kevin & list,

'The Conqueror' was produced by  one Howard Hughes, who also
produced 'Jet Pilot' - another Hughes/Wayne gobbler. either it
was his desire to make a Oscar winning flick, or a Wellsian (as
in Orson) ego trip.

The acutal Cancer problem came when Hughes insisted on using
the _actual_ Utah (and down wind) dirt on the stage at, as I
remember, Coumbia Pictures.

'Jet Pilot' is worth a look for historical reasons, it contains
footage ot the X-1 as a "Russian rocket fighter". I don't know
how Howard swung that one, either. However they ain't 'True Grit
or 'The Searchers'.

GT McCoy

   "It may not be the easy 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                  {96} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:56:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:34:21 -0500
Subject: {96} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                       24th October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 1 Issue 96
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in 58 countries.

This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be
reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject
section e.g.  Repost {96} part 1, part 2 or part 3.

In this issue:

Editorial
---------

Free to you customised MIRC
Competition

United Kingdom News
-------------------

[UK 1] Questions raised in the House of Commons
[UK 2] The aliens are out there
[UK 3] West Midlands Police Officer & the disappearing star
[UK 4] Meteors could light up night
[UK 5] Fact File - Shooting Stars

World News
----------

[W 1] They came from outer space
[W 2] Internet Could Help in Search for Extraterrestrial Life
[W 3] Swissair Jet Crashes In Atlantic, Killing 229
[W 4] Big Triangle UFO Flies Very Low Over The Ardennes - Scores
      Of Witnesses
[W 5] Life from Mars ?
[W 6] Man Pleads Guilty in Wife Killing
[W 7] Roswell space alien breaks its silence
[W 8] We are not being visited
[W 9] 12 Dead in Military Copter Crash - Nellis Air Force Base
[W 10] Pyramids built with 'instant bricks'
[W 11] Vatican man puts faith in ET and his friends
[W 12] Area-51 still inspires curiosity, theories
[W 13] Mysterious light likened to boomerang
[W 14] Reason for Optimism in ET Search

Letters
-------

Book serialisation
------------------

A FEARFUL SYMMETRY

A TRUE STORY OF ALIEN INTRUSION INTO HUMAN LIVES

By D. Lynne Bishop

Statement, Subscription Information, IRC connecting
---------------------------------------------------

How, where, and maybe even why, to find us - and what to do when you
get there.


Editorial
=========

Free to you customised MIRC

For some years now you have heard us go on about connecting to
our weekly UFO IRC meetings which we now hold on the Chatnet
servers. You are no doubt also aware that quite regularly we
have special guests join us on channel to answer your questions.
Recent guests have been Stanton Friedman, Nick Pope (UK MoD),
John Carpenter, Kevin Randle, Nick Redfern etc. Coming guests
include Jesse Marcel jnr and Joyce Murphy (Beyond Boundaries).

How you ever wished that you could join in, but have not really
known how too. We have special customised versions of MIRC for
Win 3.1/3.11 & Win 95/98 that until now have only been available
to our guests.

UK.UFO.NW would like you to join in our weekly IRC meetings. For
this reason we are making available customised versions of MIRC
just for you. They are totally free, so simple to use and
customised with your details. MIRC will be supplied with full
instructions.

For your customised version of MIRC we need to know the below
details.

YOUR NAME: YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS: NICKNAME: (the name you wish to
be known by on channel) ALTERNATIVE NICKNAME: (incase your first
nickname is already being used) AOL USER: YES/NO SEND VIA
E-MAIL: YES/NO (do you want MIRC sent as an e-mail attachment)
DOWNLOAD FROM WWW: (do you want to download MIRC via web site)

Send your mail with the following subject line: REQUEST MIRC

Send your request to ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

A receipt will be sent acknowledging your request. Please be
patient while the program is customised for you. We are unable
to give a specific time of when the program will be ready for
each individual.

Competition

In only four issues time uk.ufo.nw will reach it's 100th issue.
To celebrate we will be running a competition in the form of a
crossword. Don't worry it wont be to difficult but it will make
you think. We will have a rather nice prize for the competition
winner made exclusively for uk.ufo.nw - A picture of the gift
will be on our website shortly.


United Kingdom News ===================

[UK 1]******

uk.ufo.nw says: (Hansard) are the substantially verbatim
official records of things said in Parliament. They are issued
in daily and weekly parts, and then cumulated into bound
volumes, which are the final official version. As well as
reporting all speeches delivered in the course of debate, they
include answers to both written and oral questions, and records
of divisions.

Source: Hansard From: duncan@life.com

Questions raised in the House of Commons

Written Answers - Hansard - 29 June 1998 UFOs

Mr. Caton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will
make a statement on the role of RAF Brawdy, Pembrokeshire in the
investication of sightings of unidentified flying objects.

Mr. Spellar: Brawdy ceased to be an RAF station on 31 March 1996
when the establishment was transferred to the Army. Generally,
my Department examines reports of unidentified flying objects
only to establish whether there is any evidence that the United
Kingdom's Air Defence Region has been penetrated by hostile,
unauthorised foreign military activity. Unless a report reveals
evidence of a potential threat from an external military source,
no attempt is made to determine the precise nature of what might
have been seen.

Writen Answers - Hansard - 4 July 1998 RAF Rudloe Manor

Mr. Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
what functions are carried out at RAF Rudloe Manor; and which
organisations are based there.

Dr. Reid: RAF Rudloe Manor is an adinimistrative establishment
providing accommodation and support for a number of defence
organisations. The following units are located there:

Unit - RAF Provost and Security Service Function - Security
support, criminal investigations and provost assistance to the
RAF


Unit - Provost and Security Services (Western Region) Function -
Specialist police and security support to all RAF establishments
within the West Midlands, the West Country and Mid Wales

Unit - Defence Vetting Agency (RAF) Function - Security
clearances for RAF military and civilian personnel, and defence
industry employees

Unit - Defence Communications Services Agency Function - The
Services Management Centre of the Agency, including the Primary
Network Control Centre of the Defence Fixed Telecommunications
Service

Unit - Detachment of 1001 Signals Unit, RAF Function -
Participation in the operation of the UK military communications
satellite system

Written Answers - Hansard - 15 July 1998

Unidentified Flying Objects Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's
Government:

When arrangements for disseminating reports of unidentified
flying objects within the Ministry of Defence were put in place
and last reviewed; and whether they will ensure that all
airports, observatories, RAF bases and police stations have
accurate and up- to-date instructions about how to record
details of unidentified aerial phenomena reported to them,
together with instructions to pass them to the appropriate
authorities within the Ministry of Defence; and what follow-up
action is taken by the Ministry of Defence when it receives a
report of an unidentified flying object; and whether checks are
routinely made to see whether such reports can be correlated by
radar.

Lord Gilbert: The Ministry of Defence's interest in reports of
unidentified flying objects is limited to establishing whether
there is any evidence that the United Kingdom's airspace has
been penetrated by hostile or unauthorised foreign military
activity and whether reporting procedures are adequate for this
purpose.

Unless there is evidence of a potential threat, no attempt is
made to identify the precise nature of each reported incident.
Arrangements within the MoD have been in place for a number of
years for disseminating reports; they were last reviewed in
April 1997.

Where necessary, reports of unidentified flying objects are
examined with the assistance of relevant MoD experts, and this
may include radar correlation.

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many reports of unidentified flying objects were notified to
the Ministry of Defence in 1996, 1997 and the first six months
of 1998; and how many of these sightings remain unexplained.

Lord Gilbert: The number of reports received by the Ministry of
Defence of aerial activity not identifiable to the witness is as
follows:

1996: 609 1997: 425 1998: 88 (January - June)

Unless there is evidence to suggest that the United Kingdom's
airspace has been compromised by unauthorised foreign military
activity, we do not seek to provide an explanation for what
might have been seen as the MoD is not resourced to provide an
identification service.

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in evaluating reports of unidentified flying objects,
the Ministry of Defence will routinely consult staff at the
Royal Greenwich Observatory, the Ballistic Missile Early Warning
Centre at RAF Fylingdales and the Deep Space Tracing Facility at
RAF Feltwell.

Lord Gilbert: These or other staff may be consulted, depending
on the circumstances.

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

Why the Ministry of Defence has installed an answering machine
on the line used by members of the public to report unidentified
flying objects; and whether these people who leave contact
details on the machine receive a formal reply.

Lord Gilbert: An answering machine enables members of the public
to leave details about aerial activity or seek further
information about our policy in respect of unidentified flying
objects. The machine carries a message that sets out the MoD's
limited interest in the subject and explains that, in the case
of reported sightings, callers will be contacted only in the
event that follow-up action is deemed appropriate.

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many military personnel witnessed the unidentified craft
that overflew RAF Cosford and RAF Shawbury on 31 March 1993; and
whether, when the craft has not been identified, such an event
ought to be classified as being of no defence significance.

Lord Gilbert: The Ministry of Defence is aware of a single
report from two military personnel of an alleged sighting in the
West Midlands on 31 March 1993. The facts reported were fully
examined at the time. No firm conclusions were drawn then about
the nature of what had been seen, but the events were not judged
to be of defence significance. The MoD has no reason to doubt
the judgments made at the time.

[UK 2]******

Source: Daily Mail newspaper Publish date: Tuesday 15th
September 1998

The aliens are out there says chief starwatcher

Daily Mail Reporter

The head of Britain's radio astronomers said yesterday that he
had little doubt there were other living creatures in the
universe.

Professor Andrew Lyne, director of the Jodrell Bank monitoring
station, declared: "The question is whether it's on our doorstep
or existing now."

He and his team of radio astronomers are playing a key role in
the most comprehensive search for life in space ever undertaken.

The worlds biggest radio telescope, the 305 metre Arecibo dish
in Puerto Rico, is scouring the airways for signals from
Sun-like stars within a distance of 200 light years.

Arecibo will make the initial detection of signals having the
right characteristics to be from an intelligent civilisation.

Then the information will be passed to Professor Lyne and his
colleagues at Jodrell Bank in Cheshire. They will be using
Manchester University's Lovell telescope - the second largest of
it's type in the world.

Their job will be to be to eliminate Earth-based interference
and confirm that the signal is genuine.

Professor Lyne is under no illusions about the difficulty of the
task. The truth is out there, he said, but the problem is
finding it.

"Quite how long civilisations can last in a communicative phase
is a very big unknown.

"We could destroy ourselves in the next few tens of years, and
then our communicative phase would only have been about 100
years.

"I look upon intelligence in the universe as being like flashes
of light. We don't know whether our flash of light is happening
at the same time and in the same bit of universe as any others."

The scientists believe that other civilisations are most likely
to be found on planets orbiting stars similar to the Sun.

Such stars have lived long enough and provided enough heat to
give life a chance to evolve.

The search, named Project Pheonix, is being undertaken during
two three-week observing sessions each year and will continue
for several years.

Previous searches for life in space have been plagued by the
problem of discriminating between a 'true' extra-terrestrial
signal and those from Earth or satellites.

The technology in use in Project Pheonix, however, could finally
make possible the first ever close encounter with other worlds.

A receiver with millions of channels operating simultaneously
will scan a frequency band known as the 'water hole', where it
is though extra-terrestrials would be most likely to try sending
a signal.

For each star up to two billion channels will be searched using
a computer system which is on the look out for signals that
appear to be intelligent.

[UK 3]******

West Midlands Police Officer & the disappearing star

uk.ufo.nw would like to thank Bob a West Midlands Police Officer
for the below report.

At 9.15pm on Monday 19th October 1998 Bob was standing at the
front of his house in Eastern Green, Coventry. After waving his
wife goodbye he looked into the night sky.

There was a whispery cloud layer but so thin that the stars
could clearly be seen behind. Bob lives approximately 8 miles
from Birmingham International Airport and 8 miles from Coventry
Airport. He stated that there were a number of aircraft high in
the sky. This was not unusual for the area and he was used to
seeing this type of normal activity on a regular basis.

As he looked straight up at 90 degrees he saw a stationary white
star that looked no different from any other star. Within a
second or two the 'star' shot up and out of sight extremely
quickly. Bob said that in all his years as a police officer he
had never experienced anything like it before.

"I have seen shooting stars and the like shoot across the sky
before but never straight up" he said.

[UK 4]******

Source: Independent Television (ITV) teletext service Publish
Date: Thursday 8th October 1998

A spectacular meteor show could be seen tonight with stars
shooting across the sky at a rate of one a second.

The meteors, debris strewn from a comet passing close to the
Earth, are known as the Giacobinids.

Tonight there is a reasonable chance of our side of the Earth
ploughing through a swarm of Giacobinid meteors. The best time
to see it will be about 10pm.

uk.ufo.nw says: Well here in Birmingham it stayed really clear
until about 8pm when it clouded over and we could see nothing.
Never mind because reports we received from other parts of the
country stated they had a reasonable show. See below for dates
in November when there could be an even bigger show.

[UK 5]******

Source: Independent Television (ITV) teletext service Publish
Date: Thursday 8th October 1998

Fact File - Shooting Stars

The Giacobinid meteors produced two of the greatest meteor
displays this century, in 1933 and 1947.

Meteors are small objects, ranging in size from a grain of sand
to a small pebble, that appear as bright shooting stars when
they enter the atmosphere and burn up.

Meteors consist of debris from a passing comet. The Giacobinids
are spawned from comet 21P/Giacobinid-Zimer which rounds the Sun
every 6.6 years.

Meteor showers occur when the Earth passes through a swarm of
debris left in a comet's wake. They are seen in regions of the
Earth which meet the meteors head on.

Seen from the Earth, meteors appear to radiate from a central
point in the sky.

The Giacobinids are most likely to be visible from around 10pm
in the direction of the constellation of Draco, the Dragon. This
is the northern sky, between the Pole Star and the horizon.

Meteors enter the upper atmosphere at speeds of up to 45 miles
per second.

The best way to observe meteors is with the naked eye rather
than through binoculars or a telescope.

A full-scale meteor storm could set the sky ablaze with shooting
stars somwhere between November 17th and 18th.


World News ==========

[W 1]******

Source: "The Bulletin" magazine (published weekly in Belgium)
Publish date: 27th August 1998

They came from outer space

A UFO seen over France has strayed into Belgian airspace.  There
were numerous sightings around the country of a large,
triangular object with rounded corners, two powerful white
lights and a blinking red light - an almost identical
description of the unidentified flying object recently spotted
over the French Ardennes.  A couple from Welkenraedt, near
Antwerp, claimed that the craft hovered above their house before
zooming away, while residents in Mouscron, just across the
border from France, said they saw it gliding over the town
heading east.  Military authorities have denied reports that the
object could have been a pilotless spy plane known as a 'drone'.

[W 2]******

Source: Fox News Publish date: 27th August 1998

Internet Could Help in Search for Extraterrestrial Life

By Andrew Quinn

SAN FRANCISCO - There is good news for interstellar explorers.
The search for intelligent alien life somewhere in the cosmos is
about to get a lot easier - almost as easy as getting e-mail
from E.T. Soon you will be able to join the search for life
forms in outer space from the comfort of your home in your
pajamas. All you need is a home computer and an Internet link.

Scientists at the University of California-Berkeley have devised
a project to involve ordinary people around the world in the
hunt for alien intelligence. Using home computers and the
Internet, they hope to build a gigantic global "brain" to
analyse interstellar radio signals for signs of life.

Who knows? The old clunker you once played "Space Invaders" on
could be the computer that finally downloads hard evidence of
real extraterrestrials.

"We might get a million people involved in this project," said
Dan Werthimer, an astronomer at Berkeley's Space Sciences
Laboratory who is helping to run the project. "Everybody is
curious, everybody wants to know if there is life out there.
This is a neat way of letting them participate in the hunt."
Long a staple of big budget science fiction movies, the search
for extraterrestrial intelligence, "SETI" for short, has usually
been depicted as a job for professionals - starship captains,
dedicated radio- astronomers or renegade FBI agents cracking a
government conspiracy. JUST A DOT COM AWAY "SETI+home" -
http:/setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu - aims to change all that. By
using "distributed computing," a new way of linking individual
computers over the Internet, virtually anyone with a desktop PC
can begin hunting for aliens.

"Distributed computing is one of the Holy Grails of computer
science," said project director David Anderson, a computer
scientist. "If it works, it could be 100 times faster than the
fastest current supercomputer." SETI+home scientists stress that
the project is not yet up and running and it will take at least
six more months before they are able to begin work. Once ready,
it will start using the Internet to parcel out to individual
home computers chunks of raw data obtained from the Arecibo
radio telescope in Puerto Rico, the largest "ear" to space that
mankind has ever built.

Arecibo's huge dish scans the skies looking for radio waves that
might have been produced by alien intelligence.

"We've been leaking television shows and radio programs into
space for decades," Werthimer said. "Maybe somebody out there is
doing the same - either sending out signals on purpose, or just
leaking them the way we are." The huge volume of radio data that
must be analyzed has long been one of the main stumbling blocks
for SETI projects. Even with fast new supercomputers able to
complete as many as 200 billion operations per second, the
number crunch has been a slow grind that leaves scientists
frustrated.

That is where distributed computing comes in. Made possible by
the rapid growth of the Internet, it allows scientists to break
down large computing problems and distribute them through
networks of smaller computers. Each solves its own small part of
the puzzle, then feeds its answers back into the main computer
to build an overview. FINDING E.T.

Distributed computing has been used in earlier projects
including efforts to crack encryption codes and to figure out
large prime numbers. But SETI+home will use it for a something
that everyone can appreciate - resolving one of the biggest
mysteries of the universe.

"We are confident that Earth's civilization is not the only
one," said Bulgarian astronomer Veselka Radeva, who has signed
up for SETI+home. "It is only a question of time to understand
where and who are the other intelligent creatures in the
universe." Project managers say about 120,000 people have
already registered for SETI+home, ranging from a 12-year-old in
the Philippines to Silicon Valley computer professionals. One of
them, one day, may be lucky enough to retrieve Arecibo signals
that indicate life exists in the stars.

"They won't know right away if their clunker was the one that
found the extraterrestrial," Werthimer said, noting that the
data would have to be rechecked and reanalyzed at project
headquarters in Berkeley.

"But after the checks, and if we confirm it again, they will
definitely get the credit for the discovery." For that chance,
project participants will not be asked to do much. Once the
project is running, they will be able to visit the SETI+home Web
site and download an analysis program and their first chunk of
radio data from Arecibo.

Their personal computers will then begin searching through space
in their free time. Appearing as a common "screen saver," the
SETI program will kick in when the computer is idle and will not
affect its normal operations.

"It will all happen automatically. You won't even know it is
working on it," Werthimer said. When the computer finishes
combing over its first block of data, it will connect back with
the main project computer in Berkeley, send the data back, and
get a new data package to work on.

"Everybody gets a little part of the sky, their own little bit
of the information," he said. "There are 400 billion stars in
our galaxy ... we need all the computing power we can get."
CASTING A BROADER NET Werthimer's project casts a much broader
net than a similar operation run by the SETI Institute, a
privately funded group based in Mountain View, California, which
is also using radio data to hunt for alien life.

While the institute concentrates on a targeted search of some
1,000 nearby Sun-like stars considered likely candidates for
alien intelligence, SETI+home will take a broad look at the sky
in hopes that someone, somewhere, might be sending something our
way.

Like the SETI Institute, which was forced to turn to private
funds after Congress cancelled a similar space search mounted by
NASA in 1992, SETI+home still needs money - an estimated
$200,000 before the project even gets rolling, primarily to pay
for the expensive magnetic tapes used to record the incoming
radio data at Arecibo.

But the key to success will be the participation of tens of
thousands of E.T. buffs who are willing to use their personal
computers for something other than e-mail.

"I'm optimistic on life on the universe. It would just be
bizarre if we were the only ones," Werthimer said. "It might be
that there is a galactic community out there and they are all
talking to each other ... but we humans are just learning how."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:17:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:39:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:45:57 -0400
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:10 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles - More Thoughts

Sue,

>>What's your source on this curious snippet of information?

>I believe it's listed as point 2 of preparation in your
>beginners guide to circle making.

That is true. Imagine my 'amused horror' as I watched what was
written in the spirit of satire develop into myth and then
become 'truth', as suggested in your message. The real truth is
it was a piss-take. How would one dowse a wheat field without
leaving an awkward trace in the wheat? It makes little sense.
And why the hell would one want to anyway?

The List may be interested to know that the Beginners Guide to
Circle Making was published in July 1994 in limited edition of
as many photocopies as John Lundberg and I could be bothered to
make (around 50, I think) and sold at a London art fair, The
Fete Worst Than Death - a pamphleteer's paradise.

We sold 5 or 6 and gave some away, the other 29 are stuffed in a
box in my cellar, growing in value (I like to think) as
collectors items. Fear not, though, an edited version will
appear in Fortean Times' forthcoming Weird World 1999 --- a
must-read, if only for 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                  {96} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:56:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:35:55 -0500
Subject: {96} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                       24th October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 2 Issue 96
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in 58 countries.

This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be
reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject
section e.g.  Repost {96} part 1, part 2 or part 3.


[W 3]******

uk.ufo.nw says: The terrible tragedy of the Swissair jet crash
has been on all of our minds. Below is just a paragraph from a
Fox News article.

Source: Fox News
Publish date: 3rd September 1998

Swissair Jet Crashes In Atlantic, Killing 229

Blandford area resident Edie Boyle told Reuters: "I thought at
first it was a helicopter, all I heard was a big boom like a
sonic boom. The plane went right over head, it was very, very
low. It sounded terrible. I joked that it sounded like a UFO
because it was just droning."

[W 4]******

Source: Korea Central News Agency Publish date: 13th August 1998

Big Triangle UFO Flies Very Low Over The Ardennes - Scores Of
Witnesses

CHARLEVILLE-MEZIERES (AFP) - A triangular UFO flying at low
altitude over the region of Sedan and Carignan (French Ardennes
- note of the translator: N-N-E of France) has been observed at
the beginning of the week by ca. 150 persons.

"In the night of Monday to Tuesday, it was seen descending right
over Charleville- M=E9zi=E8res, before performing several circles
above some 30 cites or villages in the Sedan region", said on
Thursday Jean-Luc Lemaire, the local representative for the
Centre d'Etudes OVNI France (CEOF).

"Our association received some 150 reports from eye-witnesses,
and we also got a video shot during this night by two young
video amateurs ", he added. "The engine looked like a large
triangle with rounded edges, and one of its angles was directed
towards the flight path. It had two red lights in the back and a
large white one in the front. These lights were not blinking.
Condensation traces were visible at the rear of the UFO which
flew at an altitude estimated up to 500 meters".

Jean-Luc Lemaire, CEOF, France

"We got only very limited data to evaluate the speed of the UFO,
the sound of which was described as low-pitched by several
witnesses ", said Mr. Lemaire." It has been observed from
midnight to 02H00 (a.m.) and some eye-witnesses had the feeling
that it was somehow playing hide-and-seek" stated the
responsible of CEOF, an organization which head-quarters are in
Marseille (Bouches-du- Rh=F4ne). "It slowly made several circles
over inhabited regions, as if it was spying. Then, it moved away
and started circling again over another village", he added. "
Finally, it disappeared behind a hill and was not seen later",
concluded Mr. Lemaire.

Acording to Mr. Lemaire, the UFO could not be a stealth fighter
because it was flying slowly at low altitude. The UFO could
neither be a meteorite (because of the flight trajectory) nor a
comet, which would have appeared higher in the sky and almost
nonmobile. The very strange loud noise which pushed people to
look for the source of it, was neither that of known helicopter
nor that of known plane.

"We are left with several hypothesis, such as an optical
illusion or a flight of an unknown military prototype flying
outside usual plane test ranges", said Mr. Lemaire. "Overall,
the trajectory of the UFO was West to Est. We would therefore
like to know whether this UFO was seen on the West shores of
France, or whether it crosses the Atlantic Ocean", he added.

[W 5]******

Source: Sky News

Life from Mars ?

It seems that scientists may have been telling a few porkies in
the interests of furthering their funding. Remember the piece of
space rock from Mars that was found to have evidence of alien
bacterium ? Well...it turns out that there may have been a
little bit of exaggeration. According to William Schopf, a
palaeobiologist at the University of California at Los Angeles,
the scientists at NASA, led by David McKay of the Johnson Space
Centre in Huston, had approached him a few weeks before the news
broke to take a look at some odd orange and black shapes in a
chunk of rock chipped from the surface of Mars.

'They thought that these might be shells of Martian protozoa but
the size range was wrong, and some of the discs merged together.
You never find that on true fossils,' he says. McKay left and
Schopf was convinced that he had persuaded him that there was no
evidence to support the theory of ancient micro-organisms.

All this meant that when he received a draft paper from the NASA
team, to be published in Science later in the year, that claimed
that the rock did hold evidence of primitive life he was
understandably concerned about the validity of the report. It
seemed that the shapes in the sample had appeared again this
time 'instead of being fossil protozoan shells, they were
bacterially precipitated minerals.' According to Schopf the
McKay team had 'really... decided ,one way or the other, that
there was life.'

One of the most noticeable effects of the paper was the dramatic
increase in funding for scientists working on prospective
missions to Mars, meteorites and the possibility of
extraterrestrial life. This has created a division of opinion
amongst the scientific community. Imagine the dilemma for hard
working researchers who have to struggle by on meagre grants
only to see that the public and, more importantly, the media
find the fact that they haven't found the proverbial green men.

[W 6]******

Source: Associated Press Publish date: Wednesday 2nd September
1998

Man Pleads Guilty in Wife Killing

ELIZABETH, N.J. (AP) - A man who said he fatally stabbed his
ex-wife to protect her from aliens pleaded guilty to
manslaughter.

Brett Steingraber believed extraterrestrials were about to take
over the planet, and killed his ex-wife, Suraia Sadi, to save
her from the pain of the alien takeover, prosecutors said.

He could receive as much as 40 years in prison when sentenced in
November.

Sadi, 36, was stabbed 12 times in the chest in March 1996, at
her ex-husband's Roselle Park apartment.

[W 7]******

Source: BBC Online News Publish date: Thursday 25th June 1998

Roswell space alien breaks its silence

An earlier film purports to show the alien

A videotape that claims to shows an alien being interrogated by
the US military is now on sale in Britain. The film's
distributors, ILC, say the film was shot after the Roswell
Incident in 1947, when a UFO is said to have landed in New
Mexico.

In the film, a bug-eyed alien is depicted in increasing
distress. A heart monitor speeds up rapidly, then the alien is
sick.

There is no speech on the film as the alien is said to have been
interviewed telepathically.

ILC says that the alien died shortly afterwards and that it is
this alien whose autopsy was shown on British television last
year.

According to the distributors, the film was smuggled out of a
secret military base, Area 51, two years ago.

They say the man responsible for the smuggling, who they refer
to as Victor, is now dead.  The Air Force told the Roswell Daily
Record it had a UFO, but later retracted The US government and
military deny a UFO landing took place at Roswell.

In June 1997 the US Air Force released a report, The Roswell
Report: Case Closed, in which it blamed high altitude balloon
tests and accidents in the area for accounts of a UFO landing
and sightings of alien bodies.

But a Harris poll in the US indicated that 60% of the American
public believed in intelligent extra-terrestrial life.

Roswell's UFO museum and gift shop also makes cash from aliens
As well as the footage itself, the =A39.99 65-minute video
discusses tests carried out to establish the film's
authenticity.

"People should watch the video and make up their own minds. We
would not be involved in this if we did not think there was some
form of legitimacy," a spokesman for the company said.

"It has been verified by a number of UFO and military experts".

ILC has been in the headlines in the past for distributing two
other controversial videos - one of real executions and the
other showing footage from CCTV cameras.

[W 8]******

Source: BBC Online News Publish date: Thursday 2nd July 1998

We are not being visited

An international team of scientists investigating UFOs has
concluded that they are are interesting and deserve further
study. But our science editor Dr David Whitehouse explains why
he does not believe that UFOs are alien spacecraft.

Any far and open-minded scientist would agree that UFOs should
be studied. We do not know everything about our planet's
atmosphere and there must be rare phenomena yet to be
discovered.

But the thing that has frightened many scientists away from such
a sensible attitude towards UFOs is that most people think that
a UFO is the same thing as a flying saucer.

I would like to believe that our planet is being visited by
aliens but I cannot.

Why is it that all of the thousands of photographs and videos
purporting to be of 'flying saucers' are out of focus? Surely
someone must have taken a close and detailed picture?

Ask an advocate for evidence that aliens have landed and you
will get one of two things in reply. You will get stories and
you will get excuses.

Some of the stories are interesting. You can talk to people who
say they have been for a ride in an alien spaceship, some of
them claim to have been molested and experimented on by aliens.

But a story is just a story. I cannot believe them unless there
is supporting evidence.

Then there are the excuses. When you ask for proof that our
world is being visited by aliens you get all sorts of reasons
why such evidence exists but cannot be produced.

It is a cover-up they say. We did have evidence but it was
stolen by government agents who are part of a great plot by the
authorities to conceal the truth.

We have all heard about the claims that alien bodies are stored
in deep-freeze in a secret vault in a United States Air Force
base. Supposedly they have been there for 50 years following a
flying saucer crash. It has been kept secret ever since.

Well not quite. It is so hush-hush that we all know about it.
Questions should obviously be asked about the United States Air
Force's ability to keep a secret.

What is lacking is tough-mindedness and an attitude that
remarkable claims require remarkable evidence.

I will not believe it unless someone produces an artefact that
cannot be man-made; unless someone can pass on information about
the universe that we did not know and can be verified.

Or unless they land on the Whitehouse lawn - either the one in
the United States, or mine.

[W 9]******

Source: Associated Press Publish date: Saturday 5th September
1998 From: bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net (Bernhard Nahrgang)

12 Dead in Military Copter Crash

ANGIE WAGNER Associated Press Writer

NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, Nev. (AP) - The Air Force helicopter
crews were practicing rescues, going over how to find downed
pilots in the dark Nevada desert.

But the two aircraft crashed in the Nevada desert near the
top-secret Area 51, killing all 12 people aboard. The wreckage
was found at 2 a.m. Friday, 90 minutes after the HH- 60G Pave
Hawk choppers were due back.

The choppers were flying through the rugged Pintwater Mountains,
6,000-foot peaks that drop 3,000 feet to desert valley floors.
Light rain was falling at the time of the crash, said Brig. Gen.
Theodore Lay, commander of the 57th Wing at Nellis.

It wasn't known whether the helicopters crashed into each other
or went down separately, Lay said. Crews were searching the
terrain for clues to the cause of the crash.

A support center was set up at Nellis for grieving relatives.

"As we await further information about this terrible incident,
our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the crew
members," Vice President Al Gore said.

The crews were on a standard mission to practice recovering
downed pilots. Normally that involves recovering either a crew
member or a dummy from the ground, Lay said.

Crew members are supposed to wear night-vision goggles on such
missions, Lay said, but he would not speculate on whether that
was a factor in the crash.

Tech. Sgt. Richard Covington said wreckage was spread over a
wide area but would not elaborate. The area is a bombing range
with unexploded munitions.

The helicopters are with the 66th Rescue Squadron, which
specializes in rescuing downed pilots and others from behind
enemy lines. Units recently returned from duty in Turkey and
Southeast Asia, and have seen action in the no-fly zone over
Iraq.

The crash site is in the Nellis Range, 5,200 square miles of
mountain and desert northwest of Las Vegas that's used for
training and test flights. It is not far from Indian Springs,
about 55 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The site is also southeast of Area 51, a mysterious section of
the range where the F- 117 Stealth fighter and other classified
aircraft have been tested. The Air Force won't officially
acknowledge the existence of the area, shown on some maps as
Groom Lake.

Area 51 is a staple of science fiction; UFO enthusiasts and
conspiracy buffs are convinced the wreckage of a flying saucer
they believe crashed near Roswell, N.M., in 1947 was taken there
to be studied.

Previous air disasters at Nellis include the January 1982 crash
in which four Air Force Thunderbird pilots slammed their jets
into the ground while practicing at Indian Springs. All four
were killed when a stabilizer stuck in the lead plane and the
three others followed him into the ground.

The HH-60G helicopter, built by Sikorsky Aircraft Corp.,
normally carries a crew of four people: two pilots, a flight
engineer and a gunner. Some, including the two that crashed,
also carry two rescue crew members.

The Air Force said it has 99 HH-60G helicopters in use at 12
bases in the United States and abroad.

The crash was the 22nd major aviation accident in the Air Force
in the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, with ``major'' defined as
causing a death or $1 million damage. That has been one of the
best records in the military, officials said.

In same 11-month span last year, the Air Force logged 25 major
accidents.

uk.ufo.nw says: The url (web address) for Nellis Air Force Base
is:

http://www.nellis.af.mil/

[W 10]******

Source: The Express newspaper Publish date: Sunday 11th Ocotber
1998

Pyramids built with 'instant bricks'

For centuries, experts have been baffled by the way Egyptians
shifted solid blocks of stone weighing 80 tons to build the
pyramids.

But all the theories about using ramps, sweating Hebrew slaves -
and even flying saucers - have been pushed aside by an Austrian
Egyptologist.

Adolf Goil says the Egyptians never quarried the stones and
dragged them across the desert. Instead they made them on the
spot from a "stone dough".

They mixed sand and crushed limestone with mineralised water to
produce a thick mortar which was kneaded into square blocks and
hardened in the baking sun.

Goll has recreated the mixture after years of experiments with
ingredients mentioned in hieroglyphics and has named it the
'kneading stone'.

[W 11] ******

Source: The (London) Times Publish date: Saturday 29th August
1998 From: bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net (Bernhard Nahrgang)

Vatican man puts faith in ET and his friends

BY RUTH GLEDHILL RELIGION CORRESPONDENT

EXTRA-TERRESTRIALS exist and there is no conflict between a
belief in aliens and the Christian faith, a Vatican theologian
close to the Pope says.

Father Corrado Balducci, of the Congregation for the
Evangelisation of Peoples, claims in a book about alien
abductions to be published next week, that it is wrong to assert
that reports of encounters with aliens are not credible.

"It is reasonable to believe and affirm that extra-terrestrials
exist," he says. "Their existence can no longer be denied, for
there is too much evidence for the existence of
extra-terrestrials and flying saucers."

Father Balducci says that clues such as the existence of flying
saucers indicate that extra-terrestrials are further evolved
than humans. In an interview to be published as the appendix to
Confirmation, Father Balducci says that even if
extra-terrestrials were discovered who were superior to humans,
it would not call into question the teachings of Christianity.

He refers to a passage in the New Testament where St Paul refers
to Christ as the king of the universe, not just the king of the
world. "This means that everything in the universe, including
extra-terrestrials and UFOs are reconcilable with God."

Father Balducci, a renowned exorcist and expert on demonology,
has written two books on the Devil. Listed in the Vatican
directory as "priest of honour" since 1964, he is an official
member of the papal household or family.

Father Balducci says his first question to an alien would be
what their concept of God was. But he goes on to say: "It is
very important to lend credence to the eye-witness accounts, but
we must be very careful to ensure that they are authentic. I
have also heard of people who have claimed to have had contacts,
but who unfortunately were not mentally sound."

A spokesman for the Catholic Media Office in London said last
night: "The fundamental creation message relates to humans here
on earth. If aliens were shown to exist, this would not cast
doubt on the veracity of the Gospel. But we would have to ask
whether the Christian atonement was applicable to them."

[W 12]******

Source: The Detroit News Publish date: 27th August 1998 From:
bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net (Bernhard Nahrgang)

AREA-51 STILL INSPIRES CURIOSITY, THEORIES

LAS VEGAS -- Many people who believe in UFO's also believe "Area
51" is where the Air Force keeps its stockpile of captured
flying saucers.

And maybe an autopsied alien body or two.

Others believe the military base in the southern Nevada desert
is the testing grounds for America's most secret military
machines, everything from the F-117 stealth fighter to
electro-magnetic pulse weapons that would make Buck Rogers
nervous.

What is certain is that there is something out there in that
moonscape property north of Las Vegas. Officially designated the
"Nellis Air Force Bombing and Gunnery Range" on Nevada maps, the
federally protected territory in Nye, Lincoln and Clark counties
covers an area equal to Rhode Island and Connecticut combined.

And more than 1,850 federal civilian workers are employed in
mostly well-compensated jobs at several ultra-high-security
facilities in and near the range, according to a Scripps Howard
News Service analysis of government payroll records maintained
by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

"This really is one of the last big secret military bases in the
United States. It used to be that the Air Force tried to pretend
that Area 51 didn't exist at all," said Jeff Moag, a researcher
for the National Security News Service based in Washington.

The Air Force last year conceded the existence of the base and
its position along dried-up Groom Lake when it released a
publication that suggested experimental Cold War-era aircraft
could have been mistaken for flying saucers.

At a Pentagon press briefing, Air Force Col. John Hanes was
asked about Area 51.

"If you are talking about Groom Lake, Nevada ... quite frankly,
I have no knowledge or expertise in the matter," Hanes said. "I
understand there are classified things that go on there. And
that's all I have to say about it."

Whatever they do in the Nellis Bombing Range, they continue to
do it under the Clinton administration.

There were exactly 2,000 civilian employees of the departments
of Defense, Army, Navy, Air Force and Energy in the Nellis
Bombing Range area as of Sept. 30, 1992.

Five years later, and despite massive job layoffs ordered by
President Clinton, there were 1,851 employees still working
there.

Among the most popular occupations for this workforce are
"miscellaneous administration," "secretary," "general
engineering," "general physical sciences" and "management
programing."

The average salary for the Department of Energy personnel last
year was nearly $59,000 a year, well above average for a federal
employee. The payroll for all of the civilian workers in the
area totaled $80.6 million.

[W 13]******

Source: Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Online News Date:
Wednesday 12 August 1998 From: "dplace" <dplace@dreamscape.com>

Mysterious light likened to boomerang

The manager of a roadhouse south of Tennant Creek in central
Australia claims mysterious lights in the sky last night looked
like fireworks.

There have been several reports of a bright light travelling
across the sky, from Alice Springs at about 7.30pm dropping into
the Gulf of Carpentaria in Queensland after 10pm.

Lou Farkas, from Wycliffe Well, who markets the roadhouse as a
site for UFO sightings, says he heard a 'bang' as well as seeing
the light.

"Imagine the shape of a fighting boomerang, you know how it's
got that bend in it - so the light was formed and it was
probably about two to three inches wide probably in the sky, so
it covered quite a big area.

"But it formed completely. So it started then formed the shape
of the boomerang then it held until there was an explosion then
it all disappeared."

Meteor

Astronomers at the Tidbinbilla tracking station in Canberra say
a bright light that shot across the Northern Territory skies
last night was most likely a meteor.

Territory police say there were sightings from Alice Springs in
the south to the Arnhem coast in the north, with some witnesses
claiming night turned into day.

Duncan Osborne from the Deep Space Tracking Station says the
reports are consistent with the effect of a meteorite entering
the earth's atmosphere and burning up.

"Normally if you see an object such as this stop what you're
doing, if you're driving the car pull over, because a lot of UFO
sightings are actually mistaken meteorites," he said.

"But when people are driving they mistake the light itself is
moving and if it travels in a straight direction that's a good
indicator that it's probably a meteorite."

-[continued in part 3]-
--------------------------------
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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             -[For The Record]- [canufo] Alien Craft Crashes in

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 00:47:09 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:20:16 -0500
Subject: -[For The Record]- [canufo] Alien Craft Crashes in


When the Aliens Crashed at Roswell - er - Winnipeg
A True Story

Some of you have been reading the sighting reports I've been
posting about objects seen recently over Winnipeg. Most
witnesses had described an assortment of oval lights, "chasing
one another" in a tight circle. I had seen this, too, while
walking one night in the western part of the city, and knew
immediately that I was going to get reports about it.

But the person who called me on Monday, October 19, had seen
something *else* in addition to this cluster of lights:

        The witness (who did not leave her name) said that she
was out taking photographs on the Legislature grounds in
downtown Winnipeg at 10:20 pm October 19. Low in the NW, she saw
a triangular formation of yellow-white lights moving towards
her. As they passed overhead, heading SE, she could see that
each of the three lights was square in shape, and she could not
make out any object on which the lights might have been
attached, nor could she hear any sound.

        The object passed directly over her head, and she tried
to take a photograph with her camera, but - guess what! - the
camera jammed!

        She says she called the airport and they said there were
no flights anywhere near the city at that time. She *also* saw
the searchlights far to the west - the ones outside the hockey
arena which gave rise to the other reports this past week.

What I didn't add to the initial report was that the witness
said the airport spokesperson told her that while there were no
flights over Winnipeg at the time, the UFO sighting "might have
had something to do with the science fiction movie being filmed
at the airport this week."

This was the first I had heard of an SF movie being filmed this
month in Winnipeg. We've had a lot films done here, including
some with stars such as Jane Seymour and Dan Ackroyd (whose
secretary called me because he wanted a copy of one of my
books), and more are being scheduled every week. The abysmal
exchange rate has made Canada very attractive for American
filmmakers. ("I'll pay you minimum wage - in American dollars."
"Great! I'll take it!")

I put out a call to friends in the local arts and entertainment
industry. Soon, I had confirmation that not one, but *five* SF
movies were being filmed in Winnipeg. In fact, the first one was
already complete and ready to air. But the news I wasn't
expecting was that the second movie, nearing completion, was -
get this - about UFOs and the Roswell crash.

*This* I couldn't just let go univestigated. I beat the bushes
for this one, calling in a few favours along the way. After much
telephone tag, I finally reached the film's publicist this
morning, who hesitantly admitted the film was underway, with
shooting going on as we spoke. Not only that, but she said the
movie was titled: "The Roswell Project," and it was, indeed,
about the infamous crash.

Now, I don't know about you, but I had my doubts that even
Hollywood could make Manitoba look like a New Mexican desert. I
figured that in the name of ufology, I had to get the low-down
on this one. I asked politely if, as a UFO researcher who has
published an article or two about Roswell, I could be allowed to
at least see the crashed saucer they were using as a prop. After
all, I explained, I had been following up some actual UFO
reports last week, and it might have been their doing.

After a few more minutes of negotiations, the publicist said,
"Okay, but we wrap in an hour. Be here at our set in half an
hour."

I left immediately, of course. It took me 25 minutes, mostly
because I tried to save time using the new freeway link that had
opened between me and the airport. As might have been expected,
it was clogged with traffic trying to save time, too.

I had been told that the film crew was using an old hangar at
the back of the city airport. I found my way onto the road
behind the commercial hangars and located Hangar T-127 (catchy
name for a movie title, maybe?). It wasn't that hard. Security
personnel with traffic flags and two-way radios were stopping
traffic. One approached my car and said, "I'm sorry, we're ready
to roll. You'll have to wait for a few minutes." I gave my name
and explained I was there to see the publicist. The security
guard mumbled something into her radio. "Okay," she said,
complying with her instructions. "You can go in as soon as we
get the all-clear."

A few minutes later, I was driving on a bumpy entrance road
towards a dilapidated hangar that had seen better years. It
*looked* like it had been built in 1947 (and I'm sure it had
been). Dozens of semi-trailers filled the tarmac immediately
adjacent to it, and as I drove up, a guy in a vintage, beige
American army uniform ran from a trailer into a doorway, chased
by a wardrobe assistant. This was the place all right.

I parked and got out. I chose the same doorway, and was met by a
young, perky woman with a clipboard. "Are you Chris Rutkowski?"
she asked cheerfully. "Come on in and follow me. But be quiet.
They're in the middle of a series of shots."

She led me into the darkened interior. My eyes took a few
minutes to get accustomed the change. When I could see clearly,
I was astounded.

The hangar was *huge*. I think it might have housed several
airliners at one time when it was in use. Today, it was filled
from one end to the other with immemse amounts of equipment, old
cars, planes and other set pieces. My guide led me past a
wardrobe tent and some huge movie cameras on cranes with
accompanying lighting and sound equipment. It looked exactly
like a Hollywood movie set. There was a reason for that. It was.

Some actors and actresses were sitting on those high,
canvas-backed chairs, with names I didn't recognize stencilled
on some vacant ones. Off to one side were a few folding chairs
on which sat some bored extras dressed in period costume, mostly
old AF uniforms, although I recognized one man in a white lab
coat as a former TV newscaster from a local station.

Directly in front of us was one of the movie's major props: a
full-size replica of "Fat Man" (or maybe "Little Boy"), whatever
the first A-bomb was called. It was about 10 feet high and about
20 feet long, its bulbous nose on my left and the boxlike fins
on the right. It was suspended by some chains, and under the dim
lighting, its grey paint job looked reasonably convincing.

On the other side of a frame wall running the entire length of
the hangar (about 500 feet?) is where the foil-like debris was
"under study" by scientists. A giant plastic sheet was hanging
in front of the debris, preventing nosy privates from peeking
in, and allowing for some sterile conditions. An old jet trainer
(in mint condition) with its Canadian markings painted over sat
near another wall.  A few beaten-up jeeps with US Army markings
were parked hither and thither throughout the hangar.

The center of attention, though, was another set further into
the hangar. Through the crowd of grips, sound engineers and
camerapersons, I could glimpse the other key set component: the
crashed saucer. We moved behind the camera crew and behind the
director, then our own high chairs magically appeared behind us,
brought by a gopher. We sat down and watched them prepare for
the next scene.

"What is the plot about?" I asked my guide. "I mean, besides the
crashed saucer story."

"Well, it's about an alien who comes to Earth with a mission to
destroy the planet," she began. "His ship accidentally crashes
and he has to take human form to hide among us. After a while,
he learns we're not that bad. meanwhile, an evil alien comes
after him to complete the mission. Good versus bad, that kind of
thing."

The evil extraterrestrial (abbreviated EVE) takes the form of a
gorgeous woman (no editorializing necessary, please). The scene
I was about to watch was where she is questioned by an AF
officer about her presence on the base. It seems her cover is
that of a high-ranking Pentagon official. Two men and a woman
are standing in front of a Beetle-sized spacecraft. It shows
signs of intense heating and much damage. (For a styrofoam
spacecraft, anyway.) The hatch is off and there's a
humanoid-shaped contoured couch within it. There's a tarp
covering a similar-sized something nearby.

"Quiet on the set!" came the warning. "Rolling!"

Suddenly, 75 people became immobile and silent. The hangar was
eerily soundless. Then the actors started up. I couldn't hear
all the dialogue from where I was sitting, but the scene went
something like this:

AF Officer: "I'd like to know what *she* is doing here."

Major: "She came in on a transport yesterday. She's from the
Pentagon."

EVE: (look of disdain)

AF Officer: I want to know what you think this is (points to
crashed saucer)."

EVE: "It seems to be an escape pod. From the look of it,
whatever was inside probably died. The damage seems extensive."

AF Officer: "Where is it now?"

EVE: "I don't know."

AF Officer: "Well, *this* one isn't damaged at all!" (removes a
tarp from an intact saucer)

Major: "We found that one in the desert yesterday."

AF Officer: "I would hope that the Pentagon would help us get to
the bottom of this, not be in our way." (walks to EVE, glares,
pulls out lighter and lights cigarette)

AF Officer: "Well, *I* think that there's something alive out
there from one of these pods. (dramatic pause) And I intend to
find it."

EVE: (takes cigarette from AF Officer, blows smoke in his face)
"We'll see about that."

It was pure camp. It was done well, though, and I'm sure that
what was intended. The writer is a former Winnipegger who now
lives in LA. He has a string of writing credits on various
shows, and he has a special affinity for where he grew up. I
say, good for him! It seems like he's telling a nice little SF
story based on the Roswell mythos. He apparently did some
research on Roswell, visiting the town and area and speaking
with the locals and some witnesses' relatives.

I'm sworn to secrecy regarding the end of the story, however.
What I can tell you is that it has a "happy ending" and that the
Earth does *not* get blown up. (Darn.)

The actors looked like they were enjoying themselves. The woman
was dressed in a blue silk evening dress of some kind, with
matching elbow-length gloves. (In an aircraft hangar?) Her hair
and posture were reminsicent of Veronica Lake, and the way she
talked on screen (I could see a monitor from my vantage point)
was similar, too. I think she was Heather Hanson, who was in
StarGate and Police Academy.

According to the press kit, the good alien is played by Steven
Flynn, who is on Ally McBeal. It also lists Kate Greenhouse
(Virus, Traders) and Sean McCann (I *think* he was Simon Birch's
father in that movie. Someone help me out on this one.) On, and
yes, there's the required 10-year-old kid, too. You can't have
an SF TV movie without a precocious kid.

When the director said, "Stop!" (not "cut"?), everyone relaxed.
They did the shot two more times. The they broke for lunch.

I asked my escort what network this would be on, and when.

"It's being rushed to production. The last day of the shoot is
November 4, and it's air date is January 11," she replied. "But
it won't be shown in Canada unless you get satellite."

Oh, no, I thought. The three-letter acronym which makes
stone-hearted ufologists cringe and stands for mind-control,
disinformation and blasphemy!

"UPN," she said happily.

"Can I get a walk-on?" I asked immediately. Anything to help.

This is, unfortunately, where my post ends. I can't tell you if
I made it yet. I explained that I was a writer and researcher
about UFOs, had written about Roswell and knew some of the major
Roswell investigators. But that didn't seem to sway Central
Casting when I spoke to the manager. "Can you dance?" was the
only question I was asked. I said, "Sure!" I was afraid to ask
why.

I'm supposed to hear next week.

Roswell in Winnipeg, Canada. Let's hope they wrap before it
snows. Tune in January 11, 1999.



Subscribe, unsubscribe, opt for a daily digest, or start a new
e-group at:

http://www.eGroups.com

-- Free Web-based e-mail groups.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

              Conference - Paranormal and Superstitious Beliefs

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:35:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:46:23 -0500
Subject: Conference - Paranormal and Superstitious Beliefs


Please distribute this to anyone who'd want to know.


From: "Wayne Spencer" <w.spencer@dial.pipex.com
To: <m.pilkington@virgin.net
Subject: Conference
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:45:38 +0100


ANNOUNCEMENT

Paranormal and Superstitious Beliefs:
A One-Day Conference

Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.

The Association for Skeptical Enquiry (ASKE) and the Manchester
Humanists are holding a one-day conference on paranormal and
superstitious beliefs. The conference is sponsored by the MMU
Dept. of Sociology and will take place in the Manton Building,
MMU, from 12:00 - 19:30 on Friday 13th November 1998.

The speakers will be:

Dr. Christopher French. Department of Psychology, Goldsmith's
College:
The Psychology Of Superstition

Dr. Michael Heap. Dept. of Psychotherapeutic Studies, University
of Sheffield:
Ideomotor Movements

Kevin McClure. Writer and Investigator:
Alien Abductions

Dr. David Stretch. Dept. of Mathematical Psychology, University
of Leicester:
Critical Thinking And Alternative Medicine

Dr. Timothy Taylor. Dept of Archaeology, University of Bradford:
Graham Hancock and Pseudo-Archaeology

Dr. Richard Wiseman. Perrott-Warrick Research Unit, University
of Hertfordshire:
The Psychology of Luck

Tony Youens. Conjurer:
Demonstration of pseudo-psychic tricks

The conference will be free of charge.

For further information on this event please contact Wayne
Spencer at: w.spencer@dial.pipex.com

ASKE WWW Site: http://linus.mcc.ac.uk/~moleary/ASKE/

Mark Pilkington
------------------------------------------------

Magonia Online



http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk

The nearest simile I can find to express the difficulties of
sending a message is that I appear to be standing behind a sheet
of frosted glass... which blurs sight and deadens sound,
dictating feebly to a reluctant and somewhat obtuse secretary.
A feeling of terrible powerlessness thus burdens me... it is a
dark road.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:56:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:53:51 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:53:05 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO Name Change?

>>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>>List,

>>I thought this may be of interest.

>>Leanne

>>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>>Subject: UFO name change.

>>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>>natural unidentified objects.

>>>What do you all think.

>>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

>Hi Leanne

>How about an ETC - Extra-terrestrial Craft?

>Don Ledger


Hi

Why is that someone always wants to change established patterns?

How about leaving it just as it is? What will changing its name
achieve? An Unidentified Flying Object is just that, a UFO. Both
Skeptics and Believers are comfortable with this definition. It
defines precisely what we are all discussing.

Change the name and how long do you think it would take to
create another 'stigma'? The only way to change or remove this
particular stigma is to educate people. OWC...Only Word





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:41:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:49:13 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Magazine Nazi Nonsense?


Hi List

In my recent reply  regarding this Topic I suggested that Roswell
was not mentioned in the UK UFO Magazine article that Tim Mathews
referred to.This is not true.I meant to erase my reference to it
before posting.

Robert Lesniakiewicz states in his final sentence...<Might the
Roswell 'UFO' have been nothing more than a Nazi Vril or Haunebu
flying disc? This is a possible explanation>.I apologize for
this lapse and hope I have not mislead anyone.

Keith.......Keep the Faith!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                  {96} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:56:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:37:52 -0500
Subject: {96} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

        ______ _______ ______
------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
 U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                       24th October 1998
     /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K           part 3 Issue 96
--- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------

The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
subscribers in 58 countries.

This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will
be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the
subject section e.g.  Repost {96} part 1, part 2 or part 3.


[W 14]******

Source: Boston Business Wire
Publish date: 21st August 1998
From: bernhard.nahrgang@ob.kamp.net (Bernhard Nahrgang)

Reason for Optimism in ET Search

SETINOW reports that scientists conducting Searches for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) recently received good
news: ET signals may be numerous because the transmitting
technology is easy to develop. In the latest issue of the
journal SetiQuest, Boston University professor and radio
astronomer Nathan Cohen shows how a device called an 'aperture
engine' could be used to transmit across the Galaxy.

SETI uses radio telescopes to attempt reception of radio
transmissions from ET's from distant stars in the galaxy and
beyond. No ET signals have been found to date. SETI is
considered a legitimate scientific enterprise and is not
connected with UFO studies or alleged alien abductions.

A cosmic signal's transmitted power must be made very large.
Traditional thinking dictates doing this by using a powerful and
expensive transmitter or through the magnification or 'gain'
from a very large antenna dish. This produces an inefficient and
expensive technological tradeoff.

Cohen says the two are likely to be linked as an optimized,
aperture engine. The transmitting antenna also is a stellar
power collector and transmitter module array, combining three
key functions in one physical area, with high efficiency. It
would look like a collection of flat panels with multiple
layers. A typical aperture engine would be a dozen acres on a
side for transmission to Earth from the other side of the
Galaxy, 70,000 light years away. For closer transmissions out
to 1000 light years it would be slightly bigger than a football
field. The closest star is about 4 light years away.

The total number of ET civilizations spread across the Galaxy
is a matter of speculation. Guesses run between 1 and
100,000,000. No matter how big or small the actual number, Cohen
suggests that there is a good chance a vast majority of them
above a modest technological threshhold are capable of trying to
contact us or others with radio transmissions from aperture
engines. Even distant and humble ET's will have the chance for a
cosmic contact. Cohen adds: "ET contact is not just the
plaything of the few super-smart civilizations, but even the far
more numerous ones at our level or slightly above it." Asked to
speculate on the number of detectable ET's Cohen guessed between
100 and 100,000. "But we have no useful data which constrains
that number. Until you find any ET's and survey the sky
correctly no one knows", he cautioned.

Cohen also cautions that the optimized effort on the transmit
side has to be matched by one on our end, and that the
conversation is one-way, because of the great distances and time
scales. "For a chance to find even one ET signal, you need
patience, the largest radio telescopes and to look at thousands
of stars at a time", explains Cohen, " also you have to be smart
enough to know that the changing, thin plasma of space requires
a special spread spectrum method called polychromatic SETI." At
the moment, says Cohen, ongoing Earth SETI's are receive-only
and fall substantially short of optimized efforts. The most
comprehensive survey has looked at less than 700 stars out of
500 billion in the galaxy. "The amazing thing is not that we've
found nothing so far, but that we're not doing the receive
effort the right way." Cohen believes SETI will be successful
within a generation of changing its observing strategies.

Copies of the SetiQuest issue may be purchased through its
website (http://www.setiquest.com). SETINOW sponsors
dissemination of important breakthroughs in the SETI through its
in-construction web site, scheduled for a September debut.


Letters =======

From: Ivo Westerlaken.

Referring to Mr W.E. Bimson's <W.E.Bimson@liverpool.ac.uk>
[issue 94 uk.ufo.nw] interest of any natural formation on Earth
which appears to be a face from space.

I did see a TV documentary, in which a gigantic ice formation
near Greenland broke off the main ice. The formation looked like
a pencil drawing of a writer [I believe it was Edgar Allan Poe].
The detail was terrific (I could never draw a face so well). I'm
sorry I can't remember more details about it, or the programme.

Url: http://www.casema.net/~cold/

Description: Critical research and publication site in Dutch,
with the only online UFO database for the Netherlands and
Belgium. Also articles on Free Energy, Cryptozoology, mysteries,
anomalies and Fortean events. All in Dutch, of course.

--

From: Steve_Chesworth@jba.co.uk

I am interested in contacting any ufo groups in the Worcester
area and wonder if you would know of any. Thanks for any help
you can give me,

--

From: Federico Provvedi" <federico.provvedi@telecomitalia.it>

Caponi Case

In the article
http://www.psispy.com/ufo/updates/1998/mar/m27-038.shtml dated
Sat, 28 Mar 1998 appears: "... But sightings literally cover
the globe. In Italy, photographer Filiberto Caponi claims to
have met an alien creature several times outside his house in
Abruzzo. He captured it on Polaroid film in 1993. ..."

I'm a friend of Filiberto and he's from Pretare di Arquata del
Tronto in Marche and not in Abruzzo. Filiberto is not a
photographer, but a ceramist. Anyway I have investigated that
case since 1993 and my conclusion is : it's true in every
aspect.... In the July 1993 from a Radar of Rome (Pratica di
Mare) and a Radar in the Marche (Falconara marittima) the
Italian aeronautics destroyed a UFO flying from Lazio to
Abruzzo... and with 2 air-to-air missiles it was destroyed. The
fragments fell in the canal of Monte Vettore (a mountain) near
Arquata. The pilots of the Caccia airoplain saw 3 balls leaving
the UFO before the explosion. Three days later Filiberto
encountered the first alien... after several encounters in the
area, I managed to take six photographs....

For more information contact Federico at the above address.


---

A FEARFUL SYMMETRY

A TRUE STORY OF ALIEN INTRUSION INTO HUMAN LIVES

By D. Lynne Bishop

A FEARFUL SYMMETRY Copyright 1995 by D. Lynne Bishop

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including
photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission of
the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief
passages.

First Printing September 1995

Printed in the United States of America

BOOKFINDER PUBLISHING

http://bookfinder.simplenet.com/

Lynne Bishop's home page

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3862/

---

CHAPTER 16


The entire group met with John and Ann following my sister's
session, to relax and mull over the information my sister had
provided.  We all enjoyed a good laugh, when my sister declared,
"You know, this explains it all.  My sister probably got my
legs! I was supposed to be 5'6"!  I wasn't supposed to be only
5' tall!"  Laughing, I replied, "That's it!  Instead of being
switched at birth, we were switched at sixteen!"  It was
wonderful to be able to laugh after a session--and it showed
how far we had progressed since the first, tremulous hypnotic
regression we had each experienced.  The memories that were
recalled this time were no less provocative than those recovered
in other sessions, but our coping abilities were vastly
improved.

Nothing unusual occurred on the trip home, and the next several
weeks passed without incident.  Then, on March 10, the black
helicopters started appearing.  It was 6:42 P.M., and my husband
and I had been home from work for only an hour or so.  Dusk had
already fallen, when we heard the unmistakable sound of nearby
rotors.  The helicopter passed over the house low enough to
rattle the windows, and continued in a northerly direction.  Ten
minutes later I received a telephone call from my sister:  a
black helicopter had just made two passes over her house and
Mother's house.  Attracted by the noise it made as it flew over,
they had run outside in time to note it was "lit up like a
Christmas tree."  We all laughed it off; certain that it had
only been coincidence.

I wasn't so certain it was mere coincidence on March 24, when
two helicopters flew over my place of employment at 3:00 P.M.,
and continued, passing over my sister's house again.  She ran
outside with a camera, but they were too distant to capture a
decent photograph.  She was able to discern that the
helicopters were black, with no markings.  The sudden prevalence
of helicopters was peculiar, but nothing, I thought, to concern
ourselves over.

March 25 arrived.  The month was almost over, and the alien
encounter I had been expecting had not surfaced.  It was with a
certain amount of relief that I went to bed that evening.  My
husband and I had discontinued the experiment with the tape
recorder, after the strange silence on the tape during my
previous encounter.  I slept very soundly that night, and had a
very lucid "dream," in which I was given a manuscript by one of
the familiar gray alien entities.  This manuscript was
extremely thick and oversized, and had marginal notations
throughout, as if it had been proofread by someone and returned
to me.  In the presence of this entity, I perused the
manuscript, and became aware that it seemed to pertain to me
and my family members.  Parts of the book were indecipherable by
me, and after skimming the entire sheaf of papers, I came across
a letter directed to me.  I was very puzzled by the opening
paragraph, which partly stated, "I assume you got my address
from 'Cat'."  I had no idea who "Cat" was.  Upon waking, I told
my husband about this enigmatic dream and quote.  We were
standing in the bathroom, and I suddenly realized I had a
nosebleed.  I was mystified--I hadn't had a bloody nose since I
was a child.  My husband gave me a bemused glance, but made no
comment.

There was no further discussion about my "dream" or my
nosebleed for several days.  On Friday evening, as my husband
and I prepared for bed, he gave me a sideways glance, and asked,
"Has anything else happened to you, besides the dream and your
nose?"  I replied that I had noticed a couple small bruises on
my legs, but that was the only thing different.  Hesitantly, as
if fearing the implications of his next words, he told me the
following tale:

"The night you had your 'dream', I was very tired when we went
to bed, but I couldn't get to sleep.  I kept tossing and
turning, and looked at the clock, noticing it was about midway
between 10:30 P.M. and 11:00 P.M.  After several minutes, I was
laying face-down on the bed.  You were against me on my right
side, and the dog was on my feet.

"Suddenly, I got the feeling someone was in the house--and not
just in the house--but in our bedroom!  I tried to open my eyes,
but couldn't.  I tried to push myself up off the bed, and found
I couldn't move!  I was desperate--I kept trying to rise, and
finally was able to push up from the bed and open my eyes.

"But before I could focus and adjust to the darkness, some
'force' shoved me back down onto the bed.  It felt like the
gravity increased, and when I was smashed into the bed, there
was no answering 'bounce.'  Once down, I heard the covers
rustle, and the sheet  was pulled over my head.  I couldn't see
anything, except the sheet, but I sensed three 'beings' in the
room--one on my side of the bed, behind me; a second one by the
doorway on your side of the bed; and a third by the foot of the
bed, also on your side.

"Then, everything became quiet, as if I had gone suddenly deaf,
followed by total blindness.  Nothing I tried seemed to work,
and as I continued struggling, the warmth and pressure I felt
from you faded away.  Sometime later, I was able to move again
and look around.  It was just past 12:30 A.M., and you were
laying on your side.  At first, I was calm, but my breathing and
heartbeat increased as I looked around the room."

I was grateful I wasn't standing as he recited his experience.
Besides the shock at corroboration of an abduction,  all the
impotent anger I had held inside since the beginning of this
affair surfaced, as I railed against an invisible foe that hid,
like a coward, behind the sheltering facade of darkness.  We had
asked for this, my husband and me--by playing with a force
beyond our understanding.  And this force had answered us, in
unequivocal terms.  I was suddenly reminded that a person
should always be careful in wishing for something, because they
might get it!  My husband had an almost dislocated shoulder as
proof of the aliens' power.

On Sunday, March 28, I visited with my mother, and filled her
in on the latest events. After several  hours, I prepared to
leave, and she followed me to my car.  Again, the loud sound of
an approaching helicopter filled our ears.  It came from the
North, headed in a southerly direction.  Rushing inside Mother's
house, I grabbed her binoculars, and sped back outside, just in
time to catch the helicopter as it moved over her house.  It was
gloss black and large, resembling the Apache or Cobra type. The
cockpit area was composed of tinted glass.  It appeared to be a
surveillance helicopter from the private sector--not military in
origin.  I could make out no markings on its body.  Driving
home, I jumped out of the car and ran inside to check with my
husband, to see if any helicopter had passed over our house in
the last few minutes.  I wasn't very surprised, when he stated
that a black helicopter had, indeed, passed over only about five
minutes prior to my arrival.

I told my friend and co-worker, Linda, about the recent
helicopter activity in the vicinity, and we discussed the
possibilities.  The area did have occasional flyovers of
National Guard units, and the local police groups used
helicopters for aerial reconnaissance on rare occasions.  Still,
it was odd.  I had seen more aircraft in the past few weeks than
I'd seen at any time in the past, except while living on
military bases.

April arrived, along with a delayed spring season.  We attended
the Eureka Springs UFO Conference amid a flood of rain, sleet,
and snow.  We could hardly believe our ears the first night of
the Conference--surely that wasn't a helicopter flying over the
hotel!  This was becoming ridiculous!

With the approach of May, I began to mentally prepare myself
for another abduction. The vague pattern we had discerned many
months ago seemed to be holding true, and based on that pattern,
an encounter would be due at any time.  I hoped it would be a
conscious event for me this time, but more than anything, I
didn't want a repeat of the encounter in March.

As the days passed, agonizingly slow, I watched vainly for the
signs of a pending abduction.  The altered reality that began
with an unearthly silence had not appeared, and I wondered if
the entities had decided to change the time-frame for the
encounters.  The prospect of having to watch for a new pattern
dismayed me.  I had spent so many nights wide awake, waiting for
their presence, in order to discover the original phase, and I
was tired of staying awake.  I was tired of the aliens, tired
of being afraid, and just plain tired.

On May 25, I awoke from a heavy sleep and discovered several
small bruises on my right arm and leg.  "Probably just ran into
something," I thought.  "Maybe they're not going to bother me,
anymore."  I enjoyed this thought until June 2.

It was 11:00 P.M.  After tossing and turning, I had finally
found a comfortable position, and closed my eyes.  Within
seconds, that eerie, abrupt silence fell around me, cutting me
off from the natural surroundings.  My mobility frozen, I
floated off the bed in a prone position, and rapidly slipped
through the molecularly changed wall. This floating continued at
a rapid pace, and I was surprised when I didn't go upward.
Instead, the movement remained level, as the speed increased.
I became nauseated, and, for once, I welcomed the paralyzation.
My body made several rapid banking movements, as if being
aerially corrected in flight.  My eyes were open, and I saw a
meadow, or a field-like area, many feet below me.  My body
descended over this meadow, toward the thick, luxuriant grass.
I thought it was a hayfield that had not yet been cut.

As the descent abruptly ended, my eyes closed.  I sensed
several alien presences around me, and my consciousness faded
away.  When I next "came to," one of the most bizarre
experiences in my life had begun.

For several weeks, my mind had been filled with dinosaurs.
Every store contained paraphernalia about them, and my senses
had been dominated by their presence.  Upon regaining
consciousness, I found myself communicating with the alien
entities on the ship about dinosaurs.  I had trouble describing
what these massive creatures were, and I finally had expressed
the thought that I could draw a dinosaur for them.  The aliens
seemed to enjoy this concept, but evidently had no paper or
pencils on board.  To my amazement, they led me to a small area
that was composed of sand--like a child's sandbox.  Delighted, I
sat in the "sand," and began etching a Tyrannosaurus Rex for
them, its toothy snout facing left, and the tail sweeping in an
arc from right to left.  Upon completing the sketch, I turned
toward the dominant alien.  He was pleased with the rendition;
so pleased that I dared to make a request.  I asked him if I
could take back some kind of proof with me; something to
indicate this encounter had truly occurred.  I was astonished by
the warmth in his acquiescence.  I was overcome by a pervading
lethargy, and I again "passed out."

Startled, I woke in bed.  My husband wasn't there, and in a
panic I shouted his name. More alert, I realized he stood by the
open window in our room, staring out into the night sky.  I
jumped out of bed and ran toward him, words tumbling from my
mouth as I told him what had just taken place.  I gestured as I
rapidly spoke, and suddenly noticed my forearms were completely
covered in a shimmery, dust-like coating--as if some of the
"sand" I had drawn in was still clinging to my arms!  As my
husband and I stared, wide-eyed at the "dust," it started
falling off my arms to the floor below. The powdery flecks
sparkled golden as they fell, and disappeared before touching
the floor.  Glancing at each other in awe, we noticed a light
out the window.  It was the old orange disc, passing
effortlessly from left to right.

Needing no further impetus, my husband and I raced for the
front door, and ran outside.  Breathless, we watched as it
slowly crossed our field of vision.  Behind it appeared four or
five other lights, that appeared to be following in close
pursuit. As these crafts drew nearer, we could see that they
were black helicopters--with one lone white helicopter off to
the side.  I heard no sound emanating from any of the strange
crafts.  Suddenly, the irony and humor of the entire situation
struck me, and I began laughing.  We were getting the entire
show; a staged presentation for our benefit!

After watching for several moments, the orange sphere
disappeared from view, with the helicopters following behind.
My husband and I turned to reenter the house.  In the light cast
by some nearby streetlights, I noticed a sandy area near the
house that I'd not noticed before.  Drawing abreast of the sand,
we stood stock-still in silence. There, etched deeply into the
sandy patch was the dinosaur I had drawn for the aliens, but
with an added feature.  I didn't recall having drawn it, but
there, to the right side of the dinosaur was a sketch of an
alien.  After several seconds, we reentered the house.

Suddenly, I was laying in bed again, bolt awake.  My husband
was curled up beside me on my right, and the dog was by my feet,
at the end of the bed.  I had only time to glance at the
clock--it was 12:32 A.M.--when the dog fell off the bed,
landing with a loud thump.  My husband woke up, as I jumped from
the bed to make sure the dog was not injured.  I told my husband
I needed to tell him something in the morning, and he mumbled
something incoherent.  He drifted easily off to sleep again, as
I lay there, amused by the aliens' idea of "proof."

When I arose in the morning, I was still laughing as I told my
husband about the encounter.  Once again, I had been bested by
these alien beings, but there had been such a humorous twist to
the entire event that I couldn't be angry.  I had been fairly
beaten.

At work that day I spoke with my co-worker about the abduction,
and we joked together about the "proof" the aliens had given me.
As the day progressed, I noticed that I felt itchy, as if I were
having an allergic reaction to something.  I glanced at my arms,
and was shocked to see that a rash had developed, extending
from my wrist down toward the elbow on both arms.  The rash was
inflamed and itched intensely, breaking through my
concentration.  With a mixture of excitement and horror, I
realized it was located exactly where I had seen the shimmery
"sand" on my arms!

The rash lasted until the following Saturday, and finally
disappeared after a severe stomachache developed.  As the
"proof" worked its way out of my system, I wondered just what
had caused the allergic reaction:  landing in an unmowed
hayfield, or golden, shimmery "sand" in which I had drawn a
dinosaur for the aliens.  It was a mystery, and like all the
mysteries I had encountered in the past year, I would probably
never know the answer.


----------===============******************===============-----
-----

UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK

STATEMENT UK-UFO-NW statement: The articles or text appearing
within these pages are not necessarily the views or opinions of
United Kingdom UFO Network.

REPORTS Please forward all reports to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

WWW Visit us on the World Wide Web at
http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/

BACK ISSUES & FILES For information on receiving back issues and
other files send mail with REQUEST INFO in the subject area to:
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

IRC - (INTERNET RELAY CHAT) The meetings take place at 11pm
(2300hrs) each and every Saturday night. Times will vary
depending on your location in the world. If you would like to
know the time in your part of the world send a mail to:

ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

In the subject section put: IRC TIME INFO

In the message of your mail please put:

a) Your Country b) Your location c) Nearest major City

You can also find times for many cities throughout the world at
our web site: http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/

Connecting to our weekly UFO meetings on the IRC (internet
relay chat) is now easier than ever.

**NEW**

Fully configured MIRC irc software for you to download

We continually tell people that one of the best IRC programs
available is MIRC. It is a free/shareware program (fully
working) and is the 'preferred' software for use on the IRC.

Would you like to use MIRC to connect to the UK.UFO.NWs weekly
Saturday meetings? Would you like to join in when we have
regular special guests on the channel?

Well now you can. We have two fully configured versions of MIRC
available for download for PC users. They will enable you to
connect straight to the UK.UFO.NW UFO channel.

One version is for Windows 95/98 users. The other for Windows
3.1/3.11 users. To download go to:

http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk

and select the 'Download' link from the button bar. Both
programs are approximately 600Kb in size and should download
fairly quickly.

Once you have downloaded the relevant file 'Run' or 'Load' it,
which will install MIRC onto your hard drive.

Next load the MIRC program.

Enter your name, e-mail address and two nicknames that you wish
to be known by on the channel. You only have to do this the
first time you use the program. Lastly click on 'Connect to IRC
server'. Once you are connected to a server a window will appear
with '#ufo' inside. Click on the '#ufo' and then click on 'Join
channel'.

You will now be joined to the UK.UFO.NW ufo channel. In the
right hand window you will see a list (including yourself) of
all those who are currently joined to the channel. The large
upper left window is where you view the conversations. The small
lower window is where you type anything you want to say,
remembering to press 'Return' on your keyboard at the end.

The main windows within MIRC can be fully resized like most
windows programs.

Don't be shy. We are all a friendly bunch. Give it a go. You'll
soon get the hang of it. We'll be happy to offer any assistance
that you may need.

For those of you needing help connecting to our IRC meetings
send your questions to:

ufo-irc-advice@crowman.demon.co.uk

SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION
The UK.UFO.NW free fortnightly e-zine covering UFO reports and
information from the UK and around the world is now available by
subscribing to our new List Server.

Send mail to:

listserv@sjuvm.stjohns.edu

In the main body of the mail put:

subscribe ufo fn ln

note: in place of fn put your first name.
      in place of ln put your last name.

For example:

subscribe ufo John Smith

A confirm mail will then be sent to you which you need to reply to
within 48 hours to be put on the e-zine mailing list.

If you have problems you may also subscribe by sending mail to:

ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk

In the subject section of your mail type: SUBSCRIBE

That's it - see you next time!
--------------------------------
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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:17:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:42:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:03:52 -0400
>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Rob Irving <RobIrving@aol.com>
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:17:07 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Crop Circles/Balls Of Light

Tony,

>>I'm interested to know this too, especially as Max would have to
>>know how many people are involved in what is an inherently
>>secretive activity.

>Absolutely, but he could take the most active circle production
>night of the season which would tell him the minimum amount of
>teams there are creating the formations.

Quite, which would probably account for eight or nine souls at
the most. Hardly unimaginable. I used to knock off two 400 ft
'glyphs' a night in the old days, when the competition was
hotter.

I'm not sure of the exact figures this year in the UK, but it's
around 50 formations (half that of any notable complexity). If
it was 850 I'd perhaps take Max's idea more seriously.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                          BWW Media Alert 19981024

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:01:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:54:30 -0500
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19981024


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).


Octorber 24, 1998

Big week, due to Halloween.  A little more was heard from Art Bell, and a
little more came out without his apparent approval.  It appears to be
something that might fall more clearly into a family problem than one of
significance to conspiracy believers.

TELEVISION

ABC
Friday, October 30, 10:00 AM: THE VIEW (ghost-busters, Nostradamus, witches,
etc.)

AMC
Friday, October 30, 6:00 PM, HOLLYWOOD GHOST STORIES (featuring Elke Sommers
and Flip Wilson)

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Saturday, October 24, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: PSYCHIC
DETECTIVES
Saturday, October 24, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: ARE ALIENS
TRYING TO CONTACT US?
Sunday, October 25, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: BEAST OF THE MOORS
Sunday, October 25, 1:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: UFOs (including airline pilot
witnesses and a New Zealand filming)
Sunday, October 25, 2:00 PM, INSIDE AREA 51
Thursday, October 29, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE
Thursday, October 29, 9:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE (ghosts in Dover; spontaneous
bone regeneration
Friday, October 30, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE
Friday, October 30, 1:30 AM, STRANGE BUT TRUE (ghosts in Dover; spontaneous
bone regeneration)
Next Saturday, October 31, 2:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
SQUARING THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE
Next Saturday, October 31, 2:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE:
GIANTS OF EASTER ISLAND
Next Sunday, November 1, 1:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE
Next Sunday, November 1, 1:30 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE (ghosts in Dover,
spontaneous bone regeneration)
Next Wednesday, November 4, 10:00 PM, WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT?: SPIRITS, ROBBERS,
AND THE DEAD (English ghosts, among other things)
Next Thursday, 2:00 AM, WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT?: SPIRITS, ROBBERS, AND THE DEAD
(English ghosts, among other things)
Next Thursday, 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SQUID
Next Friday, 1:00 AM, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SQUID

E!
Friday, October 30, 8:00 AM, HAUNTED HOLLYWOOD (hosted by John Astin)
Friday, October 30, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HOLLYWOOD (hosted by John Astin)

THE HISTORY CHANNEL
Sunday, October 18, 7:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Sunday, October 18, 11:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Friday, October 23, 3:00 AM, THE HAUNTED HISTORY OF HALLOWEEN
Saturday, October 24, 3:00 PM, ROSWELL: AN ALIEN OBSESSION
Monday, October 26, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Monday, October 26, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Tuesday, October 27, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS
Tuesday, October 27, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS
Wednesday, October 28, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Wednesday, October 28, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Thursday, October 29, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO (Dennis Hauck,
http://www.haunted-places.com, is involved with this one)
Thursday, October 29, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO
Friday, October 30, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY OF HALLOWEEN
Friday, October 30, 8:00 PM, GHOSTS OF GETTYSBURG
Next Saturday, October 31, 4:00 PM, THE HAUNTED HISTORY OF HALLOWEEN
Next Saturday, October 31, 5:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Next Saturday, October 31, 6:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS
Next Satuday, October 31, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Next Saturday, October 31, 8:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO
Next Saturday, October 31, 9:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Next Saturday, October 31, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY, NEW ORLEANS
Next Saturday, October 31, 11:00 PM, HAUNTED HISTORY: CHARLESTON
Next Sunday, November 1, 12:00 AM, HAUNTED HISTORY: SAN FRANCISCO
Next Sunday, November 1, 10:00 AM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ENGLAND
Next Sunday, NoveMber 1, 11:00 AM, HAUNTED HISTORY: NEW ORLEANS

HOME AND GARDEN TV
Sunday, October 25, 7:00 PM, THE GOOD LIFE: CHARLESTON GHOST TOURS
Sunday, October 25, 10:00 PM, THE GOOD LIFE: CHARLESTON GHOST TOURS
Tuesday, October 22, 7:00 PM, KITCHEN DESIGN (includes a haunted kitchen)
Tuesday, October 22, 10:00 PM, KITCHEN DESIGN (includes a haunted kitchen)
Friday, October 30, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED HOUSES

THE LEARNING CHANNEL
Saturday, October 24, 1:00 AM, UFO: STORIES OF ALIEN ABDUCTION
Sunday, October 25, 8:00 PM, THE HAUNTED
Sunday, October 25, 9:00 PM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (hosted by Michael Dorn)
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6304164483/bufosweirdworld">
BWWB</A> )
Sunday, October 25, 10:00 PM, HAUNTED LIGHTHOUSES
Sunday, October 25, 11:00 PM, THE HAUNTED
Monday, October 25, 12:00 AM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (hosted by Michael
Dorn)
Monday, October 25, 1:00 AM, HAUNTED LIGHTHOUSES
Next Saturday, October 31, 5:00 PM, THE HAUNTED
Saturday, October 31, 6:00 PM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (hosted by Michael
Dorn)
Next Saturday, October 31, 7:00 PM, HAUNTED LIGHTHOUSES

MTV
Sunday, October 25, 3:00 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO stories (I don't know if this is
really appropriate to the list or not...never seen the show)
Next Monday, November 2, 4:30 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO stories
Next Wednesday, November 4, 4:30 PM, ROAD RULES: UFO stories

PBS
NOVA (times, day, and even content vary): SECRETS OF THE PSYCHICS: arch-
skeptic, James "The Amazing" Randi, takes on psychic surgery, etc. (
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6304463189/bufosweirdworld">
bwwbsop</A> )

THE SCIENCE CHANNEL
The new schedule is weird programming for an hour each at 6:00 AM, 2:00 PM,
and 10:00 PM.  Rotating shows include: INTO THE UNKNOWN, STRANGE BUT TRUE, and
ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE.

THE SCI-FI CHANNEL
Sun, October 25 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS SPECIAL #4 THE LIVING DEAD: SPEAKING FROM
THE GRAVE
Sun, October 25 7:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4034: jet/UFO encounter;
Nostradamus
Sun, October 25 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS SPECIAL #4 THE LIVING DEAD: SPEAKING FROM
THE GRAVE
Sun, October 25 11:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4034: jet/UFO encounter;
Nostradamus
Mon, October 26 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4035: UFO, ghosts
Tue, October 27 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4036 UFO, angel, ghosts, alien
autopsy
Tue, October 27 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #216: ghost marks Polaroids
Tue, October 27 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #216: ghost marks Polaroids
Wed, October 28 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4037: Colorado haunting,
unidentified submarine objects
Thu, October 29 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4038: D.C. UFOs, Japanese exorcism,
author Whitley Strieber
Thu, October 29 4:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #217: video of UFOs, Ouija board
Thu, October 29 8:00 PM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #217 video of UFOs, Ouija board
Fri, October 30 9:00 AM SIGHTINGS EPISODE #4039: Socorro (New Mexico) classic
UFO landing report, shamanism

SYNDICATED
Monday, October 26 (day may vary somewhat), ACCESS HOLLYWOOD (Marilyn Monroe's
ghost)
Friday, October 30, psychic Sylvia Browne
___________________________

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.
_____________________________





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #277

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:46:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:56:47 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #277


Apology to MW #277 (For October 24, 1998)

Hear again, I make some toasts to he who waits or rots and
roasts. One we've left to willful predators . . . lawyers,
doctors -- bad faith creditors. Those that smile and take your
home; those that label -- shove you prone. Those that, even,
drive you crazy, terrify, and scare you lazy. Masters of their
obfuscation, lying with foul osculation, the darkest of the glad
dark lords -- those that torment Johnny Ford!

They say that he's a _monster_, like some uni-bomber *fiend*.
They paint him psychopathic like a twisted, shadowed dream. They
make him out a killer (likely _them_ with bloody hands), and
they keep John in the lockup as if HE'S the guilty man. They say
that John's a terror that's been brought to lawful heel. They
say (and do) a lot of things -- like lie and cheat or steal.

John is real, and a metaphor laid out low and on the floor,
awash in water to his nose -- stripped of all but prison
clothes. He'll lay awake for hearing screams of those relieved
of cherished dreams. His own desires muted -- dulled, wishes
washed away. . . annulled. Honored goals concede potential, give
up on supposed credentials; very lost and  all alone -- he stays
awake . . . his cell mate groans.

Perhaps the inmates slap him down and treat him like a snitch.
Perhaps a few go all the way, and use him like their bitch!
Perhaps his life's in danger from assassins in the shadows --
John Ford must live a hell on earth, you're thinking, but you
_shan't_ know. Unless, of course, _YOU_ fall afoul to ask the
'man' a question, and the answers inconvenient so he persecutes
suggestion! Then it's YOU would wear John Ford's sad shoes, and
walk his tortured mile. Then it's _You_ that shall not matter,
without substance, worth, or style. Then it's _you_ the one
forgotten, or betrayed and misbegotten -- held apart to suffer
like a chain gang picking cotton!

A toast to hapless innocence . . . A toast to those who fall! A
toast to Ford and others who are WRONGED by those who stall. I
toast the persecuted. I toast them one and all -- the one's who
have the strength to spit, brought to their knees . . . acrawl.
I toast this brave man Johnny Ford, I curse again the dark realm
lords. I toast the light his
trial brings, and toast he _wins_ -- evades their sting.

I toast with ardent fervor, as John slips beneath their waves,
that his plight is heard by those who have the _power_ -- hear
my rave! I toast the few supporting him; I toast that there'll
be more! I toast that Johnny Ford will stride triumphant <I
implore>! I toast to lost indifference; I toast the truth be
told; I toast a trial revealing the injustice _we_ control. I
toast the dissolution of corrupt machines and boards; I toast a
grand new future that would see John Ford restored!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

I am still waiting, Ms. Douglass, for advice on where to send
John my hard earned bucks <g>. When that information comes --
fellow motes (!), SEND WHAT YOU CAN (try to get a few more to go
along with you!) -- You can even imagine you're sending the
money to save _yourself_ . . . you are -- in _FACT_, you are.

Restore John Ford!

--
Explore the Alien View!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/

<Updated 12 September>

"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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                                  Stealthy

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 22:35:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:14:15 -0500
Subject: Stealthy


Hi Errol, Hi All

The latest news on the Stealth plane can be found here

http://www.herald.com/archive/barry/archive/019790.htm

---
    In an infinite universe inifinitely anything is posible.
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                      Art Bell Back On Wednesday Night

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 07:30:17 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:22:11 -0500
Subject: Art Bell Back On Wednesday Night


Art has just stated on "Coast To Coast" that he'll be back on
Wednesday night (the 28th). Not one comma has been changed in
his contract, the reason for the hiatus is a family crisis.

Stig

<<<>>>

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Sender: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
To: updates@globalserve.net
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:16:53 +0200
Subject: Transcript Of Art Bell's Statement October 23


This is my transcript of Art Bell's statement on "Coast To Coast"
Friday night, October 23.

Stig

*******

Greetings to you again from the Kingdom of Nye!

While all the difficulties that caused me to so unexpectedly and
quickly leave the air have not been resolved, yet - they remain
as grave as any family would ever face - the situation has
improved to some degree, and I pray it will continue to do that.
I will NOT further exacerbate the crisis by making public what
should remain private. In my position I trust you do no less.
Should the matter, however, become public despite my best
efforts, I will have, believe me, a very great deal to say about
it.

I do again state as categorically as I am able: This was not any
kind of hoax or stunt. It was not a contract ploy, nor a
negotiation tactic for more money. Money has never been a goal
for me in doing this program. Never! Not so much as one blot on
an "i" or cross on a "t" has changed in my contract. This was
and is a family crisis. Period.

My network has been nothing but helpful and supportive, and
there are too many people to thank individually, including all
of you! Thank you! My sincere thanks to Hilly Rose for keeping
the live forum going during all this, on I might add very short
notice.

So, I'm very happy to report, I will return to "Coast To Coast"
AM and "Dreamland" beginning Wednesday night October 28. Till
then, from the
high desert:

Goodnight!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Scott Ribordy <sdr@ns.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:54:03 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:05:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:33 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting and Media

><snip>

>>To a certain degree, I was joking <g>. But then again, who knows
>>what the military thinks is "safe" for the public? After the
>>Nevada atomic testing, the government okay'd a film production
>>company to use the location (ground zero) for making "Attilla
>>the Hun" (also known as "Hun, the Barbarian") with John Wayne.
>>I'm not sure which is truly more bizarre, the film itself or the
>>permission to use an area that was still "hot". At any rate,
>>every last person on the film crew and cast has since died of
>>cancer. The government denies any connection, of course. Go
>>figure.

>I could find no reference to "Attilla the Hun" or "Hun, the
>Barbarian" but did find "The Conqueror" made in 1956. Can we
>really say that "every last person on the film crew and cast has
>since died of cancer"? Wasn't John Wayne's cancer attributed to
>smoking cigarettes?

>Just wondering.

>KRandle


Kevin, Roger & List,

For what it's worth ...

Excerpted from: http://www.westsong.com/bobharris/060198.html

by Bob Harris

June 9, 1998

<begin excerpt>

The town of St. George, where the cast and crew spent much of
their time, and Snow Canyon, where most of The Conqueror was
filmed, were about 100 miles downwind of the Nevada Test Site.

That's where the U.S. government tested various atomic weapons.

The government didn't bother to warn anybody about the fallout.

So the cast and crew of The Conqueror spent three solid months
immersed in contaminated air, food, and water.

You can guess the result.

Reviewing The Conqueror's credits, from the top:

John Wayne? Died of cancer.
Susan Hayward? Died of cancer.
Agnes Moorehead? Died of cancer.
Pedro Armendariz? Committed suicide while dying of cancer.
Dick Powell? Died of cancer.

And so on.

By 1980, when People magazine did a headcount, at least 91
members of the cast and crew had contracted cancer.

-end of excerpt-

--
sdr@ns.net (Scott)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:54:34 +0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:18:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:29:01 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Hi Gary,

>I just wanted to thank Gary and _all_ who responded to my
>request for info. It is disturbing to think that 6 out of 10 (or
>7 out of 10 couples as one of the respondants reported,) are
>experiencing fertility problems. I also don't understand why
>this isn't a _major_ issue!

>If this widespread infertility is real, and I have no reason
>to doubt the feedback I have gotten, then the little Grey
>bastards may in fact be doing us all a favor by rat holing
>gallons of human sperm and ova. All of a sudden that aspect
>of the abduction scenario starts to make (real world) sense!

>It's time to take a serious inventory and reorganize our
>priorities. The world that our grandchildren will inherit is
>_our_ responsibility. If we don't stop poisoning the environment
>and ourselves, our children and our childrens' children will pay
>the awful price for our ignorance, self indulgence, and
>laziness. Not fair to them, and it's not fair to us either.
>People are sleeping man. Crying shame. No one knows, no one
>cares.

>Amerika 1998 - Rome burns while 'Nero' (you and me) just sit
>around and play with our limp fiddles!

>Thanx again guys,

>Peace,

>John Velez, Sperm donor to the stars!



Hi John,

This might actually be a sheep in wolf's clothing. It is obvious
that mankind's laziness and self indulgence has inevitably lead
to the slow demise of our once glorious planet. Though it is
not too late to reverse, no perhaps just repair, some of the
damage we've done, our population is far too large to sustain
the society we have created.

The divine controlling force of Earth (some call it God, others
call it Mother nature, evolution, Living spirit, whatever) has
selected us for thinning, as a defense mechanism to the earth's
destruction. Don't tell me we thought we could sustain the way
we live and just let the population get larger and larger? I
only have a business degree, and my science knowledge lacks
somewhat, but that doesn't make sense to me.

It is unfortunate for our children, however maybe a population
reduction will benefit what children there are in the future,
and they can learn from our mistakes.

For a sustainable future,
Sharon. 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Higher Consciousness

From: Christine Fernandes <pumpkin@alfa.netfly.com.br>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:19:46 -0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:12:48 -0500
Subject: Higher Consciousness

[FYI - _not_ for discussion --ebk]

I tried try very hard to read all the mail that I receive on the
subject, but unfortunately something is constantly crossing my
thoughts: A lot of the disputes here presented are at times pure
ego talk, I mean who is right or wrong... Who cares..., don't
you all see that this sort of attitude defeats the whole purpose
of the reason why we have these talks in the first place.

People, this whole Extraterrestrial introduction is something
major, something unprecedented in our lifetime, is Earth asking
for help, people changing values, coming together to become a
loving planet, a planet compatible with the Love, God, Creating
Forces, Buddha or whatever name you decide to give it.

I'd be so very glad to start receiving different information,
like how much people all over the world are  growing as humans,
individuals, and yes, not afraid to say as Light Beings put on
this planet at this particular time for a reason, with a mission
urging to be awaken and a memory eager to be restored.

Please, if anyone is reading this take two seconds to think of
what I just said, it may, as we say here in Brazil, "cair a
ficha" (which translates to "ring the bell").

Sorry if you don't relate at all to what I'm saying. I could go
further into the subject but maybe is not time yet, or the
vehicle.

Thanks for the attention,

Christine Fernandes










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:57:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:29:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:08:55 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights Alternative

>>Bill is referring only to his sighting with Tom King at
>>Blonder's house. His calculations do not apply to Krzyston, L or
>>Rairdon. See

>>www.geocities.com/area51/stargate/5518/maccabee.html.>

>>If I have located Blonder's house correctly, the distance to the
>>mountain is 14 miles, not 7, according to the geological survey
>>>inch.

><snip>

>Bruce,

>Thanks for posting the response and information. I visited that
>website with your analysis in it, and got to see the pictures,
>but was unable to print out the larger, triangulation map-out,
>your Fig. 18; and in your discussion I could not get past about
>Table 5 of the Jan. 14th case before my computer or modem
>data-transfer bogged down. >

>Did you somewhere present the time intervals between the
>beginning and end position determinations of some of those
>lights, so as to be able to estimate an average fall velocity
>for them?


Time intervals are given in the text and so are distances fallen
and estimated speeds. I did not try to measure this for all
lights....very time consuming. Did a couple of representative
ones.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:57:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:51:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 02:09:21 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>I thought it would be interesting to share some comments I've
>been collecting, which relate to this "prove it and we'll
>investigate what can't be proven without investigation"
>attitude. It isn't an anomaly restricted to the relationship of
>scientists to UFOs alone, but also occurs in "conventional"
>fields. These also relate to the idea of whether the nature of
>ufology is such that it operates differently from the way
>structure of evidence from other fields, and why ufology should
>now compelling its evidence.


Thank you for posting those eloquent reminders that not ufology
is not the only academic pursuit that has a tough row to hoe.
Virtually anything truly new runs into a brick wall of
resistance.... germ theory of disease, continental drift, etc.
UFOs can't exist so they don't. And besides there is no evidence
so why bother to look.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           New Roswell Documents?

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 06:36:15 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:54:45 -0500
Subject: New Roswell Documents?


Source: alt.paranet.ufo.

Stig

*******

From: josephs843@aol.com (JosephS843)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
Subject: New Roswell Documents
Date: 22 Oct 1998 21:42:02 GMT

At John White's UFO Conference in New Haven, CN, on Sunday
afternoon Oct 11, l998, Dr Bob Woods and his son, Ryan Woods,
announced that they have obtained approx 200 pages on Roswell
related documents from former Military Intelligence source.
These pages include the "SOM-1 Operations Manual".

We still of a debris field near Roswell AAF and a vehicle crash
site over near Socorro, NM.

Details were lacking concerning the Source of these new
documents.

I would hope that time is taken to verifiy the source of these
documents before releasing them in a book and TV Special.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:57:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:40:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:28:08 -0500

>On their own, the late night videos of the Phoenix lights were
>perfectly congruent with the dropping of flares...  The only
>guessed wrong. Now that one of the more trusted writers here has
>taken time to analyze the vids and placed the lights just where
>tlares.  It doesn't diminish my life for that to be true.

>But then again, in the unexpected rustle of a sudden breeze, I
>swear I can almost hear the ethereal rumbling of an old woman
>crying out, "Off with her head..."

>Bye...  Ted..

All is not (yet) lost. The 8-9 PM events of that night are still
unexplained. And.... because I took on the Phoenix lights I have
been privileged to investigate what seems so far to be an
astounding case of photographically proven missing time!

Investigation proceeding, witnesses want anonymity......
so the best I can say is...

not yet proven but stay tuned!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                                 Bill Barry?

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:03:24 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:14:18 -0500
Subject: Bill Barry?


Dear Colleagues & Fellow List Fiends

-- I'm trying to locate Bill Barry, author of Ultimate
Encounter, the other 1978 book about the Travis Walton case.

As recently as a couple of years ago, he lived in Florida and
published a small newsletter dealing with things paranormal.
I've found quite a number of Bill Barrys listed in Florida, and
would just as soon minimize time and phone calls narrowing
things down.

If anyone out there has any info on "the" Bill Barry's current
whereabouts, or who else I might check with, I'd greatly
appreciate having it.

Of course, if you're reading this, Mr. Barry, I'd appreciate it
if you'd get in touch.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:20:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:03:03 -0500
Subject: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell



From: gerry [mailto:ed@farshore.force9.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 1998 4:29 AM
To: Skywatch International
Subject: Ed Mitchell's Latest Interview

Source: The People [London]
Date: Oct 25 1998
Header: Yes, Aliens Really Are Out There Says the Man on the Moon

Former astronaut Edgar Mitchell is one of only 12 people to have
walked on the moon.

A highly-intelligent scientist, Edgar caused a sensation at a
UFO conference in America this month when he claimed he has seen
proof that aliens exist.

In 1971, Edgar became the sixth person to walk on the moon. Now
68, he works as a consultant to the hugely popular
science-fiction TV series The X Files.

In an exclusive interview from his Florida home, Edgar told JOHN
EARLS why he is convinced there is life on other planets and
that aliens have, in fact, landed on Earth.

I AM an American astronaut and a trained scientist. Because of
my position people in high places confide in me.

And, as a result, I have no doubt that aliens HAVE visited this
planet.

The American government and governments throughout the world
have thousands of files of UFO sightings which cannot be
explained.

As a scientist, it is logical to me that at least some of these
will have been witness of alien craft.

As a former astronaut, the military people who have access to
these files are more willing to talk to me than to people they
regard as mere cranks.

The stories I have heard from these people, who are more highly
qualified than me to talk about UFOs, leave me in no doubt that
aliens have already visited Earth.

I've been interested in the subject since I joined NASA 40 years
ago. Probably my most visionary moment was when I actually
landed on the moon with Apollo 14.

I felt an overwhelming sense that the universe itself is in some
way a conscious being in its own right. This means that all
life-forms, whether on Earth or elsewhere, are all part of one
giant consciousness.

So when I learned that aliens really do exist, I wasn't too
surprised. But what did shock me when I started investigating
extra-terrestrial reports a decade ago is the extent to which
the proof has been hushed up.

It isn't just the US government which has kept quiet about alien
visits. It would be arrogant of an American like myself to
assume that ETs would only choose to visit my country.

Indeed, I've heard convincing stories about governments all over
the world that know of alien visits - including the British
government.

Not all governments are anxious to keep their findings quiet.
The Belgians have admitted that aliens may be out there and have
released information about sightings that cannot be explained
away as military planes, weather phenomena and so on.

There is a very simple reason why governments have been so
secretive: fear.

Modern UFO sightings really began with the Roswell incident in
1947, when a crashed craft containing the corpses of several
aliens was found in Roswell, New Mexico.

Make no mistake, Roswell happened. I've seen secret files which
show the government knew about it - but decided not to tell the
public.

There were very good security reasons for not informing the
public about Roswell. Quite simply, we wouldn't have known how
to deal with the technology of intelligent beings advanced
enough to send a craft to Earth. The world would have panicked
if we'd known aliens were visiting us.

The question of whether or not aliens are still visiting us is
more complex.

Such is our existing secret technology that what might look like
an alien craft may well turn out to be a top-secret military
plane. On the other hand, the craft may be an alien spaceship.
Personally however, I'd say, "Yes, it's quite possible we are
currently being visited".

The whole question of extra-terrestrials should be looked at in
an historical context. Five hundred years ago, the astronomer
Copernicus was condemned as a heretic for saying that planet
Earth wasn't the centre of the universe but merely a small part
of it.

Now we laugh at those long-dead fools for not listening to the
truth. People who believe in aliens aren't all cranks and some
may be looked upon in the future as visionaries similar to
Copernicus. Meanwhile, the majority of us still believe mankind
is the biological centre of the universe.

We will refuse to accept that intelligent life exists outside
Earth unless we personally bump into an alien while we're doing
the shopping. Is this attitude really any different from those
"simpletons" of 500 years ago?

My training at NASA only allows me to look at things
scientifically. Even if I hadn't been shown evidence of alien
landings on Earth, the assumption must be that somewhere in the
universe another planet is capable of supporting alien life.

Those life-forms need not be "little green men". The scientists'
definition of intelligent life is whether or not it can use and
manage information. Even the most primitive microbes on Earth
qualify by that definition, and surely there are at the very
least similar microbes thriving on planets throughout the
universe.

If you are starting to think walking on the moon addled my brain
and that I'll believe any old crank theory about ETs, think
again.

I would describe myself as a cynic. I wasn't convinced about the
existence of aliens until I started talking to the military
old-timers who were there at the time of Roswell. The more
government documentation on aliens I was told about, the more
convinced I became.

It must be stressed that the wackier people on the fringe of
alien matters do the subject no end of damage. Contrary to
rumour, there are no alien buildings and structures on the moon.
I should know, I was there!

I even became caught up in these rumours when a theory started
that a moon structure was reflected on my helmet during TV
transmissions of my landing. That just isn't true.

It's that kind of disinformation which stops credible people
admitting that they too believe in aliens.

Thankfully, things are changing for the better. It's a snowball
effect - the more scientists admit that ETs are a viable
prospect, the more they are investigated in a scientifc manner.
And the more that happens, the more chance there is of us
discovering inarguable proof of extra-terrestrials.

It helps too that those in possession of documentation of alien
visits to Earth are starting to come forward. The military
people I spoke to are tired of the secrecy surrounding Roswell
and similar cases, particularly as the information is being
leaked.

I firmly believe that this documentation will have to be made
public within the next three or four years. And if proof of ETs
is finally made public, nobody will be happier than me.

What I don't think will happen is that I will ever see an
extra-terrestrial. I'd love to see one, though it's not the
biggest priority in my life.

But, as they say on a TV show I'm associated with, the truth is
out there.

::: end :::

                ||||||||||||||> via <||||||||||||||
                   Gerry @ Far Shores Web Site
                 http://www.farshore.force9.co.uk
     ||||||||||||||> FAR NEWS --- Ride the Wave <||||||||||||||
                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:09:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:17:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:39:48 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>Appalled? From what I have read, the "aliens" do not care about
>anyone or anything other than themselves and their interests.
>What good thing has any "alien" done for us lately?

If they don't care then I guess they have nothing to do with
sterility either. The point anyway, was sterility a
negative....a couple of us  think it's a positive (from aliens
or wherever).


>It is funny, but there were serious concerns about
>overpopulation and scarcity of resources as far back as ancient
>times when the world population was estimated at about
>200,000,000 at the time of Christ - about 25 times smaller than
>it is now. Although there will always be things we can do to
>make our lives on Earth safer and more comfortable, our world is
>not really closer to oblivion than at any other time in our
>past, despite the seemingly new and increasing number of "the
>end of the world is coming soon" rumours we hear about
> If the "aliens" are not happy with what they find here
>on Earth, (possibly their worlds are even more overpopulated)
>then I suggest that they go look somewhere else and leave us and
>our home alone.


I personally don't go for the "end of the world" scenario
either, but you have only to look at the world news (without an
agenda) to see how we are replacing habitat with farmland or
wasteland simply because there is more of us to support and
feed, surely you can't think this is a positive thing for anyone
on this planet. Possible cures for diseases from plants in the
rainforests which are being destroyed, are another problem of
growth. There may have been concerns at the time of Christ but
"be fruitful and multiply" is no longer the necesssity it was
then.  Besides I am alive NOW, what they thought then really
doesn't concern me.

I live in one of the fastest growing areas in the US now and am
personally tired of seeing forests replaced with shopping malls,
subdivisions and all the necessities of a growing population.
Where I grew up (Wash. DC) you would be hard pressed to find any
part of the woods or even open areas I and my brothers played
in....I am sick of it. The house lots have gotten smaller so
they can cram more houses on less land which means all the trees
have to go.

I am wandering from the point of the original comment which was,
are the UFO's in some fashion responsible for sterility or is it
natures way of solving a problem? I see overpopulation as a
problem... I guess you don't.

Sue B.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                       Blather: Straddling Two Worlds

From: Daev Walsh - Blather <daev@blather.net>>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 01:50:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:22:31 -0500
Subject: Blather: Straddling Two Worlds

______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
October 23rd 1998, Dublin, Ireland   Vol 2. No. 24
_______________________________________________________

STRADDLING TWO WORLDS

Blather's 'man on the street' encountered U.S. cryptozoologist Nick
Sucik in Dublin last week, and much nattering was done about the state
of Irish animalous anomalies. Nick seemed quite surprised at the
'problems' that arise when investigating Irish mystery beasties - such
as reports of huge animals inhabiting tiny lakes with inhospitable
ecosystems - to paraphrase Peter Costello (author of *In Search of
Lake Monsters*), 'They all live in puddles'.

When pressed to comment on whether I think there's any zoological
basis for Irish lake monsters - e.g. horse-eels. - I have to
answer that apart from explaining some sightings as 'real' known
animals, I would find it difficult to entertain the idea of any new
species being discovered here.

For example - in the case of Achill Island - large, unknown bipedal
creatures residing in an exposed corrie lake (steep-walled
amphitheatre or half bowled-shaped hollow cut into a mountainside) or
upland area). Sraheens Lough is less than 100m (330ft) wide, and less
than 20m (66ft) from a busy road. A burst of sightings in the 1960s
notwithstanding, it's difficult to make a case for the existence of an
animal - or more to the point *animals*, in Sraheens.

It has been pointed out (for the life of me I can't remember where)
that entities that straddle the 'netherworld' and 'reality' are
somehow 'scarier' than mere 'ghosts'. Vampires, werewolves and
their like seem to reside in both worlds - they have a physical
presence, but only barely. On the other side of the coin, it's not
unusual for mere mortals to achieve mythic status before and/or after
their lifetimes - the Count of St. Germain springs to mind, as well as
various criminals, world leaders, and so forth, adding to their
mystery and allure.

To be truthful, I'm hesitant about referring to Irish mystery animals
in any zoological context at all, as they seem to fall into the
bracket of more *paranormal* - physical entities that don't seem quite
real, such as lake monsters, black dogs, ghost cats, and mysterious
humanoid characters. As mentioned in earlier Blathers, there have
been Irish reports to complement that of the Virginian *Mothman* and
the Cornwall *Owlman*, and it turns out that there is also a being who
*almost* complements the more humanoid *Spring Heel Jack* of Victorian
London, and the Mad Gasser of 1944 Mattoon, Illinois. This character
is notable for his legendary status and abilities...


Stoneybatter, Dublin of the 16th century played host to
*Scaldbrother*, a rogue who 'roamed the environs accosting people,
snatching their possessions, and fleeing with his booty to a vast maze
of subterranean passages extending from Smithfield to Arbour Hill
[from where Blather is published]. Not only was he a cunning thief,
but "the varlet was so swift of foot as has oftsoon outrun the
swiftest and lustiest young men of Osmanstown" in the chase'.

Scaldbrother would deride his victims by dashing away to pause by a
pub called *The Gallows*, where he would produce a rope and pretend to
hang himself before continuing to 'Scaldbrother's Hole', the entrance
to the labyrinth of tunnels.

Despite his legendary status, Scaldbrother was eventually caught and
hanged, to the delight of many... but his legend has outlived his
deeds. According to Kevin C. Kearns, many still hope to find
Scaldbrother's lair below Stoneybatter, where his booty is still
intact...

An Irish Chupacabras?, *Silly Season: Monsters, Ufos, etc.*
(http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no8.html)

A Mothman Retrospective
(http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no5.html)

Mad Gasser of Mattoon and His Kin, p191 *Mysterious America*, Loren
Coleman 1983, ISBN 0-571-12524-7
(http://www.agate.net/~cryptozoo/cryptohome.html)


The Scoundrel Scaldbrother *Stoneybatter, Dublin's Inner Urban
Village*, Kevin C. Kearns 1989, ISBN 0-171-2453-3



MORE ON OUR/YER LADY
Tim Brigham, editor of *The Devil's Advocate*, was in touch during the
week, to point out an omission in last week's issue...'that the (now
yearly) virgin Mary shindig in Conyers [Georgia], goes down on the
anniversary of the Fatima incident - October 13th... was wondering if
you've ever seen reference to the Fatima incident by Nancy Fowler and
how she explains/emphasizes this "connection"?'

Well, no, I haven't heard any mention of an acknowledgement on the
part of Ms. Fowler - perhaps Blather readers may have stumbled across
something?

(*The Devil's Advocate*, Owner, President and UberMann of The Devil's
Advocate Corporation (tm), a Corporation dedicated to achieving
various goals through its subsidiaries, which include The UberMann
Foundation, The Holy Brotherhood of Sex and Saucers, Operation
MindPhuck and The Devil's Advocate's Propaganda and Publications
Company. http://www.devilsadvocate.base.org)


Blather did a cursory root for any other significant October 13th
happenings, but so far has only run across 'Mrs Felina de la Cruz, a
45 year-old laundrywoman from Cabanatuan, north of Manila in the
Philippines, said she had given birth to an 18-centimetre mudfish on
13 October 1990' [Fortean Times 57:26]. Anyway...she hasn't let up on
Her Global Domination Tour 1998. According to the *South China Morning
Post*, She's apparently appearing in the Queen of Angels Church in
Colombo, Sri Lanka. Or, to be more specific, a silhouette behind the
altar is said to resemble the Virgin Mary. Father Edward Revel said
that during morning mass on the Feast of Corpus Christi, a ray of
bright light was seen "going up the wall", and it somehow caused the
figure to appear. Several miracles have been claimed, such as cancer
cures. The more sceptical have suggested that the mark was left by a
previous statue (no word on whether there *was* actually one in the
position, or what could have caused the mark).

Feeling left out, the entire Blather staff are now consigned to
kitchen duties, slicing tomatoes and aubergines in the hope of
locating a message from deity of choice...


(South China Morning Post -Friday October 23rd 1998)
Georgian Archetypes (http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no23.html)


CHUPACHUPA

Blather reader Michele Bryant wondered what this Blatherskite thought
about the recent Chupacabra photograph, allegedly snapped by a couple
of speleologists near Baldim, Brazil. To be honest, it hasn't been
keeping me awake at night... given the geographical and linguistic
implications involved in investigating, Blather can only really
comment on the face value of reports and testimonies. UFO Roundup
Vol.3 Number 42 included letters from various people such as this one
from one by Lydia Ribeiro:

"[Marcelo, one of the speleologists] was walking in the cavern when
suddenly, he stared with a very strange and ugly animal, sized a man.
He cried very loud and Leandro and the other young man started crying,
too. The animal, run and hidden behind a rock for a brief instant.
Exactly then, Leandro took a picture of Marcelo, that was standing,
dazzled and the animal. Shortly after, the animal passed through a
leap in the wall and Leandro and the two friends of him run fearly out
the cavern."

The accompanying photographs are poor quality scans -
discoloured and pixilated, but appear to show a human in a caving
helmet on the left, posing with, for all the world, what looks like
a giant cockroach on the right, like a scene from some early seventies
movie starring the dreadful Doug McClure. I wouldn't rule out the
possibility that the ubiquitous Virgin Mary is in there somewhere too.

- None of this is meant to disparage the witness testimony, merely to
state that Blather finds the photographs less than convincing.


UFO Roundup Vol.3 Number 42
(http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/v03/rnd03_42a.html)

_______________________________________________________

Dave (daev) Walsh
23rd October 1998
daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

|d|i|s|i|n|f|o|r|m|a|t|i|o|n|
new york, ny - http://www.disinfo.com/
Everything You Know is Wrong!

* Buy Things You Don't Need in The Disinformation Headshop!
* Books, CDs, videos and more
* Infinity Factory RealVideo talkshow with guests like Robert Anton
  Wilson, Genesis P-Orridge, alien writing expert Dr.Mario Pazaglini,
  Mondo 2000 editor RU Sirius and more.

A Loyal Reader Writes:
"Disinformation is the Medellin Cartel of Operation Mindfuck"

Disinformation http://www.disinfo.com
Trust us, it's fucked up!

_______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.blather.net/archives/index.html

_______________________________________________________


SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<list@blather.net>
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
<list@blather.net>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email admin@blather.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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 08:06:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:05:02 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>Subject: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:29 +0930

>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -
>> http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>> 'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>natural unidentified objects.
>>What do you all think.
>>Peter J. :+AD4-) ooroo.

After little thought, I think SPA would be most appropriate:

'Scientific Pain in the Arse'

Hey look up there.  It's a bird, it's a plane, no, it's a SPA.

Sue


 Model prayer:

 Dear God...So far today, I've done all right.  I
 haven't gossiped.  I haven't lost my temper.  I
 haven't been greedy, grumpy, nasty, selfish or
 overindulgent.  I'm very thankful for that.

 But in a few minutes, God, I'm going to get out of
 bed; and from then on, I'm probably going to need a
 lot more help.  .. Amen

(Author unknown)

  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





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:04:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:19:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:06:25 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <magonia@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:00:00 -0400

>And seven out of ten couples infertile? C'mon, where d'you get
>this stuff from.
>
>--
>J. Rimmer

Hi John,

I got the original statement on a local newscast here in
New York. I was quoting a senior representative of one of
the largest health care insurance outfits here in the US.
She in turn was quoting from their own stats.

If you were following the thread, one of those who responded
asked a cousin of his who works at an infertility clinic for
his opinion and it was he who stated 1 out of 7. My original
post that quoted the health care provider was 1 out 6! See
if you can acquire the stats for incidence of infertility in
the UK if you can so that we can compare. Both countries
being industrially based I wouldn't imagine that there would
be dramatic differences in the ratios. If you can please post
your findings if any. Thanx.

Peace,

John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:28:11 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:18:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:35:34 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Unidentified Fly Hatchets

>In a related link that we are all too familiar with, "Failure Of
>The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking", Ed Stewart has feverishly
>protested Jerry's writings with his usual gusto and panache:

>>This dude is not going anywhere.  Your intellectual dishonesty
>>is recorded right here on this continuing thread much to the
>>chagrin of the ufological gullible that has held you in high
>>steem up to now.

<snip>

>Is this what's bothering you Ed?
>>You have more on your hands right now than your lame ufological
>>wisdom can handle. Two members, that I am aware, of the
>>scientific review panel, Melosh and Louangee, are on record that
>>does not support your intellectual dishonest spin of the
>>Sturrock panel. And they certainly didn't need me to tell them.

>More to the point, Ed; we don't need you to tell us anything.

>Again, let's try to get this all into perspective:

>Despite your lifetime of effort collecting data, there is no
>proof regarding UFOs; maybe that's got you a bit chapped,

<snip>

>Jerry, you may be pursuing this because you think it's fun.

>But Ed, you're choking on an empty grudge.

>By the way, did I mention to either one of you that we don't care?

>Giving up,
>Roger Evans
>Houston, Texas

Gosh guys, please don't stop... please.... Maybe ol' Roge
doesn't care but I sure do.... I am having more fun with this
thread than I have _ever_ had  before.

How much fun am I having?

I am having more fun than I have ever had with my clothes on...
I am having more fun than I could manage with Pia Zadora, who
I could die with.... a lot like Rocky, you know?

Por favor!  S'il cous plais!

Please.  Don't stop... I haven't.... uh.... you know, I
haven't... (that) yet!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: [CAUS updates] - From Art Bell to CAUS

From: Pat Parrinello <pparri@crossfields.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 98 12:24:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:05:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [CAUS updates] - From Art Bell to CAUS


======================= The Contentious Post ===================
>Subject:  [CAUS updates] - Art Bell is Back--Hip Hip Oy Vay!
>Sent:  10/22/98 12:20 PM
>Received: 10/22/98 1:41 PM
>From:  UFOLAWYER1@aol.com
>To:   CAUSupdates@caus.org

>Dear CAUS Subscribers:

>CAUS just received the following e-mail from a subscriber in the know:

>"Well Peter, it's official. Art Bell just signed a new contract and
>should to returning to the air waves shortly. As I understand it, Art's
>new contract will be announced October 26th, or he'll be back on the air
>that date. That's the good news! The bad news is that Art's claim that
>his family is threatened is phoney baloney. His family is just fine."

>"Art has told us that if we were in his shoes, we'd do the same thing. I
>suppose he means by that if there was that much money at stake, we'd lie
>to America like he did. You know .... he may just be right. I suppose
>most of us would gladly sell our soul if the money was right. I guess
>in his case, it was."

>Peter A. Gersten
>Director

================================================

Subject:  [CAUS updates] - From Art Bell to CAUS
Sent:  10/25/98 9:30 AM
Received: 10/25/98 11:29 AM
From:  UFOLAWYER1@aol.com
To:   CAUSupdates@caus.org

Dear CAUS Subscribers:

So much for a Non-UFO Sunday. Though CAUS had decided it would
not comment further on the Art Bell controversy, this morning
CAUS received an e-mail from Art responding to last week's
CAUSupdate about his motivation for retiring from a 'person in
the know.'

Though CAUS believes its source to be credible, it would appear,
based upon Art's e-mail, that the source was misinformed. CAUS
has no reason to believe that
Art's statement is not true.

In fairness to all concerned I am forwarding Art's response to
all CAUS subscribers.



Peter,

I have seen the message you sent to your group, from who? It had
you name at the bottom. This message indicated I just signed a
new contract with my Network. This is FALSE information and I am
surprised you would allow your name to be associated with such a
fraud.

The message I sent out in public was the TRUTH. It was a severe
Family crisis of life and death matters. The story will get out
in the Press eventually. When it does, people who have said the
kind of things contained in that message will look like fools.

Please do one of the following: Confirm your message or retract it.

Art Bell


Hopefully this will be the last comment that CAUS will make on
this matter. CAUS wishes Art only the best. CAUS reiterates what
it had stated in its commentary of October 13th..."Art Bell will
be missed. He is an institution.

Though I might not have agreed with his choice of some of his
guests, I uphold his right to broadcast their views. It would be
a shame if we lost his voice forever. I guess only time will
tell. I sincerely hope he will be honest and forthright with us.
By withholding details of the reason for his sudden and bizarre
retirement he leaves open the door for wild and irrational
speculation...something we already have too much of in this
field. So please

Art...tell us what's going on!"

Have a special Sunday my friends...as special as each of you are.

Peter A. Gersten
Director




> So please
>Art...tell us what's going on!"

 In your 'retraction' you reflect but do not commit. Then you
end with a pleading; "Art...tell us what's going on!"

 He has said he will. I think most Bell Heads in this world give
Art the benefit of the doubt and patently await his return and
explanations.

 Now, Peter, :) Just like Art Bell asks we are asking you...

    "...from who?"

 Just who is this subscriber in the know? I want to know who he
is.

 Are you stonewalling? Is the UFO community going to have to
appoint an independant councel to get to the information you are
withholding? Are you like Clinton, that kind of lawyer?

 Why is a UFOLAWYER engaged in non-supported information
distribution? Misinformation? Disinformation? Come on now,
Peter, are you agenda driven? Is Art Bell a target?

 ~Pat~






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Peter Brookesmith - Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:09:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:23:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

[The post quoted happens to be the latest on this thread that I
have handy. What follows addresses an issue raised by Ed Stewart
many times on this thread, and doesn't particularly deal with
matters discussed in the citation.]


Not being in a position to enter this fray I had considered
making a list, for my personal delectation, of the ad hominems,
abusive apostrophes, and general insults broadcast in this
thread, and mostly heaped upon the head of Ed Stewart, by Jerome
Clark, who has informed the world so often how he abhors making
argument personal, ho hum. After all, that is a species of
intellectual dishonesty too. I also toyed with the idea of
posting some very funny anagrams of the letters JEROMECLARK (not
forgetting - just to show my impartiality - that MENDOZA soon
reduces to MAD ZONE, but I don't mind living up to that).

Further reflection reminded me of the following article.

Read, mark and learn, O ye of excessive faith. That includes my
notes at the end.


----------------------------


>From the Summer 1993 Tampa Bay Skeptics Report

TBS Report  editor depicts "believers" as loathsome,
schizophrenic -- or does he?

Gary P. Posner, Editor


The "International UFO Reporter" is the bimonthly magazine of
the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS). Although the
other major pro-UFO organization in the country, the Mutual UFO
Network (MUFON), has a larger membership, CUFOS may be the more
highly regarded of the two, especially in light of MUFON's
continued endorsement of Ed Walters' discredited "Gulf Breeze
UFO" photographs.

IUR's editor, Jerome Clark (until recently also long-affiliated
with Fate magazine), is well-known for his harsh criticisms of
the organized skeptics movement and its leaders, most notably
Aviation Week & Space Technology reporter/editor and UFO expert
Philip Klass. But Clark outdid himself in his March/April 1992
IUR editorial about the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), which
publishes the Skeptical Inquirer. Entitled "That's the way the
Committee crumbles," Clark's three-page piece included the
following remarks:

'CSICOP ... lacks in scientific seriousness ... (see, for
[example], any of Philip J. Klass' books)....  Other CSICOP
notables such as James Oberg ... [have] depict[ed] us
[ufologists] as cryptofascists (in UFOs and Outer Space
Mysteries [1981] Oberg compared UFO groups to the "bizarre[,]
irrational ... cults which preceded the fall of democratic
Germany in the 1920s") ... Gary P. Posner, an associate of Klass
[and] Oberg ... and a member of CSICOP's UFO Subcommittee, once
opined (Skeptical Inquirer, Winter 1978, page 79) that believers
in UFOs and other anomalous phenomena may be suffering from
"ambulatory schizophrenia." For CSICOP it is not enough to say
that those with whom it disagrees are wrong. It must also depict
them as loathsome human beings....  [W]e have witnessed the
spectacle of an organization in many ways out of control, so far
gone into self-righteousness ... that it appears convinced those
who reject its rigid scientism are not only mistaken but
irrational, even evil.'

Neither CSICOP nor I had fared much better in the January 1992
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research. George
P. Hansen's 45-page article, "CSICOP and the Skeptics: An
Overview," citing the same 1978 Skeptical Inquirer reference,
had this to say about me:

'Gary Posner, an M.D. and leader of the Tampa Bay Skeptics, has
claimed that believers in the paranormal may have a pathological
medical condition, saying they may be "afflicted with a thought
disorder that manifests in ... a faulty sense of reality" and
their "irrational behavior ... may be more compatible with a
diagnosis of ambulatory schizophrenia ... than with mere
naivete." ... Posner made this statement despite the fact that
surveys show that over half the population in this country has
had psychic experiences....'

And now here is, as Paul Harvey would say, "The Rest of the
Story."


In the Spring 1978 Skeptical Inquirer, CSICOP chairman Paul
Kurtz had singled out some paranormalists as candidates for the
"Uri Award" for silliness and naivete in parapsychological
research (see pp. 90-94). One nominee had claimed the ability to
communicate with the dead by employing a venus flytrap as the
medium. Being a medical resident (and S.I. subscriber) at the
time, such bizarre claims aroused in me the suspicion that there
might be more going on than mere silliness or naivete -- perhaps
a medical condition not deserving of ridicule. I was thus
motivated to write a letter to the editor of S.I. which was
published in the Winter 1978 issue and which included the
following speculative hypothesis:

'[I]t is to this label of naivete that I address my remarks....
[While] making light of such persons by nominating them for a
"Uri Award" may seem appropriate, one is obligated to consider
the possibility that some of these people may be not merely
naive but, rather, afflicted with a thought disorder that
manifests in ... a faulty sense of reality. "Ambulatory
schizophrenia" is an entity in which the subject, generally free
of symptoms, develops them only under certain circumstances ...
It is my opinion that much of the irrational behavior of many [I
now wish I had said "some"] paranormalists may be more
compatible with a diagnosis of ambulatory schizophrenia (or a
close cousin thereof) than with mere naivete.... [A]s we
continue to encounter bizarre intellectual behavior ... [this]
possibility ... should be considered before bestowing a "Uri
Award" for silliness or naivete.'

Clark's first published reference to my letter (as far as I am
aware) was in his May/June 1985 IUR editorial, as an
illustration of how organized skepticism is a "Crackpot
Enterprise." Clark implied that my comments had been directed
toward innocent "believers in UFOs and other anomalies" (such as
his typical readers) rather than toward irrational
paranormalists. My best efforts to clarify the context of my
comments for Clark (including informing him of my own prior
belief in UFOs, the result of naivete rather than mental
illness) fell upon stubbornly deaf ears. And when it was made
clear to me that my corrective "Letter to the Editor" of IUR
would be followed by a Clark rejoinder accusing me of
insincerity, "deliberate obfuscation," and of having been
assigned some "function" or "role" as a "debunking party-liner,"
I withdrew the letter from publication.

Clark went a step further in his January 1990 "UFO Reporter"
column in Fate magazine. After again implying that my 1978
letter had pertained to mere "believers in UFOs and other
anomalies," Clark added, "In other words, if you disagree with
CSICOP's pronouncements on UFOs and other anomalies, you must be
nuts."

But his latest effort in IUR was the last straw. To make certain
that Clark did indeed consider me among those CSICOP members who
"must depict [those with whom we disagree] as loathsome human
beings," I reinitiated our correspondence and asked him. Clark
responded: "From all available evidence ... you consider
ufologists to be a loathsome lot ... moral lepers.... I hate to
tell you this, Doc, but the shoe fits. Wear it in style."

James Oberg [...] is a NASA [engineer], writer and scholar
(particularly with regard to the Soviet space program). He has
submitted a "Letter to the Editor" to IUR which reads in part:

'On page 102 of ... UFOs and Outer Space Mysteries ... I
conclude a chapter debunking a collection of crackpot claims
concerning alien life discovered on the moon with a complaint
that the uncritical way publishers promulgated such obviously
loony material indicated poor judgement and disregard for
elementary fact-checking.... [I] drew a parallel with the
wide-scale pseudo-scientific crazes of Germany in the 1920s ...
[when] the decline of public common sense provided fertile
ground for the collapse of democracy. I still cannot believe
that any rational person could so grossly misinterpret that
reasonable passage into an attack on "ufologists" (who are
nowhere mentioned in the chapter) as "cryptofascists" (neither
that term nor any accepted synonym or euphemism is used ... ).

'Mr Clark's vicious accusation is thus totally unsupported....
Since I have never held the loathsome opinions Mr. Clark
unfairly attributes to me ... I might expect a clarification,
retraction, and apology from IUR, but I'm told I'll have to be
satisfied with publication of this statement, no doubt
accompanied by more self-justifying excuses from Mr. Clark.... A
remedial high school class in "Reading for Comprehension" might
be in order for anyone who suspects that there is any validity
at all in Clark's nasty fantasy-prone misinterpretation of my
words.'

But given the defamatory nature of Clark's accusations, I was
not content merely to write another "Letter to the Editor." In
response to a communication from my attorney, which requested a
retraction, apology and clarification, Clark, while citing
references allegedly demonstrating that I consider ufologists to
be loathsome, maintained that the "loathsome human being"
paragraph did not even pertain to me (or to Klass or Oberg), but
rather only to James Randi, with whom the subsequent paragraph
of his editorial dealt.

Yet, Clark offered to "insert a paragraph into our next
editorial stating Dr. Posner's concerns and making it clear that
he does not consider 'pro-paranormal activists,' including
ufologists, to be 'loathsome human beings.'" I accepted, and
submitted (via counsel) a proposed text.

In response, Clark wrote that he "would be delighted to publish
a letter from Dr. Posner.... We would simply change third-person
references to Dr. Posner to first-person references and publish
the statement in the 'Letters' section of the first available
issue of IUR." My attorney, noting the apparent "retraction of
your offer ... which we assumed had been made in good faith, to
'insert a paragraph into [your] next editorial,'" conveyed my
willingness nevertheless to "compromise" on this point of
contention, provided that my "'Letter' ... not be subjected to
an adversarial critique." My "Letter" was then resubmitted as
such, and CUFOS President Mark Rodeghier (who had co-signed
Clark's letters to my attorney) wrote back to inform us that it
would be (and it now has been) published in the March/April 1993
issue of IUR. The text follows:

'Your March/April 1992 editorial highly critical of CSICOP, in
which I was named as a member, contained the following charge:
[I then recounted the "loathsome human being" and "evil"
passages.] I wish to clarify for the record that despite my
fundamental disagreements with many paranormalists, including
your editor, I do not believe that those with whom I disagree
must be loathsome, evil human beings (nor do my colleagues).
Further, as I reminded Mr. Clark in 1985 correspondence, the
1978 "ambulatory schizophrenia" remark ... had in fact been made
in reference to what I termed the "irrational" and "bizarre"
behavior exhibited by a number of paranormalists, not to mere
"belief" in UFOs and other anomalous phenomena.... In fact, I
was a believer in UFOs well into my 20s, and was even a member
of the pro-UFO organization NICAP in my younger "pre-critical
thinking" days.'

But even my agreement to this "compromise" had to be trumped by
CUFOS. Rodeghier's letter had also stipulated that my "Letter"
would be (and it was) accompanied by the following words: "The
editors of IUR cannot respond to this letter from Dr. Posner
because his legal counsel demanded that we provide no
'adversarial critique.'" Jim Oberg's harsher letter has yet to
be published, though Oberg tells me that Clark has promised him
that it will be.

As for George Hansen's mischaracterization in JASPR of my 1978
letter, I have submitted a "Letter to the Editor," and have been
in frequent communication with JASPR's editor, Rhea White, who
has consistently expressed to me her agreement with my position
in this dispute. Hansen, on the other hand, has submitted to
White a rejoinder to my "Letter" which I find defamatory and
infinitely more objectionable than his original remarks.
Discussions continue as to how this situation will ultimately
play out, but the fair and rational approach being taken by
White stands in stark contrast to that of some of her
colleagues. I may not even need to rehire my attorney -- this
time!

--------------------

MENDOZA'S NOTES

Gary Posner's home page is at URL:
http://members.aol.com/garypos/

and a little rootling from there will find this article, along
with Brian Zeiler's bizarre "close" reading of it, and some
pithy rejoinders to his expertise in practical criticism. Also
available on the site is the whole text of the letter to SI that
so inspired Jerome.

I have slightly reformatted (punctuation &c) the above to make
this piece bearable to UpDates readers.

More to the point. The question here is not whether Klass,
Oberg, Posner, et al. are right in their arguments, hypotheses
or opinions. It is Jerome Clark's treatment of them. Would you
buy a used testimonial from him? I am not able to enter into any
discussion about this just now. I merely offer it for the
record, and to let those who might not otherwise be aware of it
that Ed Stewart is not alone in detecting a tendency to bias and
distortion in some of Jerome's immortal writings.

---------------------

Have a lovely time, one and all.

Yrs &c
Plectrum D. Mazurka
Ethnic Spoons Player
Weddings, Bar Mitzvahs & Funerals Busked






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:22:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:51:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:02:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights


>>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:28:08 -0500

>I did look at Dr. Maccabee's analysis. It is impressive, but
>hardly the final word (no offense Bruce). If you are satisfied
>as well.

>I don't recall any of the writers in this thread saying or even
>implying that the Phoenix lights were spacecraft. You apparently
>assumed that our questioning of the flare theory automatically
>implies a belief that the lights were spacecraft.


First, I will be very surprised if anyone supplies information
that proves they weren't flares,

Second, the "air of extraterrestrialism" with "thick" from the
day after the 10 pm March 13 sighting when the invesrigators
realized that somethig really bizarre had happened between
8 and 9 PM.

The natural tendency of the press/media was to combine 8 and 10
and get.... a mishmash of truth. The witnesses themselves were
convinced they couldn't be flares...so what could they be? ET?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                               Re: Colleagues

From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:56:41 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:16:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Colleagues


>From: Kathleen Anderson <KAnder6444@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:23:34 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Colleagues


Re: The travel log of Michael Heseman.

>He went to South Africa.

Yeah, and when I challenged him on this forum to produce more of
his "evidence" regarding the Lesotho and Kalahari cases, I got
just silence.

This guy, until he can prove otherwise, is just in it for the
money.

Regards







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 01:43:09 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:07:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:37:24 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

I am sorry to react late to the message of Ed Stewart dated 21
October, due to a change of Email and a backlog of messages to
read.

Ed Stewart repeats several times that there is no document
showing that the ETH will not be considered, after the rejection
of the Estimate of the Situation (EOTS). Here is the end of the
message:

>Nevertheless, Maccabee's imaginings are based on an alleged
>document none of us has ever seen. Did Vandenberg outline his
>reasons for rejecting the document in other documents? If he
>did, no one has seen those documents either. All we know is that
>the EOTS allegedly concluded that flying saucers were
>interplanetary craft, and that Vandenberg rejected the document
>because it lacked proof. To my knowledge, there isn't a single
>document setting forth any policy stating that the ETH would not
>be considered from that point on.

>Of course it could all change tomorrow with the discovery of
>previously unknown documents that can be verified.

>Ed Stewart

I am completely baffled here. Any serious student of that period
knows that, soon after the rejection of the Estimate, the
commission Sign was disbanded and replaced by commission Grudge,
which wrote the final report of Project Sign, called
"Unidentified Aerial Objects. Project Sign Release date:
February 1949.

Let's just quote its last paragraph:


"Another possibility is that these aerial objects are visitors
from another planet. Little is known of the probabilities of
life on other planets, so there is no basis on which to judge
the possibility that civilizations far in advance of ours exist
outside the earth. The commentary on this possibility by Dr
James Lipp of the Rand Project in Appendix D, indicates that
this solution of the mystery connected with the sighting of
unidentified flying objets is extremely improbable. Pending
elimination of all other solutions or definite proof of the
nature of these objects, this possibility will not be further
explored".


To me this is a perfectly clear rejection of the ETH, a
directive which was dutifully applied by the commission Grudge
thereafter. Or perhaps I am completely lost and i don't
understand anything??

I have another question for  Mr  Ed Stewart.

After reading most of your numerous messages (yes, I read most
of them!), I still wonder about your opinion, or let's say your
approach, regarding the UFO phenomenon. You are doing a
considerable work of bibliography and everyone must thank you
for that. But what is your opinion on UFOs?

You say that you are "surrounded by the insightful writings of
John Keel, Jacques Vallee, Willy Smith, Paul Devereux, Peter
Brookesmith, John Rimmer, John Harney, Dennis Stacy, ..", but
this does not help me very much since they sustain a large
variety of opinions, at least for those I know. Do you share the
views of John Keel, who sees UFOs as demonic
"transmogrifications"? Or Jacques Vallee, who sees them as the
works of an obscure "control force" hidden in another dimension
and manipulating us (to what end, only God knows, maybe). Or do
you lean toward the mysterious "earth lights" of Paul Devereux?

By the way, of Willy Smith, I have a very peculiar document: a
long book review (4 1/2 pages) on a book which did not exist:
'Manhattan Transfer' by Budd Hopkins, allegedly published by
William Morrow anc Co, 1993, 457 pp., $39.85. The real book,
'Witnessed', was published three years later, in 1996! I have
this text because it was sent by Jacques Vallee to my French
friend Joel Mesnard, publisher of the review 'Lumi=E8res dans la
nuit', who gave me a copy of it. Mesnard was going to cite it in
his review when he learned it was sort of hoax. Very annoyed, he
asked Vallee an explanation, and Vallee replied something like
"it was a little mistake"! Would you have any comment on this
little mistake, or perhaps ask Smith to explain? To me this not
a little mistake. It is a "flagrant d=E9lit" of disinformation.
Anyone caught doing that should disappear from the scene!

I have another comment on a peculiar, often used, skeptical
argumentation regarding UFOs. To the conventional wisdom of the
"psycho-sociological" advocates, people started seeing flying
saucers because they were reading lots of science fiction
stories, which implies of course that they thought of
spacecraft. But when they turn to Roswell and the problem of
the press release, they claim that the officers of the Atomic
Bombers did not know what they were talking about. To them, they
argue, a "flying disc" (or disk) could be almost anything. To
me, this is just pseudo-science and pure rethoric. Yes, the idea
of spacecraft was familiar to many people at that time
(remember the 1938 radio programme of Orson Welles), and of
course it was present in the controversy over the flying discs.
Colonel Blanchard would not have issued a press release, either
for any bizarre contraption nor for a secret weapon: there was
something else! On the other hand, SF certainly does not explain
the sudden eruption of dozens of saucers in the sky.

Another thing. Mr Stewart, you say in one of your messages to
Mark Cashman, that he is going to loose friends after
recommending to play down Roswell and abductions. Let me tell
you this: I am interested in Roswell and abductions, and I
respect Mr Cashman, who is so obviously a very good researcher.
I also respect Jerome Clark, whose Encyclopedia is one of my
reference books, anytime I want to study some aspect of ufology.
I thank him also for his excellent IUR magazine. Bravo for the
last issue (just received), especially the articles on the
Sturrock panel and on Sheridan Cavitt!  I think he is quite
right not to leave the last word to you on UFO UpDates.

Another thought, if you'll allow me. I have been on the Internet
for about six months now, and I have discovered at least one
thing: the continous flow of very skeptical talk, often on the
verge of debunking. And what about disinformation?

An exemple is the incredible reactivation of old spurious
stories of secret Nazi UFOs which would have been copied by the
Americans and the Russians as well, and would explain, of
course, UFOs. Have you noticed that these tales appeared mainly
at the time when a policy of systematic debunking was
implemented, in the wake of the Robertson panel? Well, we say
in French that "we make good soup in old pots."! Even good
disinformation.

A variation on this theme is the comical idea that Arnold
witnessed a secret test of rockets of some sort because Mount
Rainier was a suitable place for that! Looks like debunking and
disinformation are very active at the moment. Not only on the
Internet but also in the press, las in the last issue of Focus.

Another example could well be the recent TV show on the alleged
UFO crash in Russia. I have sent the video to my friend Boris
Shurinov in Moscow. He has just called me to warn that it is
most probably a hoax, and he intends to present, soon, a
critique of it. For my part, I note that the alleged sample
debris of that dubious UFO has fallen in the hands of Kal Korff.
I think we can already write the end of the story: it won't take
long now before Mr Korff reveals triumphantly to the world that
it is a hoax, and we will then hear the usual denonciation of
the "true believers" by the skeptics. But the real question will
be: who created that hoax? My bet is that we will not soon know.
Of course, this does not mean that evrything is false in that TV
show. There may some authentic footage in it.

Gildas Bourdais







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:56:08 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:46:21 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

Interesting thread. Too bad I'll miss further comments. I am
away from tomorrow through next Monday.

Please save anything specifically for my attention and send
then.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            CFS Newspaper Article

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:55:21 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:40:11 -0500
Subject: CFS Newspaper Article


Subj: CFS Newspaper Article Date: 26/10/98 09:28:07 GMT From:
Doc Barry <docbarry@webtv.net> To:   alienhype1@aol.com

 The Denver Post  Sunday, October 25, 1998 Page 11A SCIENCE
TODAY

 Renaming Illness Debated Chronic-fatigue patients, researchers
seek more respect by Richard A. Knox The Boston Globe

 It says a lot about chronic-fatigue syndrome in 1998 that a
main topic at a national conference on the subject in Cambridge
last week was what to call the elusive disorder.

 A spirited two-hour debate on whether to junk the current name
was "very polarizing," says one researcher. Patients and their
advocates insist that the "fatigue" label is pooh-poohed and
joked about among those who haven't experienced chronic-fatigue
syndrome, also called CFS.

 "The name sounds so trivial. People think, "Well, I get tired
by Friday afternoon, too", says K. Kimberly Keeney, executive
director of the North Carolina-based Chronic Fatigue and Immune
Dysfunction Syndrome Association of America. "The illness is
much more devastating than the name would imply."

 No less a public health figure than Dr. Philip Lee, the former
U.S. assistant secretary of health and human services, declares
it's time to change the name. Scientists in the field are
sympathetic.

 After all, they have put up for years with colleagues who look
askance at their research on such an ill-defined (read
"imaginary?") disorder. But, researchers counter, what do we
call it when we can't yet agree on what its essence is? Is it at
bottom a brain disease? A metabolic disorder? An immune
derangement? There's evidence for all and consensus on none.
"There's unanimity on one point: The current name is really bad
because it trivializes the illness," says Dr. Anthony Komaroff
of Harvard Medical School, one of the most respected CFS
researchers. "But we don't know enough to choose the right name.
And we'd damn well better get it right and be prepared to live
with it for the next decade."

 Whatever it's called, whatever it is, there is new evidence
that many more people suffer from it - in the most strictly
defined terms- than many people think, or than previous studies
had demonstrated. A new $1.7 million study by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention - the largest and most rigorous
ever on CFS - has found that the syndrome afflicts 183 out of
every 100,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 69. By
contrast, the previous CDC study found between four and nine
cases per 100,000 people.

 The new study was based on 90,000 residents of Sedgwick County,
Kan., where Wichita lies - one quarter of the county's
population. Researchers identified about 4,000 people who said
they suffered serious fatigue for a month or more, and
interviewed them in greater depth. Among those, 500 appeared to
have the syndrome; researchers persuaded 300 of these to undergo
physical exams and lab tests.

 Of the 300, a panel of physicians decided that 39 had bonafide
CFS by the most strigent definition. That definition requires at
least six months of severe unexplained fatigue plus four or more
of these symptoms: impairment in short-term memory or
concentration; sore throat; tender lymph nodes in the neck or
armpit; muscle pain; pain in multiple joints without
inflammation; unusual headaches; unrefreshing sleep, and
long-lasting malaise following exertion.

 The most striking new information from Wichita is that CFS
rates are much higher among women than men - 303 cases per
100,000 for all adult women, 340 cases for white women. To put
the rates in context, chronic fatigue syndrome in adult women
appears to be less common than diabetes (which is more than
three times as prevalent) or high blood pressure (66 times more
prevalent). But it is roughly three to five times more common
than lung and breast cancer. (CFS is not considered fatal,
althuogh it often disables victims for years.)

== Doc Barry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:31:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:43:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:06:25 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <magonia@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

>>It appears to me more likely the aliens would be appalled that
>>we are breeding ourselves and the planet into oblivion. Think we
>>still have quite a while yet on this planet before we have to
>>worry about the effects of sterility. Especially in some parts
>>of the world.

>These wouldn't happen to be parts of the world where people are
>perhaps rather less white than most of the posters to this list,
>would it? Sounds a rather dubious statement, IMHO.

Oh please, lets leave political correctness out of this. This
county and the "whites" elsewhere are doing more than their
share of filling the landscape and much more than their share of
using up the resources. I don't care what color they are, its
the effects on the planet I am concerned with.

>>Less people might also allow a few trees to grow back.

>A few thousand years ago the British Isles was as covered with
>trees as the Amazon rain forest (still) is now. Nowadays there
>are considerably fewer trees and about 57 million more people,
>all of whome enjoy a rather better standard of living than our
>hunting fathers did. I know in which era I'd rather live.

Give us a few years and there will be no Amazon rain forest. We
are still young on this planet. I am glad I won't be around to
see what our childrens children will face as far as standard of
living. The CDC (Center for Disease Control) here in Atlanta has
some pretty scary facts about what incurable viruses are moving
out of the rainforests because of our destruction of it - read "
The Hot Zone" it will give you nightmares.

>And last time I ventured a couple of miles away from Magonia
>Towers in the heart of downtown Mortlake, I saw an awful lot of
>fields full of nice green stuff that the UFOs could land on,
>even in overcrowded little England! All those corn-circles don't
>grow on on concrete you know.

Ah, good point! But its not the same here outside of Atlanta.
You have to go pretty darn far out of town to find a field that
doesn't have a "subdivision coming soon" sign. Bare land is
becoming far too expensive to farm and pay taxes on around these
parts. I am relating what I see here, never been to England
(very unfortunately).

>There is no threat of overpopulation on this planet. Alarmist
>eco-doom prophets from the 'sixties have already been shown up
>for the inaccurate scaremongers they were. Remember the great
>U.S. famine in the 'eighties that was predicted in "The
>Population Bomb"? Me neither.

Sticking your head in the sand isn't the answer either. John, I
really don't want to get into a eco-discussion here, I am
neither qualified nor really interested in it. I just happen to
think that a little sterility on the part of human kind could
only do this round blue ball we all live on a lot of good.

Susan Baldwin





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:50:12 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:51:10 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:56:00 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

<snip>

>Hi

>Why is that someone always wants to change established patterns?

>How about leaving it just as it is? What will changing its name
>achieve? An Unidentified Flying Object is just that, a UFO.

<snip>

Keith & List,

I do agree; the name UFO functions in Norwegian as well:
'Uidentifisert Flygende Objekt', i.e.:

-    It's 'Uidentifisert'/Unidentifiable (at least by the
     observer), and,

-    It's 'Flyvende'/Flying (in the air), and,

-    It's an 'Objekt'/Object (either a mechanical construction
     - a craft, or just a light).

Further, I think the name functions acceptably for a water-based,
floating/swimming/diving, object as well. e.g., the (proposed)
observations of Nessie (the Lochness 'monster') is also a UFO -
an Unidentified _Floating_ Object.

Regards,

AWS






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:56:02 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:54:19 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?



Hello all,

People going off on tangents is not an ideal situation for any
List. I will not make it a point to specify who but the idea of
becoming disgruntled over an email message makes you wonder what
that same person would do if stuck in traffic. A little 'falling
down' perhaps, go off and shoot the bystanders up, that'll get
traffic rolling... <VBG>

People, what do we do? Go to Webster and say; 'Hey Web, We have
all agreed to change the acronym UFO to WHITT. Just state it as -
WHITT formerly UFO in the dictionary. Thanks.'. This terminology
has been around far too long. If UFO was quoted recently, it
would be possible, perhaps, to change it. But now it's like
changing the word 'water' to 'crude'. Folks will still call it
'water'.

What's in a name. It's just a tag, an identifier that's all. As
an individual, call it as you will, but it will still mean the
same.


Donnie 'WHITT' 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:50:54 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:33:24 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:23:21 -0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>Hi Max, hi All,

>>I also have no knowledge of M.E. What are its symptoms,
>>diagnosis, and prognosis?

>>Josh Goldstein

Hi,

This site is well worth a read if you require any info on the
illness

http://www.community-care.org.uk/ME/brame/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 05:01:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:25:21 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:31:05 _0500
>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>There is absolutely _nothing_  "plausible" (or even
>intelligible) in any of your statements and it appears that the
>only thing that needs to be investigated further is the current
>state of your 'CRITICAL' mind!


Hi John

This is a fantastic advert for your foundation, do you normally
speak to abductees like this?

During your investigation into abductee cases, do you only look
at the possibility of them being et connected, or are you
objective?

Abductions are likely to be a multiplicity of phenomena so what
I'm looking into is a connection with medical illnesses,
including things such as kidney infections that imbalance
hormone levels which alter blood levels, stimulate contractions
when not pregnant etc. These can possibly create the so called
symptoms of abduction, when there may be a completely earthly
explanation.

If you think that this is all BS then that's your opinion, but
as I have been having various experiences for around 25 years I
would like to look at ALL possibilities.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:17:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:17:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:42:33 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:40:45 EDT
>>Fwd Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:03:32 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Kenneth Arnold's Sighting & Mt. Rainier

>Man, I've been busted twice in one day!

>Frankly, I didn't think anyone would have the interest to look
>it up (obviously, I didn't). Geesh....

>I believe you're right. I think it's real name was "The
>Conqueror". Although I do have a copy in Spanish that translates
>to "Hun, the Barbarian". (even more bizarre)

Roger,

Just for the fun of it: it's time you make some profit instead
of getting busted.  Anyone who has 'The Conqueror' in Spanish
version deserves adulation from any movie fan <vbg>.

One of the best URL I have found so far:

http://www.mojones.com/news_wire/harris.html

for the article 'The Conqueror and Other Bombs' by Bob Harris.


***** Extract *****


"You can guess the result.

"Reviewing The Conqueror's credits, from the top:

"       John Wayne? Died of cancer.
        Susan Hayward? Died of cancer.
        Agnes Moorehead? Died of cancer.
        Pedro Armendariz? Committed suicide while dying of cancer.
        Dick Powell? Died of cancer.

"And so on.

"By 1980, when People magazine did a headcount, at least 91
members of the cast and crew had contracted cancer.

"People never found out how many of the Indian extras were
afflicted.

"It's a brutal irony that John Wayne, the living embodiment of
American superpatriot militarism, may well have died as a
casualty of the U.S. government's willingness to endanger its
own people.

"It gets much worse. The Conqueror is just a footnote to the
full story.

"The town of St. George, none of whose citizens were big
Hollywood stars, suffered a similar fate. Uninformed of the
danger, and exposed in their homes for years instead of months,
the residents of St. George eventually contracted cancer in
staggering numbers."


***** End of extract *****


Regards,


Serge Salvaille


Note:

For all the researchers out there, to get this kind of info I used:

http://www.hotbot.com and the following search string:

              "The Conqueror" radiation

This got me 89 matches... and saved me from ignorance... for 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 98 11:09:08 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:22:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:35:34 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Unidentified Fly Hatchets

>Is this what's bothering you Ed? If it is, then you make one
>hell of an assumption about the UFO community! I, for one, don't
>hold Jerome Clark in high "steem" or even "esteem". No offense,
>Jerry, but I could care less what your opinions are or Ed's. I
>keep clicking on the topic "Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian
>Debunking" hoping that there might be some new information
>instead of the bickering and fingerpointing that seems to have
>infected that thread. Why don't you guys just rename the thread
>"Why I Hate Jerry" and "Why I Hate Ed."? It would sure save us
>readers a lot of time.

Roger, I guess I'll have to pass on your suggestion, since I
don't hate Ed. I don't understand the sources of the guy's anger
and spite, but I am not by nature a hater. Ed is at best a
low-level annoyance, nothing more.

I have made an effort to put something productive into this,
namely a fair amount of obscure information list readers may be
unfamiliar with and that may be of interest and use to them. I
have kept my responses to Ed's continuing accusations that I am
the lowest form of human in a mostly tongue-in-cheek vein, which
I don't think anybody would accuse Stewart of doing. I do the
suggestion that somehow Ed and I are equally morally culpable in
this.

I do agree, though, that Ed's views are neither interesting nor
edifying.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:03:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:27:34 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


Been there, done that.

Having been around the UFO scene for a longer while than most, I
should point out that the push for a name change has been with
us for some time. We should remember that one of the reasons UFO
was coined in the first place was because the USAF thought
'flying saucer' was too descriptive and inaccurate for sighting
reports. See how that turned out.

Now, we want to change the term again in the hope that UAP won't
be equated with LGM. Sorry, it won't matter. The media will
never accept the new term, and most of popular ufology will
continue to use UFO rather than UAP.

What's more, if you do a literature search for this in
scientific archives, you'll find that UFO was already replaced
by TOPA (Transient Optical Phenomena of the Atmopshere). This
happened in a scientific paper in either JRAS or JRASC (I can't
remember which at the moment) by a scientist who was reporting
his own personal sighting and wanted to differentiate his
"objective" account from the riff-raff he and his peers were
reading in the tabloids.

His suggestion was ignored completely.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 98 11:18:06 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:34:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:21:10 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 12:21:23 PDT

>>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:37:11 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>. Loren Gross does a remarkable and reliable job
>with full integrity.

Loren's series on monographs on UFO history is indeed
a marvel, and I recommend these works to all serious

>Loren Gross and I have been mutually assisting each other for
>the last six years and I am confident that his history will
>stand up as the source documentation for future generations
>simply because there is no pretense or hyperbole in his writing
>and it is not skewed towards any specific belief system. I am
>just sorry that his history writing will end with 1959. At least
>there will be one reliable accounting of the early days of the
>modern UFO phenomenon for future generations.

There actually are other books, including the classic Jacobs
book on the UFO controversy, Ruppelt's book, Hynek's UFO
Experience, and others, including (I hope) my own humble
contributions. But Loren's work, in its attention to detail
(it's a literal day-by-day history of the UFO controversy) and
in its raw data, is in its way unique. Keep it up the good job,
Loren!

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 98 11:38:10 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:38:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:14:59 -0700
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 11:17:35 PDT

>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:43:21 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>You seem to think that it is
>>>such a great thing to receive a favorable review by the Journal
>>>of Scientific Exploration. Let me bring attention to another
>>>favorable review published by JSE shortly before yours. Stanton
>>>Friedman's "Top Secret/Majic" was reviewed in JSE by Wood and
>>>received a very favorable and sympathetic review.

>>You know, you'd think that if my work suffered from the
>>egregious flaws and cravenness our good-humored friend claims to
>>find, _somebody else_ in the reviewing business would have
>>noticed it. So far, nobody has, and in response to that simple
>>fact, all Ed can do, when that fact is pointed out, is to get
>>meaner and louder -- nothing new there.

>You know as well as I do that book reviews tend to be generous.
>But, you have yet to mention Hilary Evans review in Magonia. Any
>reason you failed to bring attention to that review? Would you
>like for me to quote from it?

Ed, Thanks for drawing the review to my attention. I hadn't seen
it. _Magonia_ and I have long been friendly antagonists, so it's
hardly surprising that if a publication were to object to my
book, it would be _Magonia_. Those guys have never quite
forgiven me for my apostacy in abandoning, long ago, the
psychosocial approach to which they still cling.

It should be noted, not incidentally, that 'The UFO
Encyclopedia' is quite critical of Hilary Evans's approach to
the UFO issue; see pages 755-57 of the 2nd Edition. Hilary, with
whom I have always liked, is exercising his God-given right to
get back at me. I look forward to reading what he has to say.

>>And while you're at it, since participants in the meeting
>>provide such a radically different account from the one you, a
>>nonparticipant, provide, are we to believe that these people are
>>liars?

>The positive spin of the Stanford press release is not
>commensurate with the printed summary of the scientific review
>panel. Addressing comments by Sturrock and his team are
>irrelevant to what the scientific review panel members said and
>wrote. That is the essence of the panel that needs to be
>addressed. People are not stupid. The scientific and academic
>communities will see right through the unsupported spin placed
>on these proceedings by the Stanford press release and
>Sturrock's and his team's JSE report.

I would like to thank Ed for getting me to reread the Sturrock
panel report, which I did yesterday. It is an excellent
document, with much to stir thought and reflection.
Conservative, yes, but also positive. Let us hope that it
encourages the serious involvement of scientists that ufologists
have always advocated.

>>Are, for example, Rodeghier and Swords lying in their
>>account in the current issue of IUR?

>I have yet to read their account, but if they don't separate the
>scientific review panel summary comments and address them
>separately from the Sturrock comments and address only the
>Sturrockk comments they will be perpetuating a spin that is not
>supportable and ultimately it will backfire on their faces as
>well as IUR, CUFOS, and the whole of ufology.

The fall 1998 IUR issue in which the Swords/Rodeghier piece
appears is available for $6 postpaid from J. Allen Hynek Center
for UFO Studies, 2457 West Peterson Avenue, Chicago, Illinois
60659. Though I am really trying to be nice, it's worth about
1000 Ed Stewart screeds on the subject. I hope list members will
check it out. It's a revealing insiders' account of what
happened and what the prospects for future scientific
involvement in UFO study are. Those of you looking for good news
will find it here.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                         Re: New Roswell Documents?

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 05:51:06 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:42:36 -0500
Subject: Re: New Roswell Documents?


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: New Roswell Documents?
>Date: 26 October 1998 13:54

>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 06:36:15 +0200
>Subject: New Roswell Documents?

>Source: alt.paranet.ufo.

>Stig

>*******

>From: josephs843@aol.com (JosephS843)
>Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
>Subject: New Roswell Documents
>Date: 22 Oct 1998 21:42:02 GMT

>At John White's UFO Conference in New Haven, CN, on Sunday
>afternoon Oct 11, l998, Dr Bob Woods and his son, Ryan Woods,
>announced that they have obtained approx 200 pages on Roswell
>related documents from former Military Intelligence source.
>These pages include the "SOM-1 Operations Manual".

>We still of a debris field near Roswell AAF and a vehicle crash
>site over near Socorro, NM.

>Details were lacking concerning the Source of these new
>documents.

Oh ha ha ha ha.

Yet again the sentient among us are expected to swallow stories
about unnamed soldiers and anonymous sources.

This Roswell incident has been done to death and relies upon
nonsense like MJ-12 and now this! Eight crash sites, numerous
and ever-so convenient new witnesses coming out of the woodwork,
new books going over the same old ground.....and now some more
(no doubt highly dubious) "documents".

Maybe I should open a new Roswell museum....

>I would hope that time is taken to verifiy the source of these
>documents before releasing them in a book and TV Special.

I shouldn't hold your breath and in any case too many people
will believe what looks good on TV....

Tim X





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:57:53 _0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:51:55 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:23:21 _0800
>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:02 EDT
>>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: The Medical Problem M.E. & Abductee Groups

>>Hi Max, hi All,

>>I read your post with interest. Before I respond I need to ask
>>a few questions if that is ok. Sorry for length of my response
>>but this is a subject that is very near and dear to me. <G>

>John, I thank you for your intelligent response to the above.

>I have a few questions for John Velez, any other abductees or
>people who work with abductees.

>Do any of you or medical professionals involved in groups such
>as IF, AIC, MUFON, etc. have any evidence that people seeking
>regressive hynosis are in better hands having the sessions witha
>psychologist or psychiatrist rather than a hypnotist or
>hypnotherapist? The sessions can be quite traumatic. I don't
>know if hypnotherapists, etc. can make an accurate psychological
>profile before the sessions start or are trained enough to help
>the traumatized person enough when they are brought out of
>hypnosis. What have you learned?


Hi Josh,

What we have learned is; that anyone seeking hypnosis should be
extremely careful when choosing someone to perform it! It is a
'buyer beware' situation. Unfortunately we don't have competent
professionals in every state or country that we can refer folks
to when they contact us for assistance in securing someone. A
trained psychologist who is familiar with the UFO abduction
scenario (and who is not harboring any preconcieved notions or
agendas of their own) is not only recommended but preferred in
all situations. There are _so few_ competent CHT's (certified
hypnotherapists) that it becomes a crapshoot to find a good one.
I can only think of four myself. Donna Higbee, Yvonne Smith,
Dave Jacobs and Budd Hopkins.

IMHO, hypnosis has been _overused/misused_ when it comes to
those who suspect that they may be having these experiences.
Hypnosis is something that should be reserved in order to
provide relief for those who are suffering adverse symptoms
relating to their UFO/abduction memories/experiences. ie;
anxiety attacks, insomnia, phobias, fears and behaviors that
affect the quality of life etc. Only in situations where relief
from troubling symptoms is desired, or where an individuals
ability to function normally has been adversely affected should
hypnosis even be considered.

Hypnosis is not the panacea/cure all that some have painted it.
The results (unless they can be reliably verified) are always
questionable and it raises many more questions in the end than
it ever answers. Not to mention the fact that the individual
is forced to live with what came out during the session. Pandora's
Box once opened cannot be closed again. You cannot 'unforget'
what you have pried from the subconscious mind after the fact.

Hypnosis should be reserved as a _therapeutic tool_ for
symptomatic relief. Period! Until it has been proven that it is
a valid and accurate means of memory retrieval, it remains a
questionable practice.

>I also have no knowledge of M.E. What are its symptoms,
>diagnosis, and prognosis?

See the _excellent response_ that was submitted by Adam Lowe on
Fri, 23 Oct 1998. Check it out at the UpDates archive.

Peace,

John Velez


________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:32:57 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:51:46 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 05:01:38 -0500
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Abductions are likely to be a multiplicity of phenomena so
>what I'm looking into is a connection with medical illnesses,

You may be right, but for now that's a hypothesis and should be
stated as such.

The point that was being made is that as we discuss this
phenomenon we have to be very careful not to state our own
opinions as facts. Regarding the abduction phenomenon there are
no facts.

Over the life of this thread, you have made the following
statements:

To Andy on 10/22: "With bad aliens being brought in by the media
this gives the subjects an escape with a relatively plausible
and half respected explanation."

To Max on 10/22 in response to him saying that ME has nothing to
do with kidney infections: "I realise this but it is still a
common trait among abductees."

Sue, these are examples of statements that are your opinions
which you have presented as facts. There is no proof of 'bad
aliens', let alone that the media is responsible for them. There
is also no medical documention stating that kidney infections
are a common trait among abductees. Maybe that's a commonality
among those abductees that you are familiar with, but it can not
be stated as a commonality for all. As a start, we don't even
have a grip on defining the population of "all".

I don't mean to pick at you, but the last thing abductees need
is another person telling them more 'facts'where there are none.
It's irresponsible, potentially harmful and along with the
backbiting is far too common in this field, making this abductee
want to hurl.

>as I have been having various experiences for around
>25 years I would like to look at ALL possibilities.

I've been an experiencer of the bizarre for 35+ years and have
found that the more I research the cause, the more confusing it
becomes. This is due in part to so called 'researchers' coming
forward with statements as 'truths'. As emotionally spirited as
these discussions become, the temptation to become righteous in
our own unproven findings should be avoided.

Having said that I do believe that it is curious that the
majority of abductees that I am familiar with, like the
abductees you are familiar with, are suffering from illness. I'd
like nothing more than the scientific community to pick up on
this and get busy, however, until that happens, conclusions
based in fact just aren't there. If you make them as such,
expect to be held accountable.

Take care,

Ann







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Serge Salvaille >sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:00:02 +0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:00:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:09:17 -0500
>From: Peter Brookesmith - Mendoza >DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark >jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

Greetings Duke,

>snip>

>I also toyed with the idea of
>posting some very funny anagrams of the letters JEROMECLARK (not
>forgetting - just to show my impartiality - that MENDOZA soon
>reduces to MAD ZONE, but I don't mind living up to that).

>snip>

Could there be truth in anagrams?

Let me throw in some shaky remarks myself: put the following
words in a jar...

>More to the point. The question here is not whether Klass,
>Oberg, Posner, et al. are right in their arguments, hypotheses
>or opinions. It is Jerome Clark's treatment of them. Would you
>buy a used testimonial from him?

... mix the stuff and you might get:

>More to the point. The question here is not whether Jerome Clark is
>right in his arguments, hypotheses or opinions. It is Klass, Oberg,
>Posner, et al.'s treatment of them. Would you buy a used testimonial
>from them?

P.S.: Welcome back to Show Business.

;)

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:13:11 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:33:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 01:43:09 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:37:24 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Ed Stewart repeats several times that there is no document
>showing that the ETH will not be considered, after the rejection
>of the Estimate of the Situation (EOTS). Here is the end of the
>message:

If I may repeat myself. No document has ever been found outlining the
rejection of the ETH as Air Force policy.  The ETH was rejected by
Vandenburgh because there was no evidence/proof supporting it in the
alleged EOTS.

>>Nevertheless, Maccabee's imaginings are based on an alleged
>>document none of us has ever seen. Did Vandenberg outline his
>>reasons for rejecting the document in other documents? If he
>>did, no one has seen those documents either. All we know is that
>>the EOTS allegedly concluded that flying saucers were
>>interplanetary craft, and that Vandenberg rejected the document
>>because it lacked proof. To my knowledge, there isn't a single
>>document setting forth any policy stating that the ETH would not
>>be considered from that point on.

>I am completely baffled here. Any serious student of that period
>knows that, soon after the rejection of the Estimate, the
>commission Sign was disbanded and replaced by commission Grudge,

So what?

>which wrote the final report of Project Sign, called
>"Unidentified Aerial Objects. Project Sign Release date:
>February 1949.

So what?

>Let's just quote its last paragraph:

Let's do.

>"Another possibility is that these aerial objects are visitors
>from another planet. Little is known of the probabilities of
>life on other planets, so there is no basis on which to judge
>the possibility that civilizations far in advance of ours exist
>outside the earth. The commentary on this possibility by Dr
>James Lipp of the Rand Project in Appendix D, indicates that
>this solution of the mystery connected with the sighting of
>unidentified flying objets is extremely improbable. Pending
>elimination of all other solutions or definite proof of the
>nature of these objects, this possibility will not be further
>explored".

The above is the last paragraph of the 'Discussion' part of the
report and it does relate to any official policy conclusion.

>To me this is a perfectly clear rejection of the ETH, a
>directive which was dutifully applied by the commission Grudge
>thereafter. Or perhaps I am completely lost and i don't
>understand anything??

Read the statement again. "PENDING ...or DEFINITE PROOF...". The
ETH was rejected by Project SIGN because there was no compelling
evidence or proof for the hypothesis. In other words no hard
evidence, no crashed alien cruisers, no Roswell, no alien
bodies, etc... But, if any should become available, it would
definitely become a viable hypothesis. And not as Macabee has
sugggested because of irreversible Air Force policy to cover-up
ET.

As a matter of fact, the first paragraph of the 'Conclusion'
states:


        "No definite and conclusive evidence is yet available
that would prove or disprove the existence of these unidentified
objects as real aircraft of unknown and unconventional
configuration.  It is unlikely that positive proof of their
existence will be obtained without examination of the remains of
crashed objects. Proof of non-existence is equally impossible to
obtain unless a reasonable and convincing explanation is
determined for each incident."


In other words, no evidence for the ETH and the MHH is not
falsifiable contrary to Mark Cashman's commentary otherwise.

>I have another question for  Mr  Ed Stewart.

>After reading most of your numerous messages (yes, I read most
>of them!), I still wonder about your opinion, or let's say your
>approach, regarding the UFO phenomenon. You are doing a
>considerable work of bibliography and everyone must thank you
>for that. But what is your opinion on UFOs?

UFOs present a puzzle that is intriguing.

>You say that you are "surrounded by the insightful writings of
>John Keel, Jacques Vallee, Willy Smith, Paul Devereux, Peter
>Brookesmith, John Rimmer, John Harney, Dennis Stacy, ..", but
>this does not help me very much since they sustain a large
>variety of opinions, at least for those I know. Do you share the
>views of John Keel, who sees UFOs as demonic
>"transmogrifications"? Or Jacques Vallee, who sees them as the
>works of an obscure "control force" hidden in another dimension
>and manipulating us (to what end, only God knows, maybe). Or do
>you lean toward the mysterious "earth lights" of Paul Devereux?

Who cares what anybody thinks UFOs represent? What I think, or
anyone else thinks, is not relevant.  What matters is not
personal, public, cultural, or governmental opinion. All that
matters is what compelling evidence can be independentely
verified and pass rigorous scrutiny and critical analysis so
that what is left is a chain of evidence linked together
supporting whatever specific conjecture is on the table.

>By the way, of Willy Smith, I have a very peculiar document:

Ask him yourself. I am not familiar with what you refer to and
do not speak for him.

>I have another comment on a peculiar, often used, skeptical
>argumentation regarding UFOs. To the conventional wisdom of the
>"psycho-sociological" advocates, people started seeing flying
>saucers because they were reading lots of science fiction
>stories, which implies of course that they thought of
>spacecraft. But when they turn to Roswell and the problem of
>the press release, they claim that the officers of the Atomic
>Bombers did not know what they were talking about. To them, they
>argue, a "flying disc" (or disk) could be almost anything. To
>me, this is just pseudo-science and pure rethoric. Yes, the idea
>of spacecraft was familiar to many people at that time
>(remember the 1938 radio programme of Orson Welles), and of
>course it was present in the controversy over the flying discs.
>Colonel Blanchard would not have issued a press release, either
>for any bizarre contraption nor for a secret weapon: there was
>something else! On the other hand, SF certainly does not explain
>the sudden eruption of dozens of saucers in the sky.

You appear to pile up everything under the same paragraph.
Maybe you would like to explain two things for me that I don't
understand.  Most newsclippings in 1947 show a disproportionate
amount of 'flying disks' which were described by the witnesses
as flying disks under three feet in diameter and even one foot
in diameter. What does that say about alleged occupants?

Second, whatever happened to all the ET races in alleged CEIII
reports before the advent of Budd Hopkins and the greys? Where
have they dissappeared to? What does that say about those
reports and the alleged witness testimony?

>Another thing. Mr Stewart, you say in one of your messages to
>Mark Cashman, that he is going to loose friends after

I didn't say he was going to loose friends. I said he would be
seen as a debunker in disguise.  If you equate debunking with
the loss of friends, you are totally wrong.

>recommending to play down Roswell and abductions. Let me tell
>you this: I am interested in Roswell and abductions, and I
>respect Mr Cashman, who is so obviously a very good researcher.
>I also respect Jerome Clark, whose Encyclopedia is one of my
>reference books, anytime I want to study some aspect of ufology.

Obviously, you have all that you need to discuss ufological
wisdom to the ufological gullible --- but if I may suggest,
don't stray too far away from the protection of the doors of the
temple.

>I thank him also for his excellent IUR magazine. Bravo for the
>last issue (just received), especially the articles on the
>Sturrock panel and on Sheridan Cavitt!  I think he is quite
>right not to leave the last word to you on UFO UpDates.

IUR is edited to preach to the ufological choir.  The only last
word that is important is whether what is said in IUR becomes
accepted in the real world.  For that to happen, they will have
to abandon present ufological wisdom and their priests. If they
do, they lose what they have left in their membership. Quite a
quagmire to be in!

>Another thought, if you'll allow me. I have been on the
Internet >for about six months now, and I have discovered at
least one >thing: the continous flow of very skeptical talk,
often on the >verge of debunking. And what about disinformation?

What about it?

>An exemple is the incredible reactivation of old spurious
>stories of secret Nazi UFOs which would have been copied by the
>Americans and the Russians as well, and would explain, of
>course, UFOs. Have you noticed that these tales appeared mainly
>at the time when a policy of systematic debunking was
>implemented, in the wake of the Robertson panel?

It is all a big conspiracy perpetrated on the holders of
ufological wisdom to prevent that wisdom from infiltrating the
Cameroons. Don't tell anyone.  Keep it under your hat!

>Well, we say
>in French that "we make good soup in old pots."! Even good
>disinformation.

Absolutely, and be sure to hold Clark's encyclopedia close and
tight to your chest to protect you from continuous
disinformation not in concert with acceptable ufological wisdom.

>A variation on this theme is the comical idea that Arnold
>witnessed a secret test of rockets of some sort because Mount
>Rainier was a suitable place for that! Looks like debunking and
>disinformation are very active at the moment. Not only on the
>Internet but also in the press, las in the last issue of Focus.

And somehow or other, such disinformation only serves to
reinforce the faithful that their peculiar version of events is
the true wisdom. Don't let your guard down!

>Another example could well be the recent TV show on the alleged
>UFO crash in Russia. I have sent the video to my friend Boris
>Shurinov in Moscow. He has just called me to warn that it is
>most probably a hoax, and he intends to present, soon, a
>critique of it.

Yes, keepers of the accepted ufological wisdom must keep on the
alert and ever vigilant lookout for attempts to undermine the
solid foundation of present ufological wisdom.

>For my part, I note that the alleged sample
>debris of that dubious UFO has fallen in the hands of Kal Korff.

Oh, no! Quick, cover the women and hide the children!

>I think we can already write the end of the story: it won't take
>long now before Mr Korff reveals triumphantly to the world that
>it is a hoax, and we will then hear the usual denonciation of
>the "true believers" by the skeptics. But the real question will
>be: who created that hoax? My bet is that we will not soon know.

Of course not. It must have been perpetrated by a well organized
conspiracy against the holders of the true ufological wisdom to
make the true ufo believers look bad.

>Of course, this does not mean that evrything is false in that TV
>show. There may some authentic footage in it.

Yes, there may be something in that TV show that supports some
part of the present ufological wisdom.  Vigilance must be
maintained so it doesn't slip through the fingers of the
protectors of the faith.

Quiz for today has been cancelled so a foothold can be gained on
the ongoing research into the recently detected conspiracies.
Those that forgot their Jerome Clark encyclopedia, fall out.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           Filer's Files #41-1998

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:39:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:39:46 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #41-1998

FILER'S FILES

Filer's Files #41-1998
MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director,
October 15, 1998
Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020


Filer's Files: sponsored by Global Force Ltd


ASTRONAUT CLAIMS WE ARE BEING VISITED
BY EXTRATERRESTRIALS

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell says UFO's are real and
that they have been TOP SECRET in the US for decades. On
October 11, 1998, Mitchell asks Washington to tell truth about
aliens according to Tom Rhodes of the Times of London. The
U.S. Congress should grant immunity to high-level officials so
they can tell the real story about alien visits to Earth, says the
former astronaut. Edgar Mitchell holds a doctorate from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was the sixth man
to walk on the moon. He wants Washington to acknowledge
what he believes is long-standing knowledge of
extraterrestrial life. Dr. Mitchell says he is 90 per cent sure
that many of the thousands of unidentified flying objects, or
UFOs, recorded since the 1940s, belong to visitors from
other planets. Although some have been delusions and others
natural phenomena, too many remain unexplained, he said at
a conference in Connecticut. "This suggests there are
humanoids manning craft which have characteristics not in the
arsenal of any nation on Earth. That is very alarming!" Dr.
Mitchell says he has witnesses -- many of them from
intelligence agencies and the military -- who convinced him
that the American government has covered up the truth about
UFOs for 50 years. "Many of these folks are under
high-security clearances, they took oaths and they feel they
cannot talk without some form of immunity," Mr. Mitchell said.
"It takes a brave person to come out on something like this."
Astronaut Mitchell feels the crash at Roswell -- the alleged
crash of a flying saucer in New Mexico in 1947 was an
extraterrestrial craft.
"There's no doubt in my mind that Ed Mitchell gives us all
credibility," said Walter Andrus, international director of the
Mutual UFO Network, the largest organization of its kind in
America. Editor's Note: I spoke with Mitchell during our
attempts to get Congressional UFO hearings. He felt our
search for UFOs may be the most important endeavor of
mankind.

VERMONT

LYNDONVILLE: MUFON Vermont State Director Thomas
McFarland reports that there has been a series of Flying
Triangle sightings during August and September. Strange
craft were seen almost nightly flying over Vermont either east
to west or from west to east. Apparently two very short video
segments were taken of the craft. They were shot with a rather
old (1988) video cam that requires 7 lux so the most we can
establish with the video is that the lights on the craft are
exceptionally bright. When I receive DK's report I will forward
it as well. There were six witnesses to one sighting. There has
been a couple of other witnesses that have not been
interviewed yet. Some of the craft appeared to be diamond
shaped. Thanks to Thomas McFarland RR 2 Box 170C
Lyndonville, VT 05851 nightowl@together.net

NEW JERSEY

Brian Paul Calabrese writes that in the fall of 1995, I was
driving west bound on New Jersey Route 70, around 1:00
AM. I was driving when I noticed that the forest seemed to be
on fire. I looked in the direction of the light, and saw
something coming down at a reasonably slow pace. It was
bright orange, almost like the color of a campfire, and was
lighting up the entire area. Realizing, this was a UFO, I pulled
over and got out of the car and watched it land. When it got
around twenty feet off the ground, the light changed to blue,
and then the light went out. I looked around for any ET's, then
got in my car and went home. I regret not having stayed.
Thanks to Larry Clark, lclark@ibm.net and Brian Paul
Calabrese hansulle@bellatlantic.net. Editor's Note: We
have frequent reports of UFOs along this highway that
happens to mark the southern edge of the huge Fort Dix Army
Base.

GEORGIA:

John Thompson writes that he and several others are
investigating a September sighting where the two separate
witnesses have drawn pictures of a UFO. A LaGrange
woman and her daughter moved to Norcrosse just north of
Atlanta and saw a UFO. They had also been witnesses to
UFOs in the past when they lived in La Grange about 60 miles
to the southwest.
Both witnesses drew a sketch. I've compared the two witness
drawings. WOW! Pretty close match, I'd say. The witness'
description of shape as drawn is similar, but the drawings are
slightly different in terms of the angle of the "arms" of the
boomerang. This could be a simple result of the angle of
viewing relative to the object's trajectory. The UFO was
generally level and flew directly away from their position. This
would make the shape logical for a boomerang-shaped
object. The apparent size was five inches at about 30
degrees above horizon. The craft was lost behind some trees.
The sighting occurred at 8:00 PM, the sky was dark, and
object was translucent, with "distorted" edges that distorted
stars but did not block them. The size and distance to the
object was difficult for the witness to estimate, but the overall
impression was that it was low, big, and not too distant.
Thanks to MUFON investigators David Brown, Jim Clifford,
Ralph and John Thompson.

OHIO

AKRON: MUFON Photoanalyst Jeff Sainio writes, "I am
currently analyzing a very interesting video case, and was
wondering if anybody has investigated a case of a hovering
inverted Tupperware bowl with a lighted bottom rim July 11,
1998, over the Akron area?" It was observed for ten minutes
in a populated area, so there is a good possibility of other
witnesses." If any one has additional evidence or knowledge
of this case please contact Jeff. Thanks to: Jeff Sainio
jsainio@qgraph.com MUFON Staff Photoanalyst.

MICHIGAN:

LAKE ERIE: On October 12, 1998, three UFOs were seen
over Lake Erie. There is video footage available from Fox
News in Cleveland, Ohio. The footage was aired by its
affiliate in Detroit at 11:30 PM on 10/12/98. Apparently there
were three glowing objects hovering above the lake. Thanks
to S. Rebant@kitchen0.homecom.com, 38388 St. Joe
Ave. Westland, MI 48186 and Larry Clark lclark@ibm.net

TWO SIGHTINGS IN COLORADO

DENVER: On September 3, 1998, in South West Denver,
Cherry Hills Village a UFO was sighted around 10:20 AM. It
was domed-shaped, a silver color with no lights, it did not
make a sound when it moved. It had a small "spike" coming
out of the top, and it hovered relatively close to the ground,
maybe 200 feet. It left so quickly, just sped up until I could not
see it anymore. I could not believe it. Their Phone Number:
303-773-3839, 2139 Franklin Street, Denver, Colorado.
Thanks to Bounty Hunter: bountyhunterx@hotmail.com

Michael Curta Colorado State MUFON director states, "We
will follow up on this as we had a couple of other sighting in
that same area." A couple of thoughts that pop to mind right
off the bat. Cherry Hills Village [CHV] is SE Denver and not
SW. Their address is no where near that area of the reported
sighting. CHV is a heavily populated area with million dollar
plus homes. One would think that we would have more reports
if we had an object 200' feet off the ground in that area. We'll
check it out and let you all know. Thanks to John Thompson,
ISUR and Mike Curta.

MINTURN: Robert Kelly-Goss reports: An intense red light
sitting in the sky suddenly bolted across the sky at an
incredible speed on October 8, 1998, at 9:30 PM. Shortly
after, a jet with flashing lights followed at a much lesser speed
(but moving fast). The red light stopped over Battle Mountain
about 8 miles from my house. It stayed there for about 30
seconds and then disappeared. Their Phone Number:
970-827-9480, Address: PO Box 606 Minturn, CO 81645

MEXICO

SANDY BEACH: An American just returned from Mexico has
suggested that there is a Mexican "Gulf Breeze." While at
"Sandy Beach" and "Rocky Point," 25 miles from Puerto
Vallarta, he and many others saw three anomalous lights for
nearly an hour. On September 26, 1998, between 9 and 10
PM local time, three bright white lights were observed to
linger one-third above the horizon over the Pacific Ocean. The
lights, except for a few brief seconds of flashing, were
otherwise non-blinking and stationary for nearly 35 minutes
before flying away. On leaving, they moved laterally with the
Mexican coastline and took about five minutes to move out of
sight. Within a few minutes the three lights "streaked" back to
near where they had originally be seen at and began lingering
again. According to the a witness in one of the American
retirement communities there, the strange lights are seen
frequently in the summer months of the year. Frequency of
sightings varies from "4 to 6 times" in summer to only once or
twice in the winter. Local newspapers, he said, have done at
least two articles on the lights that no one can currently
explain. A retired American college astronomer who has often
seen the lights, said they are not heavenly bodies or planes
and he is at a lost to explain what they are. The Mexican lights
are capable of great speeds and linger for long periods of
time. The 9/26/98 lights had an apparent size of slightly less
than Jupiter. Thanks to John C. Thompson Copyright, 1998,
All rights reserved.

UFO SEEN IN CENTRAL ITALY

On Saturday evening, October 3, 1998, a policeman in Rieti,
a city in Italy's Lazio province, spotted a metallic discoidal
object. It had a diameter of five meters (16 feet) flying at a low
altitude over the valley of the River Tevere." Rieti is 100
kilometers (60 miles) north of Rome. The UFO descended to
the river, "brushed the top of the water," and took off in a
southwesterly direction. The object was later seen flying over
the Ponte Marconi bridge in Rome. (See the newspaper Il
Giornale for October 4, 1998. Grazie a Simone Luccarini,
Massimiliano Teso e Edoardo Russo di Centro Italiano di
Studi Ufologici per questo rapporto.) Thanks to UFO
Roundup #41, 10/11/98 Joe Trainor editor.

JET POWERED FLYING FLAPJACK FLEW IN
1947

Aviation writer Tim Mathews says, US Air Intelligence Report
100-203-79, only recently declassified, makes a number of
intriguing comments about flying saucer-type aircraft and
notes that some of the sightings in 1947/8 might have related
to 'experimental flying wing aircraft.' It also talks about 'jet-
equipped aircraft with pancake or flying wing configurations.'
Beyond the obvious conclusion that these craft were
responsible for sightings -- and despite the obvious later
change in policy after Soviet discs and similar low aspect
ratio aircraft attempted to penetrate the DEW line from the
late 1940s onwards -- we have always suspected that the
heel-shaped objects were in fact evidence that the XF5U-1
Chance Vought 'flying pancake' had flown. This was in
relation especially to the Muroc Field 'unknowns' of July 1947
which to this day remains core cases within the field of UFO
research. Despite the obvious conclusions, researchers still
intend to play their games and live up to the expectations of
their belief systems. Fine -- may their God go with them. But,
AIR 100-203-79 should dispel any doubts that the XF5U-1
flapjack flew. What is so important about this you may ask?
Quite simply all the official histories claim that the aircraft
never did more than 'taxiing tests'. Of course one wouldn't
build an advanced aircraft and then just attempt taxiing
tests(!) but that has been the lie. Paragraph 8 (2) of the
document in question says; "Among those which have been
operational in recent years are the XF5U-1 �Flying Flapjack.�
This was a US Navy aircraft and I suggest that the 'Operation
Mainbrace' sightings of 1952 are related to a Navy disc."
Need we say more? On the one hand belief and evidence for
strange natural phenomena and on the other classified
aviation research. Thanks to: Tim Matthews.

DISC PLANES THE SECRET OF THE REAL UFOs

Robert Collins responds to aviation writers Tim Mathew's and
Bill Rose who claim UFOs are built by us. From direct
personal experience in several R&D major aeronautical
weapon system related programs, I have found that many
projects that start out as pure "black" eventually go "gray."
Gray programs are a mixture of white and black spending.
For example, sensitive functional areas such as signature or
survivability remain black throughout the life of the program,
while for accounting purposes the bulk of the development
cost is white. There is black budget money for development of
a few experimental craft, but not to deploy squadrons of them.
There is a big difference between the drawing board and
hardware in terms of billions of dollars. My sources have said
that we are having stability problems with these prototype
Saucers and have been since the late Seventies early
Eighties: These Saucers are Antigravity machines. Big
problems with these things that cost allot more than a B2, or
F22. We are working on developing and test flying them.
However, there are big stability problems controlling the
Antigravity field around the Saucer using our own technology
not theirs. And you don't "test fly" anything over populated
areas: That is a No, No. The Stealth Fighter allegedly also
had stability control problems. In fact, the Air Force chose the
B-47 over the original Flying Wing because of stability control
problems particularly during the bombing run. I wonder if
cancellation of these early projects such as the Avrocar could
be disinformation as the project may have been determined
promising and afterward could have expanded in scope and
put into the 'black' areas. Just a theory? The F117 has
definite control surfaces as does the Flying Wing, B2 and
F22, etc. Those Saucers I saw in person and the ones I have
on video tape HAVE NO control surfaces at all! I was close to
them with binoculars and you can see it on the daytime videos
made in Phoenix. You can see control surfaces on every
aircraft we have including the midget that flies out of Area 51.
Now when I look at these advanced aircraft I see the obvious.
They all have control surfaces. Those Saucers I saw HAD NO
and I mean No control surfaces. You don't hover over Phoenix
for 30 to 45 minutes at a time and take off at lighting speed or
just "disappear" without any kind of atmospheric control
surface. Thanks to Robert Collins.

PIGEONS AND DEER CONFUSED

John Quinn writes, "Here where I live in Northern California, in
the past week an incredible number of wild animals--mostly
deer--have been killed on the areas roads and highways.
Obviously their survival instincts are not functioning at high
level or are being overridden. This could be because some
other of the creatures' fundamental connections or patterns
are off-kilter, or perhaps some stronger impulse emanating
from HAARP operations, is causing these effects. My feeling
is that it may be related to some disruption of some very
elemental, basic instinctual connection the animals have with
the earth, which could very well be tied to magnetic and/or
electromagnetic grid lines, patterns and fields. Recently
owners of pigeons in Pennsylvania have also complained that
their birds are confused and unable to find their way home. In
fact, some 2,400 homing pigeons disappeared during two
long-distance races on the same day, a nearly unheard-of
loss in the little-known sport of pigeon racing. About 1,800
pigeons vanished out of 2,000 competing in a 200-mile race
from Virginia to Allentown on October 12. And 600 out of 800
birds were still missing from a separate 150-mile race from
western PA to Philadelphia. A 90 percent loss rate is very
unusual and indicates some kind of interference with the birds
homing instincts. Thanks to Ron Hannivig, Simpson PA USA .

ART BELL ANNOUNCES HIS RETIREMENT
FROM UFO RADIO SHOW

Art Bell�s nightly radio show will be missed by millions of
listeners. We wish him well!

WORK CONTINUES ON GENERAL RAMEY'S
ROSWELL MESSAGE

Ronald Regehr reports things move too swiftly sometimes for
me to keep up. As you might be aware, several of us have
deciphered much of the note General Ramey is holding in his
hand in the infamous "Ramey/DuBose" photo taken by James
Bond Johnson over 51 years ago. The "translation" was
performed independently at at least two locations and
achieved an outstanding degree of correlation. Each team
member worked from a 16 x 20 print made from the original
negatives available from the UTA archives. The file from
which I worked is a scanned image of solely the message
and is 821 megabytes (this from an approximate 1" x 3/8"
image size!). Because of the differing image intensities we
were required to vary the brightness and contrast of different
areas of the image to best resolve the individual characters.
Translation took three to four hours. Several factors assisted
us. First, it was a nonproportional type, meaning each
character and space occupied the same amount of space
(unlike today's ever-popular proportional type); Second, all the
letters are upper-case; third we had large-format images.
Third, today's equipment is sufficiently capable to enable us
to perform this task. Bond and I presented the preliminary
results to an excited audience at MUFON Orange County's
monthly meeting. The highlight of the presentation was
enabling the audience to actually READ some elements of
this hithertofore "hidden" message. There was no doubt in
anyone's mind that had Gen. Ramey read this note BEFORE
Johnson took his photos. We do have this vital clue to enable
us to solve one more element in the "Mystery of the Century"
The message, as best we can determine to date, is:

Cradle Telephone or Liberty Bell Symbol

[ Large Underlined Header ] [Top Left ] [ Official Crest ]
handwritten numerals 15 33 time of receipt ?
1) ....................................................... AS THE ??
2) ........ 4 HRS THE VICTIMS OF.THE.YOU FORWARDED
TO THE
3) ...... AT FORT WORTH, TEX.
4) ...... THE "DISK" ? ...............................L.......AT 0984
ACKNOWLEDGES.
5) EMERGENCY POWERS ARE NEEDED SITE TWO S.W.
MAGDALENA, N.MEX
6) **D** SAFE TALK .....FOR MEANING OF STORY AND
MISSION.
7) BALLOON STORY. SHOW "STUFF" OF WEATHER
BALLOONS SENT ON THE
8) **** AND LAND L****VER CREWS.
9) [blank]
10) TEMPLE

Editors Note: I have the large 16 x 20 photographs and writing
can clearly be seen on the message. This interpretation
indicates the Army captured an unidentified disc in 1947.

35th NATIONAL UFO CONFERENCE

The Thirty Fifth Annual National UFO Conference will be held
at the Days Inn in Bordentown, NJ on November 7 and 8. Jim
Moseley the editor of Saucer Smear is the master of
Ceremonies. Speakers include Antonio Huneeus on UFOs in
Chile, Karl Pflock on the Florida Scout Master Case, Pat
Marcattilio on the Physical evidence for UFOs, Peter Jordan-
Cattle Mutilations, Bob Durant- Roswell Yes, Tom Benson-
One good case is enough and George Hansen-Remote
Viewing, Anna Hayes Voyagers, Richard Sauder-
Underground bases and tunnels, Rick Hilberg- UFOs the first
three decades, David Huggins-abductions, Curt Sutherly
author of Strange Encounters. The Days Inn is located on
Route 206 just off exit 7 of the NJ Turnpike. Many of these
speakers are the best researchers in Ufology.

MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS AT MUFON
CONFERENCE OCTOBER 17, 1998

Bruce Widaman, MUFON State Director of Missouri is
hosting a regional U.F.O./I.A.C Conference on the known
government connections with Ufology. Scheduled speakers
include: Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist and UFO
researcher; Robert Swiatek, FUFOR; Chris O'Brien, author;
Lt. Col. Gerald Rowles MUFON State Director for
Washington and Major George Filer, MUFON Eastern
Regional Director. The conference will be held at the Comfort
Inn, located at Page Avenue and Highway 270. The
conference will be hosted by Ted Phillips, Marvin Czarnik and
Bruce Widaman. This will be one of best conferences of the
year.

Filer's Files Copyright 1998 by MUFON EASTERN
DIRECTOR all rights reserved. Readers may post items
from the Files 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
appeared.

Send your letters to George A. Filer at Majorstar@aol.com.
If you wish to keep your name confidential please so state in
your E-mails.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:37:06 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:54:52 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


From time to time I ride my bicycle down to the end of the
runway at Washington National Airport (can't bring myself to
call it the Reagan National Airport) and watch the airliners
roll in.

You see them lined up in the distance making their approach
turns.

As I track one, I don't know the airline, don't know the name of
the pilot, don't know how many passengers or their names, don't
know from where it departed. But I know one thing, I know it is
a plane. In that very important sense it is identified.

We have identified saucers in our skies that fly with
intelligence. The debunkers demand that we know their origin,
the nature and composition of the materials of their
construction, their reason for being here and whatever else they
see fit to demand in the service of their obtuseness, in order
to consider them identified.

Tough.

UFO and Ufology are terms so wedded to the efforts of
disinformation and subversion, they have to go.

There are now six primary areas of study in the overall field.

Sightings
Animal Harvesting (Cattle Mutilation)
Cereology (Crop Circles)
Exo-Archeology/Astronomy (Cydonia, Giza, etc.)
Government Posture (the politics of disclosure and cover-up)
Contact (abductions, 4th and 5th kind interactions)

The term Ufology is supposed to cover these fields. Sorry.
That dog won't hunt.

Many members of the black community give up their "slave names"
and replace them with names more appropriate and comfortable to
how they see themselves in the world.

UFO and Ufology are "slave names" - they are part of the
nomenclature we used when we were, in too great a measure,
unwilling participants in one of the most intricate and unique
propaganda campaigns ever waged.

They need to go and we to stop apologizing to debunkers, the
government, the media or anyone else for what we know from the
evidence.

UFO and Ufology need to go.

In my work I use the phrase "extraterrestrial related
phenomena." If the odd reporter or editor or congressperson is
offended by this, once again - tough.

Steve Bassett
Paradigm Research Group
http://www.paradigmclock.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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

              Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:34:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:49:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:20:56 +0200
>Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:03:03 -0500
>Subject: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

>From: gerry [mailto:ed@farshore.force9.co.uk]
>Sent: Sunday, October 25, 1998 4:29 AM
>To: Skywatch International
>Subject: Ed Mitchell's Latest Interview

An earlier posting noted:

>A highly-intelligent scientist, Edgar caused a sensation at a
>UFO conference in America this month when he claimed he has seen
>proof that aliens exist.

<big snip>

>Make no mistake, Roswell happened. I've seen secret files which
>show the government knew about it - but decided not to tell the
>public.

<snip>

>My training at NASA only allows me to look at things
>scientifically. Even if I hadn't been shown evidence of alien
>landings on Earth, the assumption must be that somewhere in the
>universe another planet is capable of supporting alien life.

<snip>

>I firmly believe that this documentation will have to be made
>public within the next three or four years. And if proof of ETs
>is finally made public, nobody will be happier than me.


I'm not quite sure how to begin this, not wanting to sound too
critical of someone like Edgar Mitchell. I have a huge respect
for all Astronauts, regardless of their opinions. It takes
courage and a very positive and optimistic view to participate
in something like the space program.

However....

Tell us about the damn files!

To spend an entire interview talking about the fact that you've
seen proof but refusing to divulge the specifics of that proof
or where it might be found is beyond frustrating.

Mr. Mitchell, (assuming you read this) if you are privy to what
it is that everyone is dying to know and have already spent
thousands of man hours researching, then spill the beans! I
can't, for the life of me, imagine one good reason that you'd
regret informing America or the world.

While I appreciate your words of encouragement, they fall short
of satisfying and, unfortunately, only add fuel to the fires of
misinformation and speculation. Don't forget, it was the
taxpayer's dime that made you a celebrity and allowed you to
walk on the moon.

We deserve more than a cryptic "The truth is out there."
Don't you think?


Respectfully,

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:14:51 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:59:35 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43


    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 43
October 26, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

JAPAN LOSES ANOTHER
ASDF FIGHTER JET

     On Friday, October 9, 1998, at 8:02 p.m.,
a two-seater F4EJ fighter jet took off from
Chitose airbase on Hokkaido Island in
northern Japan.  The crew included two
officers of Japan's Air Self-Defense Force
(ASDF)--Lieutenant Suetake, 28, and
Lieutenant Ogasawara, 26.  The men were
returning to the ASDF air base at Misawa,
on Honshu Island 450 kilometers (270 miles)
north of Tokyo.
     At precisely 8:40 p.m., as the jet was
flying over the Pacific Ocean approximately
55 kilometers (33 miles) northeast of Misawa,
"the F4EJ fighter dropped off the radar screen.
The crew abruptly lost radio contact (with the
tower at Misawa) and reportedly crashed."
     An air-sea rescue operation was launched.
On Saturday, October 10, "An MSDF (Maritime
Self Defense Force) destroyer-escort had retrieved
documents floating on the sea and part of one
wing."
     Lt. Suetake and Lt. Ogasawara remain missing
in action.  Their jet disappeared in an area where
two Mitsubishi jet fighters vanished six weeks ago.
(See the newspaper Yomiuri Shinbun for October 10
and October 11, 1998, "Two pilots on ASDF fighter
lost."  Many thanks to Miyuki Tamura, UFO Roundup
correspondent in Japan, for forwarding the articles.)

FAMILY VIDEOTAPES A UFO
IN SOUTHERN CHINA

     On Saturday, October 3, 1998, the Han family
visited a mountainside cemetery on the outskirts
of Kunming, a large city in China's Yunnan province,
1,050 kilometers (630 miles) southwest of Shanghai.
     While they were paying their respects to their
ancestors, "at about 11:50 a.m., Han took a look
back into downtown Kunming and all of a sudden
discovered an extremely dazzling object flying over
the city.  He tracked the flying object with his video
camera and shot about three minutes of videotape
of the UFO."
     The object, which emitted "a dazzling light,"
first took "the shape of a blazing ball surrounded by
two pieces of black rubber, and then five diamond-
shaped objects flying in a diamond formation, said
Han.  This process continued for more than ten
minutes."  (See the newspaper Guangzhou Morning
Post for October 16, 1998, "UFO over Kunming,"
by Alan Zhang.  Many thanks to Stig Agermose for
forwarding this newspaper article.)

PACACCINI, WITNESSES HUNT
FOR BALDIM CAVE CREATURE

     On Wednesday, October 14, 1998, Vittorio
Pacaccini, UFO researcher and author of the book
INCIDENTE EM VARGINHA, visited Sete Lagoas
in Minas Gerais state, Brazil and met with men
who claimed to have seen a Chupacabra in a
cave in the Serra do Espinhaco mountains.
     The sighting took place at 7 a.m. on October 1,
1998 in a mountaintop limestone cave east of
Baldim, a small city on the Rio das Velhas
100 kilometers (66 miles) north of Belo Horizonte.
An amateur speleologist, Marcelo Uchoa, and two
companions encountered the creature in a cavern
150 meters underground.  Uchoa shot two photos
of the Chupacabra with a Kodak digital camera.
His friend and fellow resident of Sete Lagoas,
Leandro da Silva, then posted the photos on his
webpage on October 10.
     In an interview with UFO Roundup, Pacaccini
reported that Uchoa "could not be sure (how tall
the creature was) but it was bigger than a dog."
     The creature escaped through one of the many
wall fissures in the cave after Uchoa snapped his
pictures.
    Pacaccini, Uchoa and da Silva left Sete Lagoas
by car and drove east to Baldim.  "The cavern entrance
is almost on top of a mountain," Pacaccini reported,
"Our way up was a little vertical."
     "Right at the cave's entrance, it became obvious
that we'd have a hard time getting inside that place.
We had to use ropes to get in the first gallery,
going down about 9 meters (29 feet).  The cave's
walls were very slippery and dangerous."
     "Usually the first gallery of a cave is particularly
dangerous because it is the easiest place to find
the scorpions, the spiders, the snakes, the jaguars."
     "To reach the second gallery, we went down for
60 more meters (198 feet).  Our goal was to reach
the fifth gallery--150 meters (495 feet) below the
surface--where the picture was taken."
     "After a lot of struggle, we went down 30 more
meters (100 feet)  We hadn't heard anything so
far, but in that gallery, we started to hear a strange
sound.  We could not identify the sound.  Something
was moving below us."
     Pacaccini described the noise as "something
large dragging itself up from down there."
     "That sound continued, sometimes nearer,
sometimes further away, and, due to the crevices,
it seemed to be coming from everywhere."
     "Leandro shouted, 'Pacaccini, watch out!
There's something coming towards us!'"
     "His (da Silva's) flashlight slipped through his
fingers and fell down the tunnel.  We heard it
smash in the fourth gallery.  I said, 'Okay, fellows,
enough is enough.  We're going to leave this place
now.  Let's get out of here immediately.  Okay,
move it, move it!'"
     Pacaccini said he drew his 9mm pistol, which
was loaded with Hydra-Shok ammunition, and acted
as a rearguard as Uchoa and da Silva climbed back
up the tunnel.  Forty minutes later, they reached
the surface.
     Once back in Sete Lagoas, the trio made plans
for a second descent on Saturday, October 17, but
heavy rains that day cancelled their plans.
     Pacaccini added that he hopes to return to
the cave in another week, this time with a party
of 10 researchers and a full array of equipment,
including a digital camera, a 36mm camera and
a videocamera.  (Muito obrigado a Vittorio
Pacaccini por eso caso.)
(Editor's Comment: In May 1978, I visited Ouro
Preto, the old capital of Minas Gerais, with my
lady friend, Ana Maria Fagundes.  While at one
of Aleijadinho's 18th Century churches, we talked
to an elderly Brazilian, and he told us some amazing
stories about Itacolomi, an unusually-shaped
mountain near the city.  He said "luminous discs"
were often seen over the peak, and there was a
large tunnel leading from Itacolomi hundreds of
miles into "the Inner World."  Strangely enough,
two weekends later, when Ana Maria and I were
in Diamantina, 250 kilometers (150 miles) north
of Ouro Preto, we heard the exact same story
about a mountain in that vicinity.  UFOs and
mysterious caverns are part and parcel of the
folklore of the Serra do Espinhaco.)

UFO BLAMED IN FATAL FIRE
IN NORTHERN BRAZIL

     The family of two children killed in a mysterious
fire near Itapecuru-Mirim in Maranhao state in
northern Brazil blame a "floating fireball" for
causing the blaze.
     Killed in the rural district house fire were
Antonio Cardoso, age 10, and his sister, Maria
Lucia Cardoso, age 10 months.
     Trouble began in June 1998 when the
children's uncle, Francisco Oliveira dos Santos,
49, reported that he had been chased out of a
farm field, "pursued by this fireball and had to
run to escape."
     Following this episode, Oliveira "was disturbed."
His brother, Jose de Sacramento Oliveira, brought
him to a psychiatric clinic in Sao Luis, the state
capital.
     On Saturday, October 10, Oliveira left the
house to forage for food.  A short time later,
Sra. Elaine Oliveira de Cardoso, 29, the children's
mother, "left the house to get a bucket of water.
A few minutes after 2 p.m., the house began to
catch fire.  By the time he (Oliveira) and Elaine
returned, the house was completely destroyed."
     "Francisco's relatives don't have any doubts
that the house was burned by the mysterious
fireball.  They emphasized that there was nothing
in the house that could have caused the fire."
     The case is being investigated by the Corpo
de Bombeiros of Itapecuru-Mirim.  At present,
the verdict is "cause unknown."
     Itapecuru-Mirim is located about 600 kilometers
(360 miles) north of the national capital, Brasilia.
(See AUFON #21 for 1998.  Many thanks to
Alexandre Minuru and AUFON editor Stefan Duncan
for this news story.)

UFO FLAP HEATS UP IN
CENTRAL ITALY

     More UFO sightings were reported in central
Italy last week.
     On Tuesday, October 13, 1998, residents
of Collechio, a town near Parma 400 kilometers
(250 miles) northwest of Rome, spotted "an ovoid
object, silver in color, observed at 6 p.m. by three
local people.  The object seemed to move
horizontally through the sky for over a minute."
     On Wednesday, October 14, 1998, at 9 a.m.,
"two residents on the highway between Rieti and
Avezzano observed in the sky for a tenth of a
second a silver object in the form of a cigarette
that seemed to reflect the light of the sun and
remained stationary.  Afterwards it moved slowly
away."
     Avezzano is 70 kilometers (42 miles) east of
Rome.  Rieti is 100 kilometers (60 miles) northeast
of Rome.  A UFO was seen in Rieti on October 3,
1998.
     The evening of October 14, 1998, at 7:45 p.m.,
dozens of witnesses in the Adriatic seaports of
Civitanova Marche and Porto Potonza "saw a
strange apparition of strong luminosity, flying in
a zigzag pattern out to sea."  Some said it was
a UFO; others insisted it was a NATO spy plane
heading for embattled Kosovo province across
the Adriatic Sea in the Balkans.
     Civitanova Marche is in Macerata province,
approximately 125 miles (75 kilometers) northeast
of Rome.  (See the newspaper Il Resto del Carlino
for October 16, 1998.  Grazie a Renzo Cabassi,
Francesco Castagna, Goffredo Pierpaoli, Simone
Grandicelli e Edoardo Russo di Centro Italiano di
Studi Ufologici, CISU, per questo rapporto.)

EIGHT WITNESS SPHERICAL
UFO NEAR BRISBANE

     On Sunday, October 4, 1998, at 6:33 p.m., eight
people witnessed a UFO flyover in the Albany area
of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia "at an altitude
of 2,000 to 3,000 feet."
     According to eyewitnesses Mr. and Mrs. Eddy,
"Object was half the size of the moon, and at arm's
length the size of a tennis ball.  Shape was
spherical with a squarish bottom.  Color was
orange to red.  Moving from north to south on a
straight path.  The object had flames coming from it.
But they were different, not like the flames of an
object coming in from space, but more like a small
plane on fire.  The flames were jagged in shape."
     "Mr Eddy said that's what he thought it was
at first," a burning plane, "but there was no sound
to be heard.  Speed moving a little faster than a
hot-air balloon but slower than a Tiger Moth (light
airplane)."  (Many thanks to Diane Harrison of
UFO Network Australasia for this report.)

UFO STARTLES MOTORISTS
IN STAFFORDSHIRE, UK

     On Friday, October 16, 1998, at 9 p.m., a glowing
UFO appeared over motorway A34 in Congleton,
Staffordshire, UK, 38 miles (60 kilometers) southeast
of Liverpool, frightening several drivers.
     "Theresa Hewitt, from Bromley Road, Congleton,
was driving on the A34 when she spotted a bright
object hovering above Moreton Level.  She said,
'I saw what looked like a grey cloud moving around
in the sky.  It looked like a school of fish and was
quite bright.'"
     "'At first I thought it was a cloud lit up by one of
the laser lights.  But we have no nightclub in
Congleton, and I checked the paper and nothing
else was going on that night.'"
     "The lights were also spotted by Bill Edey from
Scholar Green who was travelling along the same
stretch of road at 9 p.m.  He said, 'i was near
Little Moreton Hall when I saw about 25 lights in
a perfect spherical shape above the car.  The lights
seemed to follow me until I reached Congleton.  I
am quite a rational man and thought it might have
been an aircraft, but it was travelling too slow and
the lights seemed to be spinning.  I nearly crashed
the car because of what I saw, and I was covered
in goose bumps."  (See the newspaper The Sentinel
of Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs. for October 19, 1998,
"Drivers alarmed by UFO sightings on the A34."
Many thanks to Gerry Lovell of Far Shores for
this newspaper article.)

UFOs REMAIN ACTIVE IN
WESTERN OHIO

     On Friday, October 16, 1998, at 7:15 p.m.,
ufologist Steven Neeley was returning home from
archery practice in rural Hardin County, near
Kenton, Ohio when he saw "what appeared to be
a star with red and blue lights...ahead of me in
the southern sky."
     "Using my game binoculars, it was clearly
visible and stationary," Steve reported, "I watched
it for two to five minutes."
     "I stood there watching, and it began to move
away and up from its original position.  I walked on
and came around a bend in the trail," only to see
the UFO glowing "on the opposite side of the sky.
It was then 180 degrees northerly.  It was closer
and lower and left no doubt that this was what I
had seen minutes before.  It was a medium-sized
star of white bright light with red and blue lights
seemingly moving in a circle around its equator.
Then it disappeared.  In the blink of an eye, it
vanished from sight."
     Hardin County is 72 miles (115 kilometers)
south of Toledo, Ohio.  (Many thanks to Errol
Bruce-Knapp for forwarding this report.)
     On Thursday, October 22, 1998, Samuel X.
and his wife were driving "on Camden/West Elkton
Road, just north of Wayne Trace" in Gratis, Ohio
(population 998), a town at the intersection of
Routes 122 and 725 about 25 miles (40 kilometers)
north of Cincinnati.  Then Sam noticed "a bright
light in the sky, flying low, headed eastward.  We
supposed the light to be the headlight of a light
aircraft.  Yet it pulsated instead of flashing on
and off."
     "As the craft got closer, we noticed two
flashing lights on both sides of the center light.
We parked our vehicle in the middle to the road
and just observed the craft as it came closer.
I was out of the car, listening for the recognizable
sound of a helicopter.  I knew it couldn't be a plane,
as it didn't travel like a plane does."
     "As it came fairly close into view, I noticed that
it didn't make any noise like a plane, jet or helicopter.
This craft hummed.  I also noticed a bright rear
light as it moved.  I asked my wife how she would
describe the light in the rear of the craft, and we
were in agreement that it was yellowish-amber in
color and illuminated the rear section of the craft."
     This is the third UFO sighting in Gratis during
the past year.  A UFO was seen in town on
November 17, 1997.  A second one was spotted
in Gratis on February 5, 1998.
(Many thanks to Kenneth Young, public relations
director for Tri-States Advocates for Scientific
Knowledge, T.A.S.K., for this news story.)

CROP CIRCLE FOUND NEAR
LOWVILLE, ONTARIO

     On Saturday, October 17, 1998, a large crop
circle formation was found in a field of cattle corn
near Lowville, Ontario, Canada.
     The formation was found by Mike Bird, a local
researcher, and Drew Cauley, Ontario coordinator
for Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada.  They
estimated the structures to be "a few weeks old."
     It was "a large crop formation, roughly in the
shape of a crescent or C...Found in cattle corn
8 to 12 feet high," measuring "approximately
210 feet north to south by 177 feet east to west."
There was "a teardrop-shaped area of standing
corn inside the crescent approximately 10 feet"
with "two 'companion' shapes attached to the
same formation, one on the edge of the field,
the other to the south, each about 5 feet by
15 feet.  Stalks were broken and 'burned' at the
break points."
     Investigators also found a "white cobweb-like
material' under one area of flattened corn.  Samples
of the plants, soil and "white cobweb" were taken
by the men for analysis.  (Many thanks to Paul
Anderson of Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada
for this news story.)

1952 UFO FLAP ALARMED
WINSTON CHURCHILL

     In 1952, during his second term as the UK's
prime minister, Winston S. Churchill ordered a
Top Secret clandestine probe of UFOs, a
British newspaper reported last weekend.
     According to Sunday People for October 18,
1998, "Worried Winston Churchill ordered a
top-level probe into UFOs, when he was prime
minister" for the second time.
     "Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine revealed the
enquiry as he admitted the Goernment is holding
at least 33 top-secret files on UFOs.  The
documents are held under lock and key at the
Public Records Office in Kew, West London,
and Lord Irvine says there may be more."
     "But the information is so restricted that it
cannot be released with the other with the other
23 files reporting sightings between 1943 and 1967,
which have already been made public."
     "Churchill asked his air minister Lord Cherwell
to investigate in 1952, writing, 'What does all this
stuff about flying saucers amount to?  What is the
truth?'"
     "Official documents show the War Office
received reports that flying saucers were spotted
by the RAF's 115 Squadron on bombing raids over
Germany in 1943."  (See Sunday People for
October 18, 1998, "Churchill's fear of a UFO war."
Many thanks to John Hayes for forwarding the
newspaper article.)
(Editor's Comment: In 1943, the same month the
Lancaster bombers of the RAF's 115 Squadron
were encountering UFOs, a daylight disc was seen
hovering above the town of Pushkino in northern
Russia by Spanish soldiers of Division Azul, a
volunteer Axis unit fighting alongside the German
Wehrmacht.  We know for a fact that in January 1945
Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force
(SHAEF) asked all military units in the European
Theatre of Operations (ETO) to send in their reports
of "foo fighters" or UFOs.  This would have included
the 115 Squadron reports from Sir Arthur Harris's
Bomber Command and all of the sightings by
American GIs in Europe.  But nobody seems to
know what happened to this massive SHAEF
archive after May 8, 1945.  Was there a UFO flap
in 1943?  The answer is probably in the SHAEF
files, and in the files of the Ground Observer Corps
in the USA, which Uncle Sam has been sitting on
for the past 55 years.)

DEEP SPACE ONE LAUNCHES
ON SHAKEDOWN CRUISE

     On Saturday, October 24, 1998, Deep Space
One, NASA's "futuristic" spacecraft, blasted off from
Cape Canaveral, Florida on its maiden flight.
     The $152 million "solar electric" or "ion-powered"
spacecraft is headed for a rendezvous with an
asteroid 120 million miles (192 kilometers) from
Earth.
     "Marc Rayman, chief engineer and deputy
mission manager at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
in Pasadena, California, said the term ion propulsion
may be familiar to TV viewers."
     "In Star Trek, the refer to ion propulsion as
being even faster than the capability that the
Enterprise had--and NASA isn't quite ready to
fly a faster-than-light spacecraft het,' he said."
     "But he added, 'It's been known for a long time
that it has the potential to provide very, very high
velocity and that aspect of it was accurately
reflected in Star Trek and is what we'll be
doing with Deep Space One.'"
     The key to Deep Space One's higher speed
capacity is its solar-electric or ion propulsion
system.  Here's how it works:
     (1) "Energies from solar arrays heats barium-
calcium-aluminate embedded in a matrix of
tungsten. The material then emits electrons."
     (2) "Electrons knock other electrons off the
xenon atoms, making the atoms positively
charged, called ions.  The electrons follow the
helical--kind of like a stretched Slinky--path of
magnetic field lines, increasing their likelihood
of meeting up with xenon atoms."
     (3) "The charged xenon atoms head for the
open end of the chamber--and toward deep space,
where there is no charge, at a rather speedy
68,000 miles per hour.  Two charged grids at the
exhaust end focus the xenon into 3,000 beamlets."
     (4) A neutralizer inserts electrons into the path
of the exiting positively-charged xenon atoms--
to that the spacecraft (itself) will maintain a neutral
charge."
     Deep Space One is carrying 180 pounds of
xenon gas in its storage tanks.  Emerging from
the spacecraft's grid-covered exhaust, the xenon
"bombarded by electrons" is "creating a glowing
blue stream of ions that can provide acceleration
for months or even years."
     Other new features on Deep Space One
include the KA-band solid power amplifier, an
ultra-lightweight unit of 0.7 kilograms that
will generate 2.6 watts of KA-band signal for
communication with Earth, and the Solar
Concentrator Arrays.  These consist of 720
cylindrical silicone Fresnel lenses that
concentrate sunlight onto 3,600 solar cells.
The arrays will boost solar power efficiency
by 50 percent, but, like an Earthbound sailboat,
Deep Space One will have to "tack," i.e.
position itself so that sunlight will always be
falling on the Fresnel lenses.  (See the New
York Post for October 25, 1998, "NASA tries
'Trek' tech."  See also Popular Science for
July 1998, "Deep Space Traveler," pages
42 to 47.)

A HIDDEN OCEAN ON
CALLISTO?

     Scientists have detected evidence of
underground oceans on two of Jupiter's moons--
Europa and Callisto.
     While a subsurface ocean was expected in
Europa's case, the revelations about Callisto have
come as a shock to the scientific community.
     During the flybys of Voyagers 1 and 2 back
in 1979, scientists calculated that Callisto had
"a water ice and silicate rock composition like
that of Ganymede...Callisto's icy crust is more
than 150 miles thick and this is not prone to
break into (tectonic) plates."
     But now it appears that Callisto's cratered
icy crust is not as thick as they originally
thought.
     "Scientists hypothesized the existence of
underground seas from data gathered by the
Galileo spacecraft.  As the spacecraft zipped
past Callisto, Galileo measured strong
disturbances to Jupiter's magnetic field that
could be caused by huge underground bodies
of salt water about 60 miles below the frozen
surface."
     "'One could expect life in such oceans,'
said said Krishan Kurana, a geophysicist at
the University of California Los Angeles and
lead author of the research."
     "If we find out four-and-a-half billion years
after the formation of the solar system that
there's still enough heat that ice will melt on
the interior of these bodies, we have to do a
little bit of rethinking,' said one of the
researchers, UCLA physicist Margaret G.
Kivelson."
     Callisto is 390 million miles (624 million
kilometers) from Earth, orbiting the gas giant
Jupiter at a distance of 1,170,041 miles
(1,883,000 kilometers).  Callisto is 2,995 miles
(4,820 kilometers) in diameter and takes
about 17 Earth days to complete a rotation.
The moon is named for a woman in Greek
mythology who had a son by Zeus.  (See the
Boston, Mass. Herald for October 22, 1998,
"By Jove!  Planet's moons may be home to
oceans," page 34.)

from the UFO Files...

1938: MARS ATTACKS!

     On Monday, October 31, 1938, Americans
listening to CBS network radio, expecting to
hear the anthology drama Mercury Theatre of
the Air, were puzzled by the sound of orchestra
music.  Suddenly, a newscaster broke in and
announced, "Ladies and gentlemen, I have just
been handed a message that came in from
Grover's Mill by telephone....Just a moment...
At least forty people, including six state troopers,
lie dead in a field east of the village of Grover's
Mill (New Jersey--J.T.), their bodies burned and
distorted beyond all recognition."
     Stunned listeners sat by their Atwater Kent
radios, hearing newscasters describe "strange
meteors" falling out of the sky, ovoid objects with
tripod legs looming above the maple trees, and
clouds of "sinister luminous gas" moving forward
relentlessly.
     Actually, it was just a radio play.  H.G. Wells's
classic War of the Worlds rewritten in "radio news"
format by Mercury Theatre producer Orson Welles.
But audiences all around the USA thought it was
real.
     "Good heavens, something's wriggling out of the
shadows like a gray snake.  Now it's another one
and another.  They look like tentacles to me.  There,
I can see the thing's body.  It's as large as a bear
and it glistens like black leather.  But that face...
it's indescribable...The eyes are black and gleam like
a serpent.  The mouth is V-shaped with saliva dripping
from its rimless lips..."
     By now, telephones were ringing in police stations
all over the USA.  In Chattanooga, Tennessee, a
Presbyterian congregation fell to its knees and began
singing What A Friend We Have in Jesus.
     In Indianapolis, Indiana, a woman who had been
listening to the broadcast burst into a church and
shouted, "New York has been destroyed!  It's the
end of the world!  Go home and prepare to die!"
     In Providence, Rhode Island, police received
over 4,000 calls from anxious listeners.
(Editor's Comment: That's not surprising.  One month
earlier, on September 21, 1938, Rhode Island had
been devastated by the Hurricane of 1938.  After
you've seen the impossible--a 20-foot storm surge
gushing down Weybosset and Westminster
Streets, and 1937 Packards bobbing around like
clumps of seaweed, a Martian invasion doesn't
seem beyond the realm of possibility.)
     In Newark, New Jersey, people climbed onto
apartment house rooftops and, looking across
the Hudson River, saw clouds of smoke over
Brooklyn and the Bronx.  Rumors spread like
wildfire.  The Martians were dropping poison
gas on New York City!  Hundreds fled Newark,
causing massive traffic jams.
     In Grover's Mill, N.J., seven duck hunters,
listening to the CBS broadcast on a car radio,
decided to fight back.  They formed a patrol
and headed into the woods.
     Suddenly, one of them cried out and
pointed to a sinister ovoid shape looming
above some trees.  "It's one of them Martian
war machines."
     "Give 'em hell, boys!"
     The group opened fire with rifle and shotguns,
but it was no good.  The object remained in place.
Then one of the men, who owned a Browning
Automatic Rifle (B.A.R.) remembered that he had
two or three clips of armor-piercing ammunition
in his ruck.  He slid in a clip and opened fire.
     A hundred yards away, a New Jersey state
trooper heard all the shooting and stopped his car.
As he made his way through the woods, he heard
the distinctive chum-chum-chum sound of the
B.A.R., followed by an anguished scream,
"Martian blood!  I'm covered with Martian blood!"
     Arriving at the scene, the trooper found the
group huddled around their soaked and hysterical
companion and said, "What are you assholes
doing!?"
     "We just knocked out a Martian war machine,"
one replied.  "Poor Frank's got Martian blood
all over him."
     Taking out his flashlight, the trooper aimed
it in the direction indicated.  He switched it on,
and the beam showed the Grover's Mill municipal
water tower, with gallons streaming from the
bullet holes in the round steel tank.
     Back in New York, police detectives invaded
the CBS control room, advised executives of the
panicky situation, and Orson Welles himself
took the microphone.
     "This is Orson Welles, ladies and gentlemen,
out of character to assure you that The War of
the Worlds has no further significance than as
the holiday offering it was intended to be.  The
Mercury Theatre's own radio version of dressing
up in a sheet and saying Boo!...we couldn't soap
all your windows and and steal all your garden
gates by tomorrow...so we did the next best
thing.  We annihilated the world before your
very ears and utterly destroyed the Columbia
Broadcasting System.  You will be relieved, I hope,
to learn that we didn't mean it, and that both
institutions are still open for business.  So,
goodbye, everybody, and remember, please, for
the next day or so, the terrible lesson you have
learned tonight.  That grinning, glowing, globular
invader of your living room is an inhabitant of the
pumpkin patch, and if your doorbell rings and
nobody's there, that was no Martian...it's
Halloween."
     For weeks afterward, commentators and
columnists talked and wrote about the "Martian
broadcast."  The Times of London tracked down
the elderly Herbert George Wells and asked
what he thought about the panic in America.
Wells's reply: "How odd."
    The day after the broadcast, CBS president
William S. Paley's office was invaded by a
species even more fearsome than Martians...
namely lawyers.  But that's another story.
(See the New York Daily News for November 1,
1938, "Fake Radio 'War' Stirs Terror
Throughout U.S."  Also ROSEBUD: THE
STORY OF ORSON WELLES by David
Thompson, Alfred A. Knopf Inc., New York, NY
1996, page 104, and ORSON WELLES: THE
ROAD TO XANADU by Simon Callow, Viking,
New York, NY, 1995, pages 402-404.")

FUN UFO WEBSITES:
     For more UFO news from Italy, check out
Giornale UFO #8.  It's at this website--
http://www.teseoedizione.com/giornaleufo
     German-speaking readers may want to visit
the new site operated by Berliner UFO
Gesellschaft.  It's at http://members.tripod.com/
~BUFOG/BUFOG.html
     Photos from the Hubble Space Telescope
are now online at this site: http://oposite.stsci.
edu/publinfo/1998/28
     Don't miss our parent site, UFO INFO.
Drop in any time at http://ufoinfo.com
     Back issues of UFO Roundup are available
for reading and downloading at our webpage.
Drop in anytime at http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

     We'll be back next week with more saucer
news from around the planet, brought to you by
"the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1998 by Masinaigan
Productions, 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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:21:41 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:22:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>I was addressing the curious argument, made by some, that the
>panel offered a final - and negative - conclusion about the UFO
>phenomenon and its origins.

The archival record of this thread shows the above as a further
example of Jerome Clark's intellectual dishonesty. The record
shows that what he was defending was his interpretation that the
Sturrock report validated ufology. No one, especially me, has
ever argued that the panel 'offered a final' conclusion. That
the Scientific Review Panel conclusion about the UFO phenomenon
being negative is self-evident. Not only did the best ufology
presented by the best ufologists did not measure up to be worthy
of further study in respect to the cases argued, but the
scientific review panel presented a definite blow to the ETH.

>Such was not the case. The cases
>presented to it convinced panel members that further UFO study
>is worthwhile, though some (not all) expressed pessimism about
>what more could be learned from existing cases.

That is an outright false statement and not based on what the
scientific review panel said and is on record stating.

>The quoted material below confirms as much.

>>In other words, the purported 'best evidence' (although that is
>>comprehensively debatable) accumulated during the past fifty years
>>wasn't deemed a promising basis of further scientific study.

>>What could be more disappointing... presumably only if it wasn't
>>considered worthy of any further analysis at all.

>It's worth remembering here that Easton and (it is clear)
>Stewart have essentially a negative view of the UFO phenomenon
>which participants in the panel did not share, at least by the
>end of the meeting.

Not Melosch's view, but as usual Jerome Clark is compelled to
ignore all that is contrary to whatever ufological wisdom he is
trying to make a case for.

>How the two of them draw negative
>interpretations from the panel is a mystery, but to each his
>own.

Actual quotes from the scientific review panel are not 'negative
interpretations' by myself or Eastman. They are actual quotes
from the scientific review panel and stand on their own without
the necessity of any supporting commentary or without the need
of any ufological wisdom interpretation from Sturrock, you or
Rodeghier and Swords. The scientific review panel can and did
speak for themselves. I fail to understand what could be simpler
than a direct quote taken in context, but then again I am not
privy to the strong forces of faith which compel the ufological
wise to extremism in denial.

>>'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'.

What part of the above don't the ufological gullible understand?
The data presented won't get the cases anywhere. Inspite of a
nice try by the investigators, the ufological data presented
lacks scientific rigor. But, if new data, scientifically
acquired and analyzed, is gotten [In other words, develop new
methodologies, get rigorous in your treatment of the new data,
and do real science] maybe it COULD yield useful information.
This is what the real world, the scientific community, and all
the skeptics have been saying for decades. What is so fantastic
about these revelations?

>One of the problems, of course, is that the cases were old,
>the trails cold in many cases. Panel members expressed
>interest in these cases and were clearly puzzled by some, yet
>frustrated for the reason just stated.

If I remember correctly, Condon didn't want to look at old cases
either and for the same reasons just stated, but what did he
know.

>On the other hand, these cases would not have been investigated
>at all if not for the dedicated (though institutionally
>unsupported) work of heroic civilian researchers - whose
>efforts, by the way, McDonald validated as he reviewed the work
>of civilian researchers when he got interested in UFO study.

McDonald has been buried for almost three decades. There is
nothing that he did that is of any consequence to the cases that
were presented to the review team. If ufology hasn't been
standing still since the Oberg paper, as I have been contending
it has, why this dependency on the great McDonald? Did
scientific ufology die with McDonald? Apparently so!

>It is certain that he would have disagreed with the pessimistic (or
>cautious) assessments of some on the Sturrock panel on these old
>cases. It is also true that McDonald's involvement was far more
>extensive than that of anyone on the panel. McDonald, after all,
>spent an immense amount of time investigating and
>reinvestigating cases, retracing the steps of both civilian and
>military inquirers, and he expressed the highest regard for the
>documentation top-flight investigators such as Walt Webb, Ray
>Fowler, Bill Weitzel, Ted Bloecher, and others produced.

1) He was the first to admit there was no proof for the ETH. 2)
It is ludicrous to suggest what he might of thought of ufology
in the nineties, having died in the early seventies. One thing
is certain, he would have not stood still in his accessments.
For all anyone knows, he might have reached complete opposite
oppinions once cases were further investigated or he may have
reached the same level of disgust for ufology that Allan Hendry
also did and quit the field altogether realizing there was
nothing he could do. No one knows, and any conjecture is simply
irrelevant. What is relevant is that almost three decades later,
ufological wisdom hasn't moved forward at all still dependent on
the great McDonald on the hopes that the mention of his name and
reputation helps inflate ufological wisdom's positional
arguments.

>Here, I think, McDonald was more likely to be correct than the
>panel members, but I certainly don't object in principle to
>their caution. It's just that on this particular matter,
>McDonald was the one with the expertise and, consequently,
>probably the one we should be listening to. In any event, no
>doubt a moot point at this stage. Still, Phillips's forthcoming
>work on the Delphos CE2 and Sparks's on the RB-47 radar/visual
>are powerful evidence of what a dedicated investigator can do
>with even an old case.

Okay, the A-team of the best ufologists with the best cases had
a dismal showing. Let's send in the B-team of the best
ufologists with the second best cases. It is apparent the high
priests of ufological wisdom still don't get it.

Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific
review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs
new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies
if it hopes ever to get out of its pit.

> What is crucial, as is said above, is that new cases - when the
>experience and evidence are fresh - be investigated
>_immediately_, this time with the full institutional support of
>science. That's what the panel wants, and that's what all
>serious ufologists want.

The scientific review panel didn't say "with the full institutional
support of science." It said:

        "But new data, scientifically acquired and analyzed,
could yield useful information and advance our understanding of
the UFO problem, the panel said'.


The implication being that the process of science can be done by
anyone.

>See panel member Prof. Eshleman's
>remarks, which all of us can endorse, below:

>>'The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence
>>presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or
>>causes of the reports.

After one month of ad hominens, straw men, and red herrings,
Jerome Clark seems to agree with the above which was part of my
original contention and a direct quote from the review panel.

>>However, the panel considers that new
>>data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well
>>documented, recurrent events), could yield useful information.

Also from the review panel but so what? It is so basic of a
statement it doesn't say anything. How many of you would object
to the truism of the above if we were talking about the
recurrent mating habits of homosexual Florida alligators? The
point is that any data, scientifically acquired and analyzed
COULD yield useful information regardless of subject. So what?

>>In this case, physical scientists would have an opportunity to
>>contribute to the resolution of the UFO problem.'

In other words: ufology, clean up your act and get scientific so
that we may assist you.

>>My personal conviction is that we have to proceed along with
>>priorities. If the means are given to work professionally,

Here is the old my-hands-are-tied-and-I-can't-seem-to-get-up
school of ufological wisdom.

>>there
>>is still an interest in re-visiting several of the existing
>>cases and the related evidence, either on a case by case basis
>>(e.g. photographic documents), or from a statistical point of
>>view. But the choice (good or bad) of the cases presented in
>>Pocantico was such that effectively little would have to be
>>expected from new studies of those cases, of which many are
>>already pretty old.

And what cases would those be? Not the ones presented at
Pocantico. They told the best ufologists to pack up those cases.
If not those, what is meant by 're-visiting'? It should be
obvious that the cases referenced here have not been visited in
the first place by the scientific review panel to be
're-visited'.

>Note the remark about "revisiting several of the existing cases
>and the related evidence," indicating that panel members found
>such cases intriguing and even, all the cautious asides aside,
>conceivably amenable to further, potentially profitable study.
>These remarks underscore the point that the panel did not
>dismiss out of hand the significance of these reports, as (or so
>I gather from a not very clearly stated argument) Stewart and
>Easton would want us to believe.

But the review panel did dismiss out of hand the cases that were
reviewed.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:05:49 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:28:05 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:56:02 -0600
>From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

>Hello all,

>People going off on tangents is not an ideal situation for any
>List. I will not make it a point to specify who but the idea of
>becoming disgruntled over an email message makes you wonder what
>that same person would do if stuck in traffic. A little 'falling

>People, what do we do? Go to Webster and say; 'Hey Web, We have
>all agreed to change the acronym UFO to WHITT. Just state it as -
>WHITT formerly UFO in the dictionary. Thanks.'. This terminology
>has been around far too long. If UFO was quoted recently, it
>would be possible, perhaps, to change it. But now it's like
>changing the word 'water' to 'crude'. Folks will still call it
>'water'.

>What's in a name. It's just a tag, an identifier that's all. As
>an individual, call it as you will, but it will still mean the
>same.

>Donnie 'WHITT' S... :)
> dshevlin1.vcf


Actually, Donnie,

UFO is a relatively receint name...I believe it came in to
popular use in the Mid to late 60's. I may be wrong...someone
help me out here if I am wrong.

Previous to this they were called "Flying Saucers." Yet as the
subject became more expansive in it's scope, it was decided that
the name should be changed to UFO; since any Unidentified Flying
Object might not be a flying Saucer, but a "Flying Saucer,"
would be an object which implied a "spaceship" from elsewhere.

I don't know that that was a true assumption, however, it is an
understandable reason for using the present term which is just
one of many..."ifo, identified flying object; uao, unidentified
aerial object; uwo, under water object; etc."

Take care Donnie..

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 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:55:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:30:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


>From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:09:08 -0500
>Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:17:01 -0500
>Subject: Re: Need info -R U Shooting Blanx?-


Previously, Susan Balwin wrote:

<snip>

>I live in one of the fastest growing areas in the US now and am
>personally tired of seeing forests replaced with shopping malls,
>subdivisions and all the necessities of a growing population.
>Where I grew up (Wash. DC) you would be hard pressed to find any
>part of the woods or even open areas I and my brothers played
>in....I am sick of it. The house lots have gotten smaller so
>they can cram more houses on less land which means all the trees
>have to go.

>I am wandering from the point of the original comment which was,
>are the UFO's in some fashion responsible for sterility or is it
>natures way of solving a problem? I see overpopulation as a
>problem.

<snip>

I must agree with Susan.

Overpopulation not only affects the amount of resources and land
consumed, it also affects our quality of life. When I was a kid,
we had hours to do nothing but swing on the front gate and watch
the cows. If we ran as hard as our small legs would carry us,
we'd run out of breath long before we ever saw a stranger or,
sometimes, even a good neighbor. Education is such a concern for
many people. However, many often underestimate the true
inspirational and educational value of a forest before it
becomes pages in a textbook on Sociology. Ironic, isn't it?

Regarding the true topic of this thread; the terms "sterility"
and "infertility" seem to be tossed about as the same thing and
they are not. "Sterility" is a physical medical defect unique to
a specific person;i.e. that person cannot produce sperm or egg
at all. "Infertility" is a general term most often used to
describe couples unable to bear children, even if each person is
not necessarily sterile.

I'm not sure exactly what relationship UFOs and aliens, etc.
might have to each. Just thought I'd clear things up a bit for
the discussion.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Higher Consciousness

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:21:42 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:44:35 -0500
Subject: Re:  Higher Consciousness


>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:19:46 -0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Christine Fernandes <pumpkin@alfa.netfly.com.br>
>Subject: Higher consciousness

>[FYI - _not_ for discussion --ebk]

>I tried try very hard to read all the mail that I receive on the
>subject, but unfortunately something is constantly crossing my
>thoughts: A lot of the disputes here presented are at times pure
>ego talk, I mean who is right or wrong... Who cares..., don't
>you all see that this sort of attitude defeats the whole purpose
>of the reason why we have these talks in the first place.

>People, this whole Extraterrestrial introduction is something
>major, something unprecedented in our lifetime, is Earth asking
>for help, people changing values, coming together to become a
>loving planet, a planet compatible with the Love, God, Creating
>Forces, Buddha or whatever name you decide to give it.

>I'd be so very glad to start receiving different information,
>like how much people all over the world are  growing as humans,
>individuals, and yes, not afraid to say as Light Beings put on
>this planet at this particular time for a reason, with a mission
>urging to be awaken and a memory eager to be restored.

>Please, if anyone is reading this take two seconds to think of
>what I just said, it may, as we say here in Brazil, "cair a
>ficha" (which translates to "ring the bell").

>Sorry if you don't relate at all to what I'm saying. I could go
>further into the subject but maybe is not time yet, or the
>vehicle.

>Thanks for the attention,

>Christine Fernandes


I salute you Christine...

Your thoughts are loving and selfless...it is grand to see
such a lovely person post on this mail list.

You are correct, this mail list has/is "full of itself,"
for the most part.

Peace, My Peace I give unto You, Christine, and anyone
else who will accept it.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                      'Extraterrestrial' Search Engine

From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:13:59 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:56:04 -0500
Subject: 'Extraterrestrial' Search Engine


From: klaatu <klaatu@earthops.org>

Regarding the search-engine at

http://earthops.org/Harvest/brokers/Extraterrestrial

ExtraTerrestrial Broker Statistics

There are 986 objects in the database from 170 Internet server(s),
including:

      http://www.ufomind.com/ (236 objects)
      http://www.geocities.com/ (161 objects)
      http://unix.ltlb.com/ (52 objects)
      http://www.hwg.org/ (43 objects)
      http://ww2.audionet.com/ (37 objects)
      http://www.cseti.org/ (36 objects)
      http://caus.org/ (32 objects)
      http://www.amazon.com/ (26 objects)
      http://www.broadcast.com/ (22 objects)
      http://www.renaissoft.com/ (20 objects)
      http://users1.ee.net/ (17 objects)

Collection occurs every 24 hours, at 00:41.

The broker checks for expired objects every 12 hours.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Each "object" is a web-page, text document, or FTP file which
has been indexed.

We will be expanding the search parameters shortly, to index
more sites.

If you have a site dealing with UFO, alien encounters, or data
on such encounters, please send mail to harvest@earthops.org and
I'll try to get your site indexed.

We would prefer such sites as tend to "stick to the facts" - we
also have a search engine that deals more with earthly
abductions, cults, conspiracy theories and suchlike located at

http://earthops.org/Harvest/brokers/Arcana






    Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
          Re-transmission of this e-mail expressly prohibited.
  Non-UseNet re-transmission of this article is a willful violation of US
 Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00
Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow.      http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:13:11 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:05:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 10:07:02 PDT

>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>They did and I might add at the invitation of Carl Sagan.

>Who, as I have already pointed out, stacked the deck with
>skeptics and debunkers, who knew little or nothing about the UFO
>phenomenon.

Was that the reason only ufo believers were allowed to present
'the best ufo evidence' and not a single skeptic invited to
participate before the Sturrock scientific review panel? I
wonder what the reaction was among the scientific review panel?
'Hey guys, we are only hearing one side of the story, have you
noticed?'

>>>Morrison, on the other hand, had - by his own
>>>admission - no more familiarity than casual reading of
>>>unspecified UFO literature (George Adamski? Frank Edwards?
>>>Brinsley le Poer Trench?). In no other field than UFO-bashing
>>>would this sort of ignorance qualify one as an expert.

Philip Morrison was and still is one of the premier physicists
in the world having worked on the Manhattan Project during WWII.
He is a recognized authority on science and there is hardly
anyone better qualified to speak on the scientific method and
science than Morrison. Unless you wish to make a case from the
old
ufology-is-special-and-it-requires-special-handling-and-dispensa
tion school of ufological wisdom as to why science is not the
proper venue for insvestigation of ufological cases?

>>Morrison's paper was on the nature of scientific evidence, and
>>not as Jerome Clark's continued abuse of facts and historical
>>perspective implies, on the nature of ufological evidence. If
>>Jerome Clark wants to make a case for Philip Morrison not being
>>qualified to address the nature of scientific evidence, please
>>do so but don't mislead readers with your otherwise false
>>diatribes.

>As I have said, as Morrison himself admitted, he knew nothing -
>or, at best, very little - about the UFO and was therefore
>unqualified to talk about how it related to anything, including
>the nature of scientific evidence. Hynek and McDonald rightly
>complained that people like Morrison had no business on the
>panel. But then, of course, Sagan had the deck stacked, and that
>was the point - even if it continues to sail past the point on
>Ed's head.

Why are you so scared of people like Morrison and Sagan? You
keep saying they stacked the deck, they stacked the deck. What
do you call the Sturrock panel then? At least Sagan, who at the
time was willing publically to call for a wait-and-see attitude
among his scientific colleagues, invited the best of the best
ufologists (Hynek and McDonald) to participate. Who was at
Pocantico to argue against the cases presented? If anyone wants
to make a case for stacking decks, the Sturrock panel takes the
cake hands down. <G>

>>>Hynek
>>>and McDonald rightly objected to Morrison's claim to expertise
>>>or insight, and I suspect most people would.

>>Really? Just above you state that Morrison himself 'admitted' he
>>was unfamiliar with the UFO data, but with a stroke of the
>>keyboard, when it seems to please your argument, you say that
>>Morrison claimed expertise which was allegedly objected to by
>>Hynek and McDonald, but you fail to quote and provide a source.
>>So Clarkish! Exactly what did Hynek and McDonald object to? His
>>paper on the nature of scientific evidence? Or his good looks
>>and reputation? I would be interested in reading in context
>>these alleged objections. Please provide references that can be
>>independently verified. Nothing personal.

<snip>- no reference provided by Jerome Clark.

>Hynek and McDonald objected, as I do, to Morrison's lack of
>knowledge about the UFO phenomenon - as, being a trifle less
>obtuse than Ed Stewart, they damn well should have. Amusingly,
>Morrison cites as "evidence" against UFOs a few anecdotal
>accounts of mistaken observations.

Really? And what were those accounts? Please provide a reference
that can be independently verified? It wasn't from his paper on
the nature of scientific evidence presented at the conference;
what are you referencing? Your fans want to know.

>And here Ed was lecturing us
>not long ago, in his characteristic snarl, about the utter
>worthlessness of anecdotal accounts.

Really? Why the entire thread is archived and on record. Cite
the specific message where I lectured 'about the utter
worthlessness of anecdotal accounts'. I strongly suspect that
your intellectual dishonesty has now reached the level of lying
through your teeth. Why you keep making an ass out of yourself
is beyond me, but believe me, I am the last one to want to see
you stop. Please quote in context the alleged message where I
said the above? Since this thread is so recent and archived on
the record I will assume if you can't provide a reference in
context, that you are nothing but a lowdown scum of a liar who
has no scruples for intelligent dialogue. Your fans await you to
prove me wrong.

>That being the case, dude,
>I am at a loss to understand why you are now asking us to take
>Morrison seriously. But no one has ever accused you of launching
>a coherent argument, I realize. You use whatever's convenient at
>the moment of the rant.

I have already stated my reasons why I consider Morrison's paper
so germaine to solving ufology's woes, but since you are not
part of any solution for ufology I don't ever expect you to
understand and always to be at a total loss. But people that
have taken my advice and on their own have read the paper,
undestand its true value to ufology.

>Hynek's and McDonald's complaints were made in various forums
>about which Ed, as a bibliographer, ought to know but of which
>he pretends ignorance. I'll let him twist slowly in the wind and
>see where else he goes with this before being more specific.
>This should be fun.

If you think that not providing references for your claims is
fun, guess again. It is just more evidence to the hundreds and
probably thousands of readers who will be accessing this thread
for the next couple of years as to your continuous intellectual
dishonesty. Of course, you don't have to provide any. It all
depends on whether you want to be remembered by UFO buffs online
as credible or not? Back up your statements or retract them?
It's that simple. Your fans would love to see you prove me
wrong. Let's see those references in context.

>>I gather since you chose to ignore and not to respond to the
>>part of Barry Greenwood's response:

>In fact, I wrote a response to Greenwood, who did not see fit to
>publish it - which is his right, after all; it's his magazine.
>Why, if you're interested, Ed, don't you write Barry and ask for
>a copy of my letter?

Because we are here online and the challenge to you is today,
now and here. Your online fans await your response.


    " If Sagan were off base in his negative views on alien
visitation, then one case, only one example need be provided to
prove so. Which one is it? Or several? Do you care to put
yourself on the line on this matter?" --- Barry Greenwood


>I like Barry Greenwood, who's a gentleman and a friend. But his
>powers of analysis have failed him here, as he highlights the
>central problem of the Sagan approach, which would not even be
>thought of (or, if thought of, laughed out of court) if applied
>to any other scientific question, namely:

Laughed out of court? Since when is the ETH a question to be
resolved in a court and not resolved by scientific evidence?

>With practically no scientific work conducted to answer the
>question one way or another, Sagan uses the absence of "proof"
>(whatever that is) of ET visitation - something that could be
>found, if it is there, only at the end of a serious, well-funded
>investigation - as a reason not to conduct scientific research
>on UFOs. Incredible.

I see. The old
my-hands-are-tied-behind-my-back-and-I-can't-seem-to-get-up
school of ufological wisdom coupled with the
show-me-the-money-I'll-show-you-ET school of ufological wisdom.
Let's not forget the ole
what-do-you-mean-it-is-my-hypothesis-and-the-burden-of-proof-fal
ls-on-me school of ufological wisdom. It appears to me that I
see a pattern emerging among exponents of ufological wisdom.
They seem to be more anti-science then actually pro-ufo! Maybe I
should add an e to your name and call you Clarke. It looks like
you can use the extra weight since you carry so many chips on
your shoulders.

>For a bunch of solid cases, see the list of puzzling, documented
>sightings Mark Cashman provided you a few days ago

So what? The best ufologists haven't been able to convince
anyone outside the choir of their alleged significance to any
hypothesis, much less the ETH.

>or else go to my UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed.,
>and look up the following entries, since you don't seem to know
>much about this subject. These entries address many of the best
>cases on which rests the argument that UFOs may be extraordinary
>anomalies (conceivably under somebody's intelligent control;
>"alien visitation, "earth lights," and the rest, however, are
>theories to be taken up aside from the body of suggestive data
>below)

How silly of me. The answer is in Jerome Clarke's encyclopedia!
Did you ask LR and Sturrock to provide a copy to each member of
the scientific review panel just as back-up if it was needed? If
they had your encyclopedia, look at all the different it might
have made?

>; Sagan, by the way, avoided mentioning nearly all of
>them in his various writings on the UFO phenomenon. Gee, I
>wonder why.

The Sagan of the AAAS procedings called for a wait and see
attitude until more could be found. That was a quarter of
century ago.

>Arnold Sighting
>BOAC Sighting
>Cash-Landrum CE2
>Chiles-Whitted Sighting
>CE1s
>CE2s
>CE3s
>Coyne CE2
>Cressy Sighting
>Damon CE2
>Daylight Discs
>Delphos CE2
>Dr. X Case
>Everglades CE2
>Exeter CE1
>Falcon Lake CE2
>Fishersville CE2
>Fort Monmouth Radar/Visual Case
>Gill CE3
>Green Fireballs and Other Southwestern Lights
>Hessdalen Lights
>Hill Abduction Case
>Iran CE2
>Itaipu Fortress Incident
>JAL Sighting
>Kelly-Hopkinsville CE3
>Kinross Case
>Kuwait Sightings
>Lakenheath-Bentwaters Radar/Visual Case
>Langenburg CE2
>Lavonia CE2
>Laxson CE3
>Levelland Sightings
>Lubbock Lights
>McMinnville Photos
>Marshall County CE2
>Montana Film
>Moore Case
>Morocco Sightings
>Muroc Air Base Sightings
>Nash-Fortenberry Sighting
>New Zealand Film
>Ocala Radar/Visual Case
>Portage County Sightings
>Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14
>RB-47 Radar/Visual Case
>Red Bluff Sightings
>Ririe CE3
>Salt Lake City Sighting
>Senator Russell Sighting
>Socorro CE2/CE3
>Stonehenge CE3
>Tombaugh Sighting
>Trans-en-Provence CE2
>Trindade Island Photographs
>Utah Film
>Valensole Disappearance
>Washington National Radar/Visual Case
>Westchester Sightings

All those cases and not a single one that compells the
scientific community to scratch its nose. How sad! You don't
think it is because they all lack what Philip Morrison
suggested: a chain of evidence independentely verified all data
points linked together, now do you?

<G>

>After you've read all of these entries, my good-natured friend,
>go to McDonald's many monographs, most based on his personal
>investigations of many puzzling cases. Read (since you seem not
>to have read it before) such seminal works as Ruppelt, Hynek,
>Jacobs's UFO Controversy, Gross's valuable monographs, and so
>on.

Do I then get to become a member of the choir?

>And then maybe, if you haven't learned better by then, you'll be
>able to mount some marginally sensible response to me


Oh, I see! The old
I-know-more-than-you-do-therefore-I-am-not-going-to-answer-your-
question school of ufological wisdom.  Why is it so hard to
admit? I, Jerome Clark, like the rest of my ufological wisdom
colleagues, do not have compelling evidence/proof of the ETH,
but I am compelled to continue globbbering Sagan, et al for
stating the obvious because the ufological gullible needs a
sacrificial lamb for the dismal shape that ufology finds itself
in.

After all, if we don't keep the attention on Sagan, Condon,
Menzel, et al for our woes, the ufological gullible someday may
turn on its very own high priests!

Cheers!

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
  Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:28:22 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:08:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 22:42:17 PDT

>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:37:51 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Anyway, anybody who admits openly to admiring John Keel is
>really not somebody who ought to be pointing fingers at others
>for their silly ideas.

In case readers of this mailing list are not aware, John Keel
writes a monthly column for FATE magazine titled "Beyond The
Known" where he provides insights and humor into many subjects,
of which ufology happens to be one of them.

One of his many books 'UFOs: Operation Trojan Horse' has been
reprinted and available through major bookstores. Associate
editor of IUR and Jerome Clark's co-worker, George M. Eberhart,
gave this book the coveted double asterick "**" as a  major must
read book in his classic bibliographical masterpiece.

Ed Stewart

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:58:48 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:12:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:20:56 +0200
>Subject: Mitchell: Secret Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

>From: gerry [mailto:ed@farshore.force9.co.uk]
>Sent: Sunday, October 25, 1998 4:29 AM
>To: Skywatch International
>Subject: Ed Mitchell's Latest Interview

>Source: The People [London]
>Date: Oct 25 1998
>Header: Yes, Aliens Really Are Out There Says the Man on the Moon

>Former astronaut Edgar Mitchell is one of only 12 people to have
>walked on the moon.

>A highly-intelligent scientist, Edgar caused a sensation at a
>UFO conference in America this month when he claimed he has seen
>proof that aliens exist.

>In 1971, Edgar became the sixth person to walk on the moon. Now
>68, he works as a consultant to the hugely popular
>science-fiction TV series The X Files.
>>In an exclusive interview from his Florida home, Edgar told JOHN
>EARLS why he is convinced there is life on other planets and
>that aliens have, in fact, landed on Earth.

>I AM an American astronaut and a trained scientist. Because of
>my position people in high places confide in me.

<snip>

>extra-terrestrial. I'd love to see one, though it's not the
>biggest priority in my life.

>But, as they say on a TV show I'm associated with, the truth is
>out there.

==============================================>

It makes one wonder why Mr. Mitchell has not been interviewed by
the "legitimate" American press.

An admission of this nature should be supervened by tremendous
headlines. This is real news.

Anyone understand the reason for the quietude in the media over
this revelartion??? It illudes me!

Perhaps it is because Mr. Mitchell is associated with New Age
groupies? It never fails, does it?

Draw into the mouth through a suction force produced by
movements of the lips and tongue, just one rigid mass; just ONE
LOUSY RIGID MASS! And for the rest of your life you will be
known as a preson who draws into the mouth through a suction
force produced by movements of the lips and tongue - er.

Dr. Jaime Gesundt





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                   SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI?

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:51:59 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:20:39 -0500
Subject: SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI?


I got on the track of this thanks to a message posted to
"alt.ufo.reports" on October 26. The message from the SETI
discussion forum is at the end. Unfortunately the downloading of
the graph pictures is very slow, so I have given it up for the
present.

*******

SETI signals at 1450Mhz from EQ Pegasi?=BF

Author: seticontact
Email: seticontact@my-dejanews.com
Date: 1998/10/26
Forums: alt.tv.x-files, alt.fan.art-bell, alt.ufo.reports

At

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193

is a message I found posted on the SETI discussion forum today.
It reads like something out of science fiction but to the best
of my knowledge it's true: Apparently Jodrell Bank is looking
into this. Oh yeah, the .GIFs mentioned in the message are on
this website:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193

*******

And here's the page.

Stig

***


Pictures of SETI Signals from unknown engineer in the UK.

(Picture) October 22, 1998 21:13 UTC

(Picture) October 23, 1998 21:17 UTC

I have contacted the engineer and requested more information.
One thing of interest is that the position of these signals
coincides (roughly) with the position of a star named EQ Pegasi
which is about 22 light years away in the constellation Pegasus.
The SETI Institute thought they might have picked up signals
from this star back on September 17th and their description of
the events that followed is here (link).

Here is the text of the message that appeared on the SETI email
forum 10-26-98:

<Begin Quote>

Several days ago I sent the message below to the executive
director and the "Hits" list without a response. (This may be
due to me not being a member of the SETI League). I am very
excited about this yet it seems no one at the SETI League
leadership is interested so I send this along to the members and
appeal to them to help confirm this interesting signal. I have
tried sending this several times all to no avail. This is my
last attempt as I think I may be censored.

Message follows:



Hello,


I am sending this along to inform you of a possible SETI Hit.
First let me state, I am *NOT* a member of the SETI League for
reason's I would rather not go into. I have however been
conducting Amateur SETI for little over a year and a half. I am
an engineer at a major telecommunications firm in England and I
have for the last year conducted SETI from one of the large (10
Meter) dishes we have here that was taken offline some years
ago. This is a "parasitic" experiment and no one around here
knows I mounted a 2nd feedhorn on the dish due to the fact that
I am the engineer.

The station is as follows:

One 10 Meter dish ----> into a custom built (by me) 1450 Mhz
Feedhorn >-----> into a custom built (again by me) -----> a
"waterhole" filter (again designed and built by yours truly)
-----> an Inmarsat LNA with about 25db gain ----->an ICOM R7100
whose output is sent to two Pentium II's (one running SETIFOX,
the other FFTDSP42).

Here is what happened: On 22 Oct 1998 at about 21:13UTC FFTDSP
logged a "Hit". Whilst I was working outside the signal faded
into view. I looked at the FFTDSP screen when I came inside to
take a break to find the last bit of signal trailing into
static. I quickly used the REPLAY.EXE program to replay the data
to find what you see in the gif file HIT.GIF. The antenna was
pointed at RA: 23 degrees 31 minutes 48 seconds (approx.),
Declination: 19 Hours 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx.).

Several times during my shift I moved the antenna to that
position but the signal did not reappear. Today 23 Oct 1998 at
approximately the same time (21:17UTC in this case) the same
signal was picked up at the same RA and declination. I had come
in prepared to check again for the signal. Between last night
and tonight I checked out all equipment to ensure it was in good
health so you can imagine my excitement when SETIFOX alerted me
at about the same time that it detected a carrier. I had FFTDSP
logging the data again and you can see by looking at HIT02.GIF
the signal did almost the exact same thing as the night before.
I hurried to move the antenna off the source and when I did so
the signal went away I moved it back on and lo and behold there
it was. I ran two more on-source, off-source tests of this type
before finally keeping it onsource by putting the antenna in
tracking mode. I during this time I recorded several minutes of
data in the form of a .WAV file to disc.

Now that said, I am very reluctant to give my name due to the
nature of my work and the fact that my supervisors know nothing
of my SETI endeavor. I have a wife and kids and don't want to
risk my job unless I know for sure this is the real thing. I was
hoping your lot could check it out over the weekend since I will
be unable to take data during my days off. I don't risk having
the programs running when I am not there just in case someone
from the company comes nosing around. Anyway if this sequence
occurs again Monday or Tuesday I will alert Jodrell Bank, and
the media (BBC, CNN,Skynews, and the like) due to the fact that
I don't trust many people, SETI folks included. (No offense
meant)

73's (I'd give my call but that would give me away.)

So I'll just sign this, anonymous (for 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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:50:42 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:25:17 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:03:13 -0800
>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change

>Been there, done that.

>Having been around the UFO scene for a longer while than most, I
>should point out that the push for a name change has been with
>us for some time. We should remember that one of the reasons UFO
>was coined in the first place was because the USAF thought
>'flying saucer' was too descriptive and inaccurate for sighting
>reports. See how that turned out.

>Now, we want to change the term again in the hope that UAP won't
>be equated with LGM. Sorry, it won't matter. The media will
>never accept the new term, and most of popular ufology will
>continue to use UFO rather than UAP.

>What's more, if you do a literature search for this in
>scientific archives, you'll find that UFO was already replaced
>by TOPA (Transient Optical Phenomena of the Atmopshere). This
>happened in a scientific paper in either JRAS or JRASC (I can't
>remember which at the moment) by a scientist who was reporting
>his own personal sighting and wanted to differentiate his
>"objective" account from the riff-raff he and his peers were
>reading in the tabloids.

>His suggestion was ignored completely.

When this idea was first put forward I figured it to be a light
hearted suggestion and entered into the discussion with that in
mind. Let's not treat this too seriously. It seems to have taken
on a life of its own.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:05:15 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:36:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:13:11 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 01:43:09 EST
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:37:24 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Ed Stewart repeats several times that there is no document
>>showing that the ETH will not be considered, after the rejection
>>of the Estimate of the Situation (EOTS). Here is the end of the
>>message:

>If I may repeat myself. No document has ever been found outlining the
>rejection of the ETH as Air Force policy.  The ETH was rejected by
>Vandenburgh because there was no evidence/proof supporting it in the
>alleged EOTS.

<snip>

Yes, _snip_. Because I don't think any of this is worth
repeating. To me it's a little like what Egg Foo Young does to
my digestion... it keeps repeating it's foul taste ad
neauseum...

>Quiz for today has been cancelled so a foothold can be gained on
>the ongoing research into the recently detected conspiracies.
>Those that forgot their Jerome Clark encyclopedia, fall out.

>Ed Stewart

Sir...

Put your books away and take out a piece of paper and a pencil.
Today's pop quiz has only ONE question. It will count on your
final exam, Ed.  So consider your answer carefully, OK?

What is the temperature of the sand?

I'll give you a hint. The sand you appear to have your head
buried in.

Jim





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             -[For The Record]- Online Resources For Researchers

From: Rod Brock <rodbrock@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 15:28:16 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:44:08 -0500
Subject: -[For The Record]- Online Resources For Researchers


Greetings, list,

In the quest to make my life a little easier, I have for some
time been searching for online resources such as dictionaries,
glossaries, etc., for quick lookup of terms, foreign, and
otherwise.  Here are couple resources that some individuals on
this list might find useful:


'A Web of Online Dictionaries' - This is the most comprehensive
resource page of this type I have found. It contains links to
dictionaries, word-lists, etc., in more than 150 different
languages, including multi-lingual dictionaries. It must be seen
to be believed - there is an amazing amount of reference
material  here.

http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/rbeard/diction.html


'Reference Desk' - This contains links to dictionaries and
glossaries from a host of scientific disciplines. There are also
links to  useful pages dealing with measurement conversion,
acronym finder, and so on. You will even find Strunk's 'Elements
of Style' online, here.

http://www.eurekalert.org/resources/definitions.html


'The Net Advance of Physics' - alphabetical links to papers on
various topics in physics.

http://web.mit.edu/redingtn/www/netadv//


'History of Physics' - many, many links to potentially useful
topics.

http://web.mit.edu/redingtn/www/netadv/hist.html

Have fun,
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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Michel M. Deschamps <739411@ican.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:05:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:00:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:05:10 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights

>>>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>>Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights [was: Failure Of The 'Science'...]

If only you guys would go and listen to the Phoenix Lights
eyewitness accounts reported on the Art Bell show (RealAudio
files # linda011298.ra and linda011298b.ra), all this talk about
"flares" would cease immediately.


Michel M. Deschamps
UFO Researcher/Historian
739411@ican.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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Michel M. Deschamps <739411@ican.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:28:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:07:02 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: UFO name change.
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:34:52 PDT

<snip>

>>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>>To: <Aussiepost@listbot.com>
>>Subject: UFO name change.
>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:29 +0930

>>The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -

>http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

>>It has been suggested by Hal Mckenzie, I believe, that the name
>>'UFO' be changed to 'Off World Craft' (OWC) to remove the stigma
>>associated with the former, it also removes associations with
>>natural unidentified objects.

<snip>

Too many folks are accustomed to hear the term "UFO".

When I say "UFO", I refer to the definition given by Edward
Ruppelt who "invented" the term. He came up with it because
there were many unusual objects from 'someplace else'
(interplanetary) that were reported to be of different shapes
other than the typical saucer shape.

In the early days, 'UFO' meant 'some type of unknown object from
outside the earth'. But nowadays, the term 'UFO' is a
free-for-all. People will tell me: "Yeah, you say you saw a UFO.
But if it were investigated further, you would find that what
you saw was a....weather balloon, or a...satellite!"...or an
airplane, or this, or that.

Well, that's bull! I think Ruppelt had it right, and we've
forgotten that. "UFO" is good enough for me. I should know
because I've had 14 separate sightings since 1974; each
different in shape and appearance than the others, plus
_no_sound_, and _definitely_ weren't from earth. That, I'm
absolutely sure of.

Michel M. Deschamps
UFO Researcher/Historian
739411@ican.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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                         Re: Filer's Files #41-1998

From: Rebecca <XianneKei@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:33:24 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:12:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #41-1998


>Subj:  UFO UpDate: Filer's Files #41-1998
>Date:  98-10-27 00:25:53 EST
>From:  updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)

>FILER'S FILES

>Filer's Files #41-1998
>MUFON Skywatch Investigations
>George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director,
>October 15, 1998
>Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020

<snip>

>OHIO

>AKRON: MUFON Photoanalyst Jeff Sainio writes, "I am
>currently analyzing a very interesting video case, and was
>wondering if anybody has investigated a case of a hovering
>inverted Tupperware bowl with a lighted bottom rim July 11,
>1998, over the Akron area?" It was observed for ten minutes
>in a populated area, so there is a good possibility of other
>witnesses." If any one has additional evidence or knowledge
>of this case please contact Jeff. Thanks to: Jeff Sainio
>jsainio@qgraph.com MUFON Staff Photoanalyst.

Hovering Tupperware in Ohio?

Could a mad housewife/husband be behind this?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                                Music & UFOs

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:14:51 -0500
Subject: Music & UFOs


Hi All,

This is purely for self interest.

Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Short & Sweet as they say.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                  Assessing The 'Estimate Of the Situation'

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:29:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:21:02 -0500
Subject: Assessing The 'Estimate Of the Situation'


I am posting this material as a separate thread as I incorrectly
posted an older, incomplete version of my commentary in the
Obergian Debunking thread where Stewart and Clark are
entertaining those who are easily distracted. If you are looking
for character attacks then resume your reading of their ongoing,
enlightening and amusing thread of personal attack and
counter-attack, the UFO equivalent of World Wide Wrestling
(WWW). Now lest anyone think that I don't appreciate WWW just
understand that I spent many, many hours watching it with my
grandfather who thoroughly loved the sport - he lived to 103 so
maybe it has a undiscovered gerentological benefit - time will
tell.

And so I begin:

There are three key sentences which have been omitted in most
discussions of the Estimate of the Situation. For readers
unfamiliar with Ruppelt after reading these sentences and
understanding their implications just ask yourself why the other
people discussing this issue have omitted this information from
the discussion. This way the next time you see these hypocrites
discussing the Estimate you will know where they are coming
from. The following is abstracted from some material I have
written to accompany my long in forthcoming index of Ruppelt's
"The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects".

Here are the index entries for the Ace Books edition:

Estimate of the Situation
an intelligence assessment of a vital problem.............58
batted down by General Vandenberg.........................64
concludes UFOs were interplanetary........................59
declassified and incinerated .............................64
ignored by Sidney Shallet.................................86
kicked back to ATIC.......................................66
proved that UFOs were real................................82


Here is a short abstract from the commentary included with the
soon to be published (as soon as Jimmy Hoffa is found) index of
The Report.

Copyright (C) 1998 Gary Alevy

Secret Documentation

There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
recent promises of de-classification. The Estimate of the
Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. Be certain to review
the Estimate's index entry for Ruppelt's discussion of this
legendary document. The Estimate was considered by its creators
at ATIC to contain "proof positive" of the reality of the UFO
and that they were interplanetary! Ruppelt discusses the
peculiar fate of this estimate, after noting that it was not
accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Hoyt
Vandenberg.

   The estimate died a quick death. Some months later it
   was completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator.
   A few copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of
   the golden days of the UFO's.

Readers familiar with the handling of secure documents will
recognize the unusual way this document was treated,
declassified and then destroyed. The declassification sent the
message that the document was not important. However, the
document was then destroyed. Notice the order in which this was
done, the declassification serving to indicate that the document
was a dead end, of no real relevance. At this point the document
could well have simply been released to the public, to Walter
Winchell for instance, or given to the officer's children for
paper airplanes. In other words once declassified it was
perfectly legal to own it and distribute it as widely as
possible. But these things were not done, were they? No, the
remaining copies were ordered BURNED, (so as to remove any
possibility of reconstruction?) and most were, though at least
one remained for Ruppelt, and others to see. No matter how you
look at it, the events surrounding the Estimate are unique.
Perhaps the burning was to prevent the KGB from obtaining the
information from the trash dumpsters, something shredding would
not necessarily preclude. In any event, all of this was done for
a document that had been declassified and, as was stated above,
could well have been made available to the world.

Also most interesting is that although "momento" copies
apparently were retained they too have never been made public,
in spite of the fact that several well-known UFO figures
examined surviving copies. This interesting footnote to the
history of Project Sign's Estimate of the Situation has been
documented by historian Loren Gross who compiled a list of
individuals who publicly acknowledged that they had read the
"momento copies". [15] All of these people would likely have had
top secret clearances with the requisite FBI field checks and
would very likely be signatories to security agreements given
their connections to the intelligence community. It is certainly
more than curious that Allen Hynek was unwilling to share a
declassified document with the public and speaks volumes about
the role that he really played in the UFO field. The bottom line
is none of these readers ever took it upon themselves to share
this declassified document with the public.

Don't miss Ruppelt's revelations about the role the Estimate
played in the battle of the pro and anti-UFO factions in the
military and intelligence communities. [16] Another document
discussed by Ruppelt has also yet to see the light of day, Major
Dewey Fournet's 'hot' motion analysis report that proved that
UFOs were under intelligent control. Like the Ark of the
Covenant in Raiders Of The Lost Ark, the "momento copies" and
Fournet's report are thought to exist but have not been seen
again. Their location is known only to a priesthood of keepers
of secrecy.


Endnotes
--------

 15 Gross, Loren E. UFOs: A History Volume 2: 1948. August -
December, 1948 pp. 51.
Port St. Lucie, Arcturus, 1988.

"Supporting testimony of the documents existence (Project Sign's
Estimate of the Situation) later came from Dr. J. Allen Hynek
who told West Coast journalist Robert B. Klinn and David Branch
in 1972 did not only did he know about the document, but that he
even had read. Keyhoe, evidently using the influence he had with
Dewey Fournet, got a peek at a three-page summary of the
"estimate" due to a sympathetic colonel in Air Force
intelligence."

16 Moynihan, Daniel P. (Chairman) The Commission on Protecting
and Reducing Government Secrecy
Senate Doc. 105-2
Washington, D.C. 1997.

On page XXXI of the Chairman's Foreword is a discussion which
documents how truly secret information in government which is
never intended to see the light of day is only transmitted
verbally and is never committed to paper and ink. This
discussion and example are provided below. Another relevant
example of the application of the verbal secrecy technique was
its utilization by General Leslie Groves for the development of
the atomic bomb during the Manhattan Project. With these
examples in mind we feel it is logical to deduce that there is
little to no hope for the smoking gun, secret single document to
reveal the UFO mystery, if Moynihan's discussion and the Grove's
example don't make clear why, then you'll never understand why.
What Moynihan's discussion does hold hope for is that research
and analysis can pull together a reasonable scenario based on
second tier docments, created by the the "grunts" stamping on
overtime; and human accounts. This is the path we are following
in this book; the key here is to have a clear understanding of
how intelligence bureaucracies work, possess a wide ranging
knowledge of the subject matter, in this case UFOs, and then
apply critical analysis to the relevant information with the
purpose of building the scenario mentioned above. Also see pages
8-9 of the Commission's report for an illuminating discussion of
the role of leaks and counterleaks in the struggle by proponents
and opponents in the establishment of contested policy. "It is
now almost routine for American officials of unquestioned
loyalty to reveal classified information as part of ongoing
policy disputes, with one camp leaking information in support of
a particular view, or to the detriment of another, or in support
of settled administration policy."

Does the history of the UFO field offer examples of leaks and
counterleaks? This conclusion is inescapable after careful
consideration of the information and misinformation that the
field nearly drowns in from time to time which has emanated from
government and quasi-governmental sources.


From page XXXI:

"Over the course of 80 years, notably in the later period, a
vast system of secrecy developed within the American Government.
So much that it has been termed a culture of secrecy. The system
grew so vast, however, that it began to appear unavailing.
Secrecy has been defined as "the compulsory withholding of
information, reinforced by the prospect of sanctions for
disclosure." Almost everything was declared secret; not
everything remained secret, and there were no sanctions for
disclosure. In the course of 1996, the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the United States Senate carried out a detailed
inquiry into the decision by the President not to object to the
shipment of arms to Bosnia by way of Croatia. A notable aspect
of this decision was that it was never put in writing. The
Deputy Secretary of State explained this to the Committee in
these terms:


  Another reason that diplomatic transactions and internal
deliberations do not end up on paper is because of the extreme
sensitivity of the subject matter. What goes down on paper is
more likely to come out in public, in inappropriate and harmful
ways, harmful to the national interest.


This, of course, is a privilege of the privileged within the
system. For the grunts the rule is stamp, stamp, stamp.

>From pages 8-9:

Secrecy can also have significant consequences for the
functioning of government itself. Information is power, and it
is no mystery to government officials that power can be
increased through controls on the flow of information. One
persistent problem in this context has been the intermingling of
secrecy used to protect carefully defined national interests
with secrecy used primarily to enhance such political or
bureaucratic power. This creates the potential that some
officials, welcoming insulation from outside scrutiny, will seek
means to develop and maintain secrecy beyond what is authorized
in a statute or regulation. (An example is when sources and
methods protection under the National Security Act is used to
deny access to information that does not reveal a particular
intelligence source or method.) Such actions obviously have
significant consequences for relationships between different
parts of government.

As the scope of secrecy grows and the system for protecting
secrets becomes more layered and complex, the prospect for
leaks-deliberate releases of classified information, nearly
always on an anonymous basis-grows as well. Secrets become
vulnerable to betrayal, often from high in the chain of command;
this in turn promotes greater disrespect for the system itself.
Those condemning leaks may, at the same time, be using them in
their own self-interest for any number of reasons (ranging from
the desire to gain a bureaucratic advantage to using leaks as
"trial balloons" for possible policy initiatives). The anonymous
leak, often at a senior level, "has become an important tool of
governing" and a form of "instant declassification" (although
the information leaked is likely to remain officially classified
notwithstanding its publication).

"Leaking has a symbiotic relationship with secrecy. Without
secrecy there would be no need to leak information. As
government secrecy grows and comes to involve more people, the
opportunities to leak from within expand; and with increased
leaking, governments intensify their efforts to shore up
secrecy."

                  Sissela Bok, Secrets

The leaking of secrets has important consequences for the
quality of information made available to the public, as well as
for the ability to verify the information. Leaking creates a
double standard that may, at times, pit political and career
government officials against one another. To the extent that
leaking gains any legitimacy, it complicates efforts to impose
sanctions on officials for overclassification or other abuses of
classification. Leaks that result in changes in policy would
appear to reward those within the Government whose motivations
may be the most dubious-not those interested in a more sustained
and consistent approach to promoting greater openness.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, leaking can greatly
damage the integrity of and public respect for the overall
classification system, including those efforts by the Government
to control the information that is most vital to the nation's
security. Leaks undermine the credibility of classification
policies and other restrictions on access to information, making
it harder to differentiate between secrecy that is needed to
protect highly sensitive national security information and that
which is not well-founded.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Rebecca <XianneKei@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:57:36 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:37:23 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:37:06 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

<snip>

>We have identified saucers in our skies that fly with
>intelligence. The debunkers demand that we know their origin,
>the nature and composition of the materials of their
>construction, their reason for being here and whatever else they
>see fit to demand in the service of their obtuseness, in order
>to consider them identified.

They do?

>UFO and Ufology are terms so wedded to the efforts of
>disinformation and subversion, they have to go.

Oh jeez.

>There are now six primary areas of study in the overall field.

>Sightings

yep.

>Animal Harvesting (Cattle Mutilation)

Nope

>Cereology (Crop Circles)

Not at all.

>Exo-Archeology/Astronomy (Cydonia, Giza, etc.)

Interesting, but not part of what UFOs are about.

>Government Posture (the politics of disclosure and cover-up)

nope

>Contact (abductions, 4th and 5th kind interactions)

only if sightings are involved.

It's the inclusion of all this crap that has mucked up the
field.

>The term Ufology is supposed to cover these fields. Sorry.
>That dog won't hunt.

Nope ufology is NOT supposed to cover those fields, not IMO.

>They need to go and we to stop apologizing to debunkers, the
>government, the media or anyone else for what we know from the
>evidence.

Ufology apologizes to debunkers?

>UFO and Ufology need to go.

>In my work I use the phrase "extraterrestrial related
>phenomena." If the odd reporter or editor or congressperson is
>offended by this, once again - tough.

And unless the "reporter" is Art Bell, they more than likely
think you are a nut.

UFO is the _perfect_ description for the phenomenon of
Unidentified Flying Objects. We don't know what they are or
where they come from.

Rebecca





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 01:01:46 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:41:46 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:37:06 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

>From time to time I ride my bicycle down to the end of the
>runway at Washington National Airport (can't bring myself to
>call it the Reagan National Airport) and watch the airliners
>roll in.

>You see them lined up in the distance making their approach
>turns.

>As I track one, I don't know the airline, don't know the name of
>the pilot, don't know how many passengers or their names, don't
>know from where it departed. But I know one thing, I know it is
>a plane. In that very important sense it is identified.

>We have identified saucers in our skies that fly with
>intelligence. The debunkers demand that we know their origin,
>the nature and composition of the materials of their
>construction, their reason for being here and whatever else they
>see fit to demand in the service of their obtuseness, in order
>to consider them identified.

>Tough.

>UFO and Ufology are terms so wedded to the efforts of
>disinformation and subversion, they have to go.

>There are now six primary areas of study in the overall field.

>Sightings
>Animal Harvesting (Cattle Mutilation)
>Cereology (Crop Circles)
>Exo-Archeology/Astronomy (Cydonia, Giza, etc.)
>Government Posture (the politics of disclosure and cover-up)
>Contact (abductions, 4th and 5th kind interactions)

>The term Ufology is supposed to cover these fields. Sorry.
>That dog won't hunt.

>Many members of the black community give up their "slave names"
>and replace them with names more appropriate and comfortable to
>how they see themselves in the world.

>UFO and Ufology are "slave names" - they are part of the
>nomenclature we used when we were, in too great a measure,
>unwilling participants in one of the most intricate and unique
>propaganda campaigns ever waged.

>They need to go and we to stop apologizing to debunkers, the
>government, the media or anyone else for what we know from the
>evidence.

>UFO and Ufology need to go.

>In my work I use the phrase "extraterrestrial related
>phenomena." If the odd reporter or editor or congressperson is
>offended by this, once again - tough.

>Steve Bassett
>Paradigm Research Group
>http://www.paradigmclock.com


They have to go?  To satisfy whom?  Blacks and slave names? To
satisfy whom?

If you use that analogy, the only people who feel better about
their comfortable names are the blacks themselves!  God damn it,
man.  They are still gonna be BLACK!  Get it?

It matters to no one, in my opinion at least, but those who have
the knee jerk reaction to the name.  What sort of dimbulb do you
think will look more favorably on a subject by virtue of the
name being changed to some esoteric bull dingy?

John Q. Public?  I don't think so.  For the simple reason that
no matter what you choose to call it, the debunkers will do
their thing anyway.  Whatever you choose to call the phenom, it
will not be able to satisfy _anyone_ that this subject now
merits greater respect, the people involved now merit greater
respect, because we call it something else.

Horse hockey!

And it is, once again in my opinion, a waste of time, bandwidth
and breath wondering what the hell to call this phenomenon.
Just as it a waste of mind to wonder over what to call a black
man whose name is Washington or Jefferson.  Doesn't matter.

What matters is content.  The name is strictly optional.  If one
imagines that by changing the name from UFO to Farfel Pippic
will matter one dot, then my good friend, change your name too.
For it will be remembered for it's lack of intestinal fortitude.

It's a little like a member of some religion or race or creed
trying to "Pass".   Remember that term?  Pass!  I'm a Jew, but I
will try to pass as a gentile because I will be respected more
in my community.  Or a Catholic.  Or an Eskimo.

Oh God.  Traffic is so light today.  It must be one of those
Eskimo religious holy days.

God man.  Join the ranks and stop trying to _pass_.  You are
either credible or you are not.  And it matters not one stinking
bit what the hell you call yourself.

Jim Mortellaro, Ph.D.

Are you impressed?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Gary <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:45:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:44:15 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?
>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 07:20:50 +1000

>Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
>tkbnetw@fan.net.au

>From: Peter & Lynette Johnson <prlfj@netyp.com.au>
>To: D Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?
>Date: Saturday, 24 October 1998 13:54

<snip>

>Where did the name UFO come from anyway?

>Peter J. :>)


One of the writers on this thread, Peter, recently asked where the
name UFO came from.  It is important to know how the terminology of
the UFO originated.  Once again one needs to look back to Edward J.
Ruppelt's seminal work "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects".

Below is another short abstract from the commentary included
with the soon to be published (as soon as Jimmy Hoffa is found)
of my index of The Report.


Copyright (C) 1998 Gary Alevy

Acronyms Can Both Simplify And Confuse

Ruppelt created the UFO terminology we use today.  This acronym,
UFO, has been the source of much confusion and consternation in
the field. Through his creation of the term "unidentified flying
object, UFO" Ruppelt forever changed the focus and understanding
of this phenomenon.  The acronym says that the study of this
phenomenon is about objects, things, that is, technology,
technical things flying around in the sky.  It focuses ones
attention on machines and what they are, not really who might be
flying them and what their purpose might be.  By his
incorporation of the term "unidentified" the semantic
distraction is complete, these objects will forever be
unidentified too.  Ruppelt is circumspect in going beyond the
boundaries of the vocabulary he created.  As an intelligence
officer he knows that although description and assessment of
technical devices is important, the primary objective of the
intelligence professional is to provide an assessment of the
capabilities and intentions of the people or agency employing
these devices.  This type of formal assessment is known in the
intelligence field as an estimate of the situation.  Ruppelt
never offers HIS estimate of the situation regarding UFOs in The
Report and its absence is telling.  He focuses on tertiary
issues, avoiding the critical issues of "who" is flying these
objects and "why" are they doing so.


Language a Double Edged Sword

Ruppelt was a master of one of the primary tools of the
intelligence officer, language.  True to his profession Ruppelt
carefully, craftily used language to both obfuscate as well as
clarify; this is evident throughout the book. The technique of
semantic distraction is powerful in ways which are not
immediately obvious.  Let's consider the use of language to
misdirect attention.  An excellent example of this is the
nomenclature Ruppelt uses to describe UFO incidents.  He called
the Lubbock series of events the Lubbock "Lights" incident.
Ruppelt used this name although the principal witness, who had a
Q-level security clearance and was a technically trained Atomic
Energy Commission employee, described and identified a flying
wing or triangular shaped object drawn by another independent
witness!  In the scientific terminology of experimental design,
the AEC employee passed a single blinded object identification
test administered by the intelligence officer conducting the
interview.  Nonetheless Ruppelt chose a word to label the
Lubbock incident which had no relation to these facts.  By
referring to "lights", a vague term commonly used as in the
phrase 'lights in the sky', he altered the public's perception
of the event and its significance. The  name was adopted by the
media and has endured over the years.  Had he called it the
Lubbock Flying Wing incident, there would have been a radically
different perception of the importance of the incident,
stimulating an interest in the identity and origin of the
objects.  Ruppelt's use of semantic distraction was not
accidental and proof that it was deliberately used is provided
by historian Loren Gross who notes that official and once secret
Air Force documents on the Lubbock incidents refer to the
sighting of "objects" and rarely to "lights"; the later term
being too vague for official use. [11]


Ruppelt masterfully chose his words for the desired effect and
one must consciously be alert as this technique is employed in
several instances.  Another example was his designation of the
objects seen in Levelland Texas incident as 'Things'.  Enough
said.

Endnotes:

11  Gross, Loren E. UFOs: A History Volume 8: 1951,  pp. 88.
Officer Bossart�s Report Reads. Port St. Lucie, Arcturus, 1998

Gross notes that the Air Force files on the Lubbock incident
very often referred to the Lubbock Lights as "the object".
Ruppelt and Air Force spokesmen were careful to use the
terminology "Lights" and not object.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:31:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:12:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:13:11 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>In other words, no evidence for the ETH and the MHH is not
>falsifiable contrary to Mark Cashman's commentary otherwise.

Determining The
Truth Or Falsity Of The
Misperception/Hoax/Hallucination
Hypothesis (MHH)
Copyright 1998 by Mark Cashman

http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/analysis/mhh.htm

Introduction

In a communication to the UFO Updates mailing list from Ed
Stewart, Stewart claims that the hypothesis that UFO reports
are soley caused by

    Witness misperception of known phenomena (incorrect
    interpretation of stimulus by perceptual systems).

    Witness knowingly propagating false accounts of UFO
    phenomena, based on imagination, literature and cultural
    context.

    Witness experiencing altered mental states which generate
    the appearance of UFO events in the absence of any
    external stimulus.

cannot be validated because it amounts to attempting to prove a
negative. His citation of part of the Project Sign report is to
the point:

"No definite and conclusive evidence is yet available that would
prove or disprove the existence of these unidentified objects as
real aircraft of unknown and unconventional configuration. It is
unlikely that positive proof of their existence will be obtained
without examination of the remains of crashed objects. Proof of
non-existence is equally impossible to obtain unless a
reasonable and convincing explanation is determined for each
incident."

However, it is my contention that the MHH
(Misperception/Hoax/Hallucination Hypothesis) can, indeed, be
proven or disproven. This document discusses the discriminators
which I believe exist for this hypothesis.

Can The MHH Be Proven Or Refuted?

Any hypothesis makes explicit or implicit predictions in its
attempt to explain the phenomenon to which it is addressed. The
MHH is indeed a hypothesis, and it makes a number of predictions
which can be validated or refuted from the data.

According to the previous citation and to most MHH proponents,
there is only one way to prove the MHH - obtain a reasonable and
convincing explanation for each incident. Since this is held to
be impossible, MHH proponents neatly avoid the pressure placed
upon most theorists.

According to that citation and to its proponents there is also a
simple way to refute the MHH - discovery of indisputable
physical remains of a technological UFO, overt contact with the
source of the UFO phenomenon, or repeatable observations of the
phenomenon which would allow direct determination of the cause
of the phenomenon.

MHH proponents then claim that since MHH cannot be proved and it
has not been refuted, it is the best explanation for UFO
reports. They assert that success in applying MHH to a large
percentage of initial reports allows one to assume that the
reports unaccounted for by the MHH are nonetheless caused by the
MHH phenomenon.

What Are The MHH Predictions?

If the MHH is the true explanation of the UFO phenomenon, then
there are a number of predictions it makes about the data, cases
both explained and unexplained:

    The MHH can explain all of the best UFO reports - those
    with the most credible witnesses, those with multiple
    witnesses, those with detailed, data-rich observations,
    those observed with instruments, those which leave
    physical traces, those where observing conditions are
    excellent, and those where the object is claimed to be in
    close proximity to the witness. If the MHH can explain
    these reports, no one will complain if it fails on poor
    reports from less credible single witnesses under less than
    ideal conditions.

    UFO witnesses generally suffer from sensory or
    perceptual problems which lead to the misidentification of
    common or natural but uncommon phenomena.

    UFO witnesses are in unfamiliar environments at the time
    of their observation, and their misperceptions stem from
    observing a familiar phenomenon in an unfamiliar
    environment or from observation of an unfamiliar but
    natural phenomenon.

    UFO witnesses who report cases with physical effects are
    probably hoaxers (they are unlikely to be misperceivers, as
    are subsequent investigators, since the effects are
    objectively existent and easily examined), and therefore
    will be generally less credible in reputation than non-CE-2
    witnesses. These claimants will be shown to follow known
    psychological profiles for hoaxers.

    Witnesses who claim close proximity UFO events who are
    not hoaxers will be shown to suffer from mental or
    physical disorders which induce hallucination, or will have
    a history of hallucinatory drug use, or will be found to
    have their experiences under conditions which could lead
    an otherwise normal person to hallucinate. Such
    experiences will fit clinical profiles for hallucinatory
    experiences under the disorder, drug, or special conditions.

    Instrumentally observed UFOs are a special case where
    either the misperception is assigned to the observing
    apparatus or the observer's interpretation of the state
    reported by the apparatus. Therefore the misperception
    can be classified as a known error in the apparatus or a
    known error in operator interpretation of the apparatus
    state.

These are eminently verifiable predictions.

The State Of The Predictions

More research is needed on all of these predictions. However,
there are some observations which can be made on their
application to date. In many cases no support for the MHH in
regard to a specific category is known to the author, so that
column was shifted to the last column in the table.

Prediction
                        Refutation
                                          Support
====
  MHH can explain the best
  UFO cases. As cases
  deteriorate in quality, the
  MHH will find it more
  difficult to explain them.

                        By definition, the best UFO
                        cases have already passed
                        the MHH filter (given the
                        use of UFO as proposed by
                        Hynek, which is accepted in
                        this document).

                        The misperception part of
                        the hypothesis decreases in
                        explanatory power with
                        improved reports (better
                        conditions, better observers,
                        richer data). By the time
                        close encounters are
                        reached, few reports can be
                        explained by this part of the
                        hypothesis, and those which
                        can be seem to differ
                        significantly from
                        unidentified cases, while the
                        unidentified cases show
                        numerous common factors.

                        No evidence has be found
                        that a significant percentage
                        of UFO reports in the CE
                        range can be explained as
                        hoaxes. Studies performed
                        so far (AF, U Of Co) show
                        only a small percentage of
                        confirmed hoaxes in UFO
                        reports, many of which are
                        confined to photographic
                        hoaxes or to landing trace
                        hoaxes.

                        No evidence has been
                        demonstrated that any
                        noticeable percentage of
                        UFO reports are due to
                        hallucinations.

                        Thus, one can state that the
                        explanatory profile of the
                        MHH is the opposite of
                        what one would expect, in
                        that CE reports (the reports
                        which are the most data
                        rich) reported by credible
                        witnesses, are the least easily
                        explained by the MHH and
                        many such reports have
                        been unable to be explained
                        by the MHH.

                        According to Special Report
                        14, twice as many
                        unknowns come from
                        reliable reports as from
                        unreliable reports. Since the
                        AF was a proponent of
                        MHH, this would appear to
                        be another refutation of it.

-----

  UFO witnesses generally
  suffer from sensory or
  perceptual problems which
  lead to the misidentification
  of common or natural but
  uncommon phenomena.

                        No such pattern of problems
                        has been demonstrated.
                        Groups which are tested to
                        exclude persons with such
                        problems (such as pilots,
                        radar operators, etc) report
                        some of the best cases -
                        cases which remain
                        unexplained by the MHH.

                        Misidentifications show a
                        slight increase among such
                        tested groups compared to a
                        technically trained witness
                        pool of non-tested personnel
                        (pilots are slightly more
                        likely to report an
                        identifiable sighting than
                        technical personnel,
                        according to Hynek's
                        analysis of Blue Book data).
                        Unless a significant
                        pro-reporting bias can be
                        found for pilots, this would
                        appear to be as direct a
                        refutation of this prediction
                        as the current state of the
                        data allows.

-----

  UFO witnesses are in
  unfamiliar environments at
  the time of their
  observation, and their
  misperceptions stem from
  observing a familiar
  phenomenon in an
  unfamiliar environment or
  from observation of an
  unfamiliar but natural
  phenomenon

                        According to Vallee's study
                        of the French wave in
                        1954[footnote 1],
                        "Practically in all cases, the
                        site of the observation was
                        quite familiar to the witness.
                        In 22 cases [approx 10% of
                        sample], the [object] landed
                        literally in his backyard or in
                        the immediate vicinity of his
                        house or property... In no
                        less than 75 cases [more
                        than 30% of sample] it
                        landed directly on the road
                        or in the immediate vicinity
                        of the road which he used
                        for going to and from work.
                        In fifteen cases [more than
                        5% of sample] it landed
                        where the witnesses were
                        working... In 43 cases
                        [approx 20% of sample] the
                        witnesses were at work
                        when they saw the object
                        for the first time. In 9 cases
                        they were going to work. In
                        21 cases they were returning
                        from work."

-----

  UFO witnesses who report
  cases with physical effects
  are probably hoaxers (they
  are unlikely to be
  misperceivers, as are
  subsequent investigators,
  since the effects are
  objectively existent and
  easily examined), and
  therefore will be generally
  less credible in reputation
  than non-CE-2 witnesses.
  These claimants will be
  shown to follow known
  psychological profiles for
  hoaxers.

                        The same study shows a
                        slight increase in percentage
                        for businesspeople and
                        technical personnel.

                        No study showing a
                        psychological profile for
                        CE-II witnesses that follows
                        any clinical study of hoaxer
                        profiles is known to this
                        author.
                                          A slight increase in
                                          percentage of young
                                          reporters of CE-II in one
                                          demographic
                                          study[footnote 2] over the
                                          CE-I percentage of such
                                          reporters. This may not be
                                          significant given a small
                                          sample size.
-----

  Witnesses who claim close
  proximity UFO events who
  are not hoaxers will be
  shown to suffer from
  mental or physical
  disorders which induce
  hallucination, or will have a
  history of hallucinatory
  drug use, or will be found
  to have their experiences
  under conditions which
  could lead an otherwise
  normal person to
  hallucinate. Such
  experiences will fit clinical
  profiles for hallucinatory
  experiences under the
  disorder, drug, or special
  conditions.

                        No such profile has been
                        demonstrated.

                        There does not appear to be
                        any basis for attributing
                        complex hallucinations to the
                        state known as "road
                        hypnosis".

-----

  Instrumentally observed
  UFOs are a special case
  where either the
  misperception is assigned to
  the observing apparatus or
  the observer's interpretation
  of the state reported by the
  apparatus. Therefore the
  misperception can be
  classified as a known error
  in the apparatus or a
  known error in operator
  interpretation of the
  apparatus state.

                        High quality instrument
                        cases such as the RB47
                        case[footnote 3] show a
                        pattern which cannot be
                        attributed to instrumental or
                        operator error.

                        Radar and visual
                        observations occur and
                        remain unidentified. Multiple
                        frequency radar observations
                        also remain unidentified, and
                        no physical basis for system
                        misperception exists in those
                        cases.

====

Conclusion

The MHH, contrary to the assertions of its proponents, does make
predictions which can be validated. Those predictions are not
supported by the pattern of explanation, by large scale studies,
by witness studies, or by the pattern of the data. This tends to
confirm that not only can the MHH be refuted, but that it has
been refuted.


Footnotes

1. Humanoids, A Special Report of Flying Saucer Review, p 65

2. http://www.temporaldoorway.com/uhyndemg.htm

3. UFO Encyclopedia, ed. Clark, article by Brad Sparks



------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                           Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:32:50 _0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:21:35 -0500
Subject: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 05:01:38 _0500
>From: Sue Lawrence <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees
>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:31:05 _0500
>>To: UFO UpDates _ Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'M.E.' & Abductees

>>There is absolutely _nothing_  "plausible" (or even
>>intelligible) in any of your statements and it appears that the
>>only thing that needs to be investigated further is the current
>>state of your 'CRITICAL' mind!

>Hi John

>This is a fantastic advert for your foundation, do you normally
>speak to abductees like this?

Thank you, I agree! It _is_ a tremendous advert for the
Intruders Foundation. I have already recieved kudos for my
response to your post. Some were actually upset that I got to
you first. Imagine that! You may not realize it but
unsubstantiated statements such as yours really piss some people
off. Maybe it's their presumptive tone or unintelligible
content. I don't know, pick one.

Regarding: do I "normally speak to abductees like this";

Actually no. Those comments were written just for you. I usually
take people one at a time. I'm not in the habit of relating to
every case in the same way. Do you?

>During your investigation into abductee cases, do you only look
>at the possibility of them being et connected, or are you
>objective?

(Again) Huh? What? Your question implies that if we consider an
abduction report to be ET based it connotes a lack of
objectivity. That's precisely the kind of _slanted_ statement
that I addressed in my first response to you. You're just full
of those ain't you? <G>

In reference to:

>During your investigation into abductee cases, do you only
>look at the possibility of them being et connected,

No, we try to look at _all_ of the _prosaic_ explanations/
possibilities first. We have two psychologists that can evaluate
(and administer psychological tests) as a part of our
investigative process. But, if after the process of
'elimination' takes place, if it still walks like a duck and
talks like a duck..... we're open to the possibility of alien
intervention. An alternative (I am gathering by your ques.) that
you personally find unacceptable or not enough.

>are you objective?

Not as much as some, and more than some others. Depends on who
you talk to!  I _have_ been accused of being objective by others
in the past so I may as well just cop to it.

My answer would be yes, as much as I can be. I think I'm more
objective on alternate Saturdays as opposed to Wednesdays
however.

Geez, that's a tough one. I don't know. How does one measure
such a thing? How objective are you? More than a little? Less
than a lot? Send me the yardstick that you use to guage such
things and I'll be happy to tell you how I 'measured up' to
_your_ standards!

<I'll betcha mine is bigger than yours!> LOL

>Abductions are likely to be a multiplicity of phenomena

Says you. But hey man, you're the ex-spurt!

>so what I'm looking into is a connection with medical illnesses,
>including things such as kidney infections that imbalance
>hormone levels which alter blood levels, stimulate contractions
>when not pregnant etc. These can possibly create the so called
>symptoms of abduction, when there may be a completely earthly
>explanation.

That is worthwhile research Sue. Good luck in your
investigations and I hope to see the results posted here on
UpDates whenever you complete your study. If you wish to add me
to your database;

I (thankfully) don't have chronic fatigue or suffer from any
kidney conditions. Aside from hypertension which is under
control, I'm in pretty good shape. The only thing I do suffer
from is a lifetime of unwanted invasions by little grey men with
big black eyes that are extremely fond of sticking things into
other things. I guess they are alot like most human males in
that sense! <EG>

>If you think that this is all BS then that's your opinion, but
>as I have been having various experiences for around 25 years I
>would like to look at ALL possibilities.

I never said _anything_ about there being something wrong with
the exploration of alternatives. Those are words that _you_ are
putting in my mouth.

Pahtooey! I spit them back out.

Reread my original response and questions. (None of which you
have addressed BTW.)

For keerists sake all I did was ask you to substantiate some of
your own statements. Rather than respond to the points I raised
you simply take the offensive and don't answer at all.

Who's kidding who Sue? (Did I sound like an owl when I said
that?)

You made some pretty wild statements/claims. I asked you to back
them up. I know enough about the abduction "data" to know that
there is nothing anywhere that will substantiate your remarks.

You throw words around while taking about abduction and
abductees like "psychic this" and "subconscious that." _You_ are
the one who claims that you got it from "the data". All I asked
you to do is show me where.

Twenty-five years eh? Amazing! See if you can spend a part of
the next twenty-five learning how to answer simple questions!
Unless you can refer me to this "data" you speak of I'm not too
interested in persuing this conversation.

Peace,

John Velez, P.I.T.A. to 'posers' everywhere!
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 06:31:09 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:25:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:21:41 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

>>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Such was not the case. The cases
>>presented to it convinced panel members that further UFO study
>>is worthwhile, though some (not all) expressed pessimism about
>>what more could be learned from existing cases.

>That is an outright false statement and not based on what the
>scientific review panel said and is on record stating.

In fact, the panel would not have recommended further UFO study
by scientists had it not found the cases investigated by
ufologists interesting and suggestive of the potential of UFO
study, whatever the limitations (in the panel's view) of any one
specific case.  If panel members had not felt that way, they
would have had  no reason to recommend that science commence to
look at UFOs seriously.  There is no reason to believe that
their recommendation was based on a mere psychic sense that UFO
study might be worthwhile even if nothing in the present made it
look that way.

In any event, further discussion here is pointless.  List
members who are still paying attention are urged to read the
Sturrock report and make up their own minds about what it says.
I suspect that their reading will be rather closer to mine (and
every other commentator aside from Stewart and Klass), but
everyone should decide that for himself or herself.  You are
smart enough not to need Ed or me to tell you what to think.

Meantime, it is more than worth your while to read (or reread)
what James McDonald had to say about the UFO phenomenon. The
Fund for UFO Research has reprinted some of his eloquent,
insightful writings on the subject.  McDonald wrote from the
experience not only of a first-rate scientist but of a
hard-working investigator of cases; whatever their other
virtues, the scientists on the Sturrock panel can lay claim to
no such expertise. Along with Hynek, no scientist writing on the
UFO phenomenon and on ufology has a more compelling claim to our
attention.  It is a shame that his work is missing from nearly
all current ufological discourse.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:56:42 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:43:59 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:37:06 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>From time to time I ride my bicycle down to the end of the
>runway at Washington National Airport (can't bring myself to
>call it the Reagan National Airport) and watch the airliners
>roll in.

>You see them lined up in the distance making their approach
>turns.

>As I track one, I don't know the airline, don't know the name of
>the pilot, don't know how many passengers or their names, don't
>know from where it departed. But I know one thing, I know it is
>a plane. In that very important sense it is identified.

>We have identified saucers in our skies that fly with
>intelligence. The debunkers demand that we know their origin,
>the nature and composition of the materials of their
>construction, their reason for being here and whatever else they
>see fit to demand in the service of their obtuseness, in order
>to consider them identified.

>Tough.

>UFO and Ufology are terms so wedded to the efforts of
>disinformation and subversion, they have to go.

>There are now six primary areas of study in the overall field.

>Sightings
>Animal Harvesting (Cattle Mutilation)
>Cereology (Crop Circles)
>Exo-Archeology/Astronomy (Cydonia, Giza, etc.)
>Government Posture (the politics of disclosure and cover-up)
>Contact (abductions, 4th and 5th kind interactions)

>The term Ufology is supposed to cover these fields. Sorry.
>That dog won't hunt.

>Many members of the black community give up their "slave names"
>and replace them with names more appropriate and comfortable to
>how they see themselves in the world.

>UFO and Ufology are "slave names" - they are part of the
>nomenclature we used when we were, in too great a measure,
>unwilling participants in one of the most intricate and unique
>propaganda campaigns ever waged.

>They need to go and we to stop apologizing to debunkers, the
>government, the media or anyone else for what we know from the
>evidence.

>UFO and Ufology need to go.

>In my work I use the phrase "extraterrestrial related
>phenomena." If the odd reporter or editor or congressperson is
>offended by this, once again - tough.

>Steve Bassett
>Paradigm Research Group
>http://www.paradigmclock.com


OK, Steve.  But how do you know that any of these phenomena are
extraterrestrial in origin? I've seen nothing at all to convince
me of this.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:45:34 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:52:20 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Rebecca <XianneKei@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:57:36 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>UFO is the _perfect_ description for the phenomenon of
>Unidentified Flying Objects. We don't know what they are or
>where they come from.

>Rebecca


OK, but we don't know that they are objects, and they don't
"fly" in the same sense that an airplane or rocket does, so the
only part that really fits is unidentified.

Lets just call them U.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                                  1450 Mhz

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:16:08 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:40:17 -0500
Subject: 1450 Mhz


Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:54:06 +0100 (MET)
From: pharabod@in2p3.fr
To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Subject: 1450 Mhz

Warning: it seems that 1450 Mhz is currently used in receivers of
satellite TV and in CPU of some computers (search for "1450Mhz" and
"1450 Mhz" on dejanews).

J. Pharabod








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                       Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:08:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:50:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 98 11:09:08 PST

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:35:34 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Unidentified Fly Hatchets

Jerome,

I trash "Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking"
every time I see "Ed Stewart" and "Jerome Clark" in the header.
The first text of "Unidentified Flying Hatchets" was a call for
peace between Ed Stewart and yourself, something like "bury the
hatchet guys and go smoke a joint".  You are using this here
thread as still another forum to drive Ed Stewart to the ground.
You are going to far.

This is disgraceful.  All of this is disgraceful.

Believers refuse the pertinent facts and systematically use
tangents to adhere to their credo "nothing will ever make me
change my mind".  In this respect, debunkers are wide-eyed
believers: they do not differentiate themselves from the adepts
of urine-therapy and of raellian philosophy.  Meeting these
people usually ends up in very short conversations - unless you
want to loose your time. (Looks like I have just insulted the
debunkers.  Please don't take this personally people.  It is my
opinion and I won't fumigate you any more than necessary <g>.)

I understand that Ed is no piece of cake. This is no reason to
treat him like a piece of shit. If you find pleasure in
insulting people then you have a big problem.  Not being a
hater, but deliberately provoking hate, is a dishonorable
attitude: hypocrite at best.

When you write:

>I have made an effort to put something productive into this,
>namely a fair amount of obscure information list readers may be
>unfamiliar with and that may be of interest and use to them. I
>have kept my responses to Ed's continuing accusations that I am
>the lowest form of human in a mostly tongue-in-cheek vein, which
>I don't think anybody would accuse Stewart of doing. I do the
>suggestion that somehow Ed and I are equally morally culpable in
>this.

>I do agree, though, that Ed's views are neither interesting nor
>edifying.

I feel freaking ashamed, like a witness to something vile.

You are not a gentle man, Jerome.  You may pride yourself with
civilized distinguished manners, but I suggest that, like all
members of the gentry, you remember that you are only as good as
the way you treat people, any people.

P.S. Please refrain in using any eventual reply as a
justification for an unjustifiable attitude.  You have done this
consistently in other replies to other people and have only
succeeded in making a fool of yourself.  Enough is enough.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                     What'S The Temperature Of The Sand?

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:10:15 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:09:27 -0500
Subject: What'S The Temperature Of The Sand?


Dear List;

I have received numerous emails (delivered to my AOL address)
since our Host/Moderator EBK ran my post on the temperature
of the sand.

Since it appears to have drawn much interest, I will give the
source of this piece of undigested beef...

This term "temperature of the sand" is from a true story...
one which occurred back in the mid sixties at a NASA-Goddard
meeting which was attending by Grumman personnel and led by
the then project chief for the program I was working on, the OAO
(Orbiting Astronomical Observatory).   This spacecraft was a
precursor to Hubbell and Grumman was the prime contractor.

I was then responsible for integrating the various experiment
packages on board the flight article.  For a young engineer, this
was a great deal of responsibility, and so I was more than a
little cocky!

At a NASA meeting, the program manager was making a complete
fool of himself and I just couldn't take it any more of his
stupidity.

So when the chief opened the meeting for questions, I asked,
"Sir, what is the temperature of the sand?

The NASA chief asked, "Sand?  What sand?"

"The sand you have your head buried in!"

Subsequent to that particular episode, I was asked by my
management to seriously consider a career in the Postal Service.
I did two things.  I kept my mouth shut.  I kept my job.

But Jimmy doesn't work there any more.  Jimmy is retired. So I
decided to ask the question once more, for old times' sake.

Jimmy





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:48:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:48:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs

>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.

Hi Roy,

I have played the drums for 36 years and guitar for 17. Twice a
month I get together with a couple of rapidly aging long haired
lotharios to play Jimi Hendrix covers and blues drenched rock
and roll.


John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Donald Waldrop <DONZON@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:08:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:08:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs

        ::
:
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:59:57 EST
To: updates@globalserve.net
:
Subject: Re:  UFO UpDate: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Yes, I am a musician in Los Angeles, working in the studios as a
session player on low brass instruments.


Donald Waldrop
State Section Director, MUFON LA
Mutual UFO Network Los Angeles
http://www.mufonla.com
donzon@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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 13:13:17 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:16:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:13:11 -0800
> From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
> >Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 10:07:02 PDT
>
> >>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0700
> >>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


To the list:

Nothing in any of what Ed Stewart has to say following my
remarks cannot be refuted easily by any informed ufologist,
but I personally am not going to bother.  I am closing down
participation in this pointless exercise, more mud fight than
productive discourse by a considerable margin.

In my defense I'll say I have tried to retain good humor through
it all, and I think I've succeeded, most of the time, against
tremendous provocation.  I don't recall being called as
many nasty names since I was a little kid squabbling with
playmates.  Still, simply to pay attention to Stewart is, I am
learning, to make it look as if one lives on his level.  I do not,
of course, and  I refuse to be further demeaned -- or, as far
as that goes, distracted from the real business of my life,
none of which involves Ed Stewart..

In fact, I am going to go further.  I am happy to engage in
vigorous debates which serve some purpose and in which
some degree of mutual respect -- an acknowledgement,
explicit or implicit, that reasonable persons can honorably
disagree about complex UFO-related issues -- but I will no
longer engage in discussions (or mud fights) in which my
adversary engages in ad-hominem attack, crude insult, and
repeated slanders of my character. And if I should fall
myself to that level, I encourage you to remind me of what
I've written here.

True, the temptation to defend oneself, when one has been accused
of everything short of responsibility for hangnails and halitosis in the
human population, is great, naturally; those of you who haven't had
the experience are inevitably quicker to judge us than those who
have undergone something so thoroughly unpleasant experience.
I can only envy those of you who haven't. I even envy the luxury you
have of pointing fingers, clucking tongues, and assuring
yourselves that you would do better under the circumstances.
Maybe.  Don't bet on it, though.

At the same time I am grateful to those who wrote me privately
to express support or to offer helpful observations.  Yet to all
of you out there, too, I apologize for letting myself get sucked into
something that has been a  huge waste of time for just about
everybody.  For my part in prolonging the agony, I am truly
sorry.

Enough, in short, is enough.  I have a life to live, a book to finish,
and a new house to move into with the woman who is the love of my
life.  Have a good and long life, Ed.  I hope that your health continues
to mend, and I hope, too, that one day happiness finds you.
Meantime, keep at your splendid bibliographical work.

Cordially,

Jerry Clark


> >>They did and I might add at the invitation of Carl Sagan.
>
> >Who, as I have already pointed out, stacked the deck with
> >skeptics and debunkers, who knew little or nothing about the UFO
> >phenomenon.
>
> Was that the reason only ufo believers were allowed to present
> 'the best ufo evidence' and not a single skeptic invited to
> participate before the Sturrock scientific review panel? I
> wonder what the reaction was among the scientific review panel?
> 'Hey guys, we are only hearing one side of the story, have you
> noticed?'
>
> >>>Morrison, on the other hand, had - by his own
> >>>admission - no more familiarity than casual reading of
> >>>unspecified UFO literature (George Adamski? Frank Edwards?
> >>>Brinsley le Poer Trench?). In no other field than UFO-bashing
> >>>would this sort of ignorance qualify one as an expert.
>
> Philip Morrison was and still is one of the premier physicists
> in the world having worked on the Manhattan Project during WWII.
> He is a recognized authority on science and there is hardly
> anyone better qualified to speak on the scientific method and
> science than Morrison. Unless you wish to make a case from the
> old
> ufology-is-special-and-it-requires-special-handling-and-dispensa
> tion school of ufological wisdom as to why science is not the
> proper venue for insvestigation of ufological cases?
>
> >>Morrison's paper was on the nature of scientific evidence, and
> >>not as Jerome Clark's continued abuse of facts and historical
> >>perspective implies, on the nature of ufological evidence. If
> >>Jerome Clark wants to make a case for Philip Morrison not being
> >>qualified to address the nature of scientific evidence, please
> >>do so but don't mislead readers with your otherwise false
> >>diatribes.
>
> >As I have said, as Morrison himself admitted, he knew nothing -
> >or, at best, very little - about the UFO and was therefore
> >unqualified to talk about how it related to anything, including
> >the nature of scientific evidence. Hynek and McDonald rightly
> >complained that people like Morrison had no business on the
> >panel. But then, of course, Sagan had the deck stacked, and that
> >was the point - even if it continues to sail past the point on
> >Ed's head.
>
> Why are you so scared of people like Morrison and Sagan? You
> keep saying they stacked the deck, they stacked the deck. What
> do you call the Sturrock panel then? At least Sagan, who at the
> time was willing publically to call for a wait-and-see attitude
> among his scientific colleagues, invited the best of the best
> ufologists (Hynek and McDonald) to participate. Who was at
> Pocantico to argue against the cases presented? If anyone wants
> to make a case for stacking decks, the Sturrock panel takes the
> cake hands down. <G>

>
> >>>Hynek
> >>>and McDonald rightly objected to Morrison's claim to expertise
> >>>or insight, and I suspect most people would.
>
> >>Really? Just above you state that Morrison himself 'admitted' he
> >>was unfamiliar with the UFO data, but with a stroke of the
> >>keyboard, when it seems to please your argument, you say that
> >>Morrison claimed expertise which was allegedly objected to by
> >>Hynek and McDonald, but you fail to quote and provide a source.
> >>So Clarkish! Exactly what did Hynek and McDonald object to? His
> >>paper on the nature of scientific evidence? Or his good looks
> >>and reputation? I would be interested in reading in context
> >>these alleged objections. Please provide references that can be
> >>independently verified. Nothing personal.
>
> <snip>- no reference provided by Jerome Clark.
>
> >Hynek and McDonald objected, as I do, to Morrison's lack of
> >knowledge about the UFO phenomenon - as, being a trifle less
> >obtuse than Ed Stewart, they damn well should have. Amusingly,
> >Morrison cites as "evidence" against UFOs a few anecdotal
> >accounts of mistaken observations.
>
> Really? And what were those accounts? Please provide a reference
> that can be independently verified? It wasn't from his paper on
> the nature of scientific evidence presented at the conference;
> what are you referencing? Your fans want to know.
>
> >And here Ed was lecturing us
> >not long ago, in his characteristic snarl, about the utter
> >worthlessness of anecdotal accounts.
>
> Really? Why the entire thread is archived and on record. Cite
> the specific message where I lectured 'about the utter
> worthlessness of anecdotal accounts'. I strongly suspect that
> your intellectual dishonesty has now reached the level of lying
> through your teeth. Why you keep making an ass out of yourself
> is beyond me, but believe me, I am the last one to want to see
> you stop. Please quote in context the alleged message where I
> said the above? Since this thread is so recent and archived on
> the record I will assume if you can't provide a reference in
> context, that you are nothing but a lowdown scum of a liar who
> has no scruples for intelligent dialogue. Your fans await you to
> prove me wrong.
>
> >That being the case, dude,
> >I am at a loss to understand why you are now asking us to take
> >Morrison seriously. But no one has ever accused you of launching
> >a coherent argument, I realize. You use whatever's convenient at
> >the moment of the rant.
>
> I have already stated my reasons why I consider Morrison's paper
> so germaine to solving ufology's woes, but since you are not
> part of any solution for ufology I don't ever expect you to
> understand and always to be at a total loss. But people that
> have taken my advice and on their own have read the paper,
> undestand its true value to ufology.
>
> >Hynek's and McDonald's complaints were made in various forums
> >about which Ed, as a bibliographer, ought to know but of which
> >he pretends ignorance. I'll let him twist slowly in the wind and
> >see where else he goes with this before being more specific.
> >This should be fun.
>
> If you think that not providing references for your claims is
> fun, guess again. It is just more evidence to the hundreds and
> probably thousands of readers who will be accessing this thread
> for the next couple of years as to your continuous intellectual
> dishonesty. Of course, you don't have to provide any. It all
> depends on whether you want to be remembered by UFO buffs online
> as credible or not? Back up your statements or retract them?
> It's that simple. Your fans would love to see you prove me
> wrong. Let's see those references in context.
>
> >>I gather since you chose to ignore and not to respond to the
> >>part of Barry Greenwood's response:
>
> >In fact, I wrote a response to Greenwood, who did not see fit to
> >publish it - which is his right, after all; it's his magazine.
> >Why, if you're interested, Ed, don't you write Barry and ask for
> >a copy of my letter?
>
> Because we are here online and the challenge to you is today,
> now and here. Your online fans await your response.
>
>
>     " If Sagan were off base in his negative views on alien
> visitation, then one case, only one example need be provided to
> prove so. Which one is it? Or several? Do you care to put
> yourself on the line on this matter?" --- Barry Greenwood
>
>
> >I like Barry Greenwood, who's a gentleman and a friend. But his
> >powers of analysis have failed him here, as he highlights the
> >central problem of the Sagan approach, which would not even be
> >thought of (or, if thought of, laughed out of court) if applied
> >to any other scientific question, namely:
>
> Laughed out of court? Since when is the ETH a question to be
> resolved in a court and not resolved by scientific evidence?
>
> >With practically no scientific work conducted to answer the
> >question one way or another, Sagan uses the absence of "proof"
> >(whatever that is) of ET visitation - something that could be
> >found, if it is there, only at the end of a serious, well-funded
> >investigation - as a reason not to conduct scientific research
> >on UFOs. Incredible.
>
> I see. The old
> my-hands-are-tied-behind-my-back-and-I-can't-seem-to-get-up
> school of ufological wisdom coupled with the
> show-me-the-money-I'll-show-you-ET school of ufological wisdom.
> Let's not forget the ole
> what-do-you-mean-it-is-my-hypothesis-and-the-burden-of-proof-fal
> ls-on-me school of ufological wisdom. It appears to me that I
> see a pattern emerging among exponents of ufological wisdom.
> They seem to be more anti-science then actually pro-ufo! Maybe I
> should add an e to your name and call you Clarke. It looks like
> you can use the extra weight since you carry so many chips on
> your shoulders.
>
> >For a bunch of solid cases, see the list of puzzling, documented
> >sightings Mark Cashman provided you a few days ago
>
> So what? The best ufologists haven't been able to convince
> anyone outside the choir of their alleged significance to any
> hypothesis, much less the ETH.
>
> >or else go to my UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed.,
> >and look up the following entries, since you don't seem to know
> >much about this subject. These entries address many of the best
> >cases on which rests the argument that UFOs may be extraordinary
> >anomalies (conceivably under somebody's intelligent control;
> >"alien visitation, "earth lights," and the rest, however, are
> >theories to be taken up aside from the body of suggestive data
> >below)
>
> How silly of me. The answer is in Jerome Clarke's encyclopedia!
> Did you ask LR and Sturrock to provide a copy to each member of
> the scientific review panel just as back-up if it was needed? If
> they had your encyclopedia, look at all the different it might
> have made?
>
> >; Sagan, by the way, avoided mentioning nearly all of
> >them in his various writings on the UFO phenomenon. Gee, I
> >wonder why.
>
> The Sagan of the AAAS procedings called for a wait and see
> attitude until more could be found. That was a quarter of
> century ago.
>
> >Arnold Sighting
> >BOAC Sighting
> >Cash-Landrum CE2
> >Chiles-Whitted Sighting
> >CE1s
> >CE2s
> >CE3s
> >Coyne CE2
> >Cressy Sighting
> >Damon CE2
> >Daylight Discs
> >Delphos CE2
> >Dr. X Case
> >Everglades CE2
> >Exeter CE1
> >Falcon Lake CE2
> >Fishersville CE2
> >Fort Monmouth Radar/Visual Case
> >Gill CE3
> >Green Fireballs and Other Southwestern Lights
> >Hessdalen Lights
> >Hill Abduction Case
> >Iran CE2
> >Itaipu Fortress Incident
> >JAL Sighting
> >Kelly-Hopkinsville CE3
> >Kinross Case
> >Kuwait Sightings
> >Lakenheath-Bentwaters Radar/Visual Case
> >Langenburg CE2
> >Lavonia CE2
> >Laxson CE3
> >Levelland Sightings
> >Lubbock Lights
> >McMinnville Photos
> >Marshall County CE2
> >Montana Film
> >Moore Case
> >Morocco Sightings
> >Muroc Air Base Sightings
> >Nash-Fortenberry Sighting
> >New Zealand Film
> >Ocala Radar/Visual Case
> >Portage County Sightings
> >Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14
> >RB-47 Radar/Visual Case
> >Red Bluff Sightings
> >Ririe CE3
> >Salt Lake City Sighting
> >Senator Russell Sighting
> >Socorro CE2/CE3
> >Stonehenge CE3
> >Tombaugh Sighting
> >Trans-en-Provence CE2
> >Trindade Island Photographs
> >Utah Film
> >Valensole Disappearance
> >Washington National Radar/Visual Case
> >Westchester Sightings
>
> All those cases and not a single one that compells the
> scientific community to scratch its nose. How sad! You don't
> think it is because they all lack what Philip Morrison
> suggested: a chain of evidence independentely verified all data
> points linked together, now do you?
>
> <G>
>
> >After you've read all of these entries, my good-natured friend,
> >go to McDonald's many monographs, most based on his personal
> >investigations of many puzzling cases. Read (since you seem not
> >to have read it before) such seminal works as Ruppelt, Hynek,
> >Jacobs's UFO Controversy, Gross's valuable monographs, and so
> >on.
>
> Do I then get to become a member of the choir?
>
> >And then maybe, if you haven't learned better by then, you'll be
> >able to mount some marginally sensible response to me
>
>
> Oh, I see! The old
> I-know-more-than-you-do-therefore-I-am-not-going-to-answer-your-
> question school of ufological wisdom.  Why is it so hard to
> admit? I, Jerome Clark, like the rest of my ufological wisdom
> colleagues, do not have compelling evidence/proof of the ETH,
> but I am compelled to continue globbbering Sagan, et al for
> stating the obvious because the ufological gullible needs a
> sacrificial lamb for the dismal shape that ufology finds itself
> in.
>
> After all, if we don't keep the attention on Sagan, Condon,
> Menzel, et al for our woes, the ufological gullible someday may
> turn on its very own high priests!
>
> Cheers!
>
> Ed Stewart
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
> There Is Something     |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
>   Going On!    ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
> Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
> ---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------
>
>
>
> \_______________________________________________/
>
>  UFO UpDates - 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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 13:52:02 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:24:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs



>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.

>Regards

>Roy..


Roy,

The only instrument I play is the stereo -- and boy, do I play
it well!

Seriously, folks: I am a huge music enthusiast, especially of
folk and roots forms (blues, bluegrass, traditional ballads,
fiddle tunes, old-time string bands, conjunto, Cajun, zydeco,
slack-key guitar, classic honkytonk, Western swing, and so on),
on which I hope to write a book soon with a musician friend. I
have a bloated record collection of this sort of stuff, and if I
get started on the subject, I can promise that I'll bore you
silly.  I know _all_ the Robert Johnson legends!

In addition, I am an often-recorded songwriter/ lyricist (Mary
Chapin Carpenter, Tom T. Hall, Emmylou Harris, and others),
writing with Robin and Linda Williams, who do the melodies.
(Their latest CD, Devil of a Dream, which came out earlier this
year, contains 11 songs we've written together, including the
Fortean-titled but not Fortean-themed "Falls from the Sky.")
We've even made the academic books.  Cecelia Tichi's High
Lonesome: The American Culture of Country Music (University of
North Carolina Press, 1994) carries an exegesis (on pp. 65-69)
of our song "Rolling and Rambling (The Death of Hank Williams),"
which Emmylou Harris recorded awhile ago and which USA Today
cited as one of the best country songs of the year..

Robin and Linda appear frequently on Garrison Keillor's popular
Saturday-afternoon public radio show Prairie Home Companion, so
if you've heard them, you've heard many of the songs we've
written together.  They also perform on the Nashville Network
and the Grand Ole Opry from time to time.

The one other musician I know of on this list is our good friend
Greg Sandow, an immensely talented composer as well as a
respected critic of classical and popular music.  I've been
lucky enough to hear some of Greg's music, and it's real swell.

Anybody else out there?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:40:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:39:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell


>From: James S. Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:58:48 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

>It makes one wonder why Mr. Mitchell has not been interviewed by
>the "legitimate" American press.

>An admission of this nature should be supervened by tremendous
>headlines. This is real news.
>
>Anyone understand the reason for the quietude in the media over
>this revelartion??? It illudes me!

Jaime and list-

Actually, Edgar Mitchell appeared on a Network news magazine
program on one of the three major networks (I can't recall
which) and made similar statements to a national (U.S.)
audiance.

You assume that the press is going to jump on this type of news,
but the fact is that he had little more to offer than his
beliefs and annecdotal evidence, which is pretty much all he has
been able to provide since.  If he could provide names, records,
and other tangible evidence to support his allegations, then the
press would probably jump on the story and run with it.  But
without that, it's an interesting annecdotal story and the press
would probably leave it alone.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:24:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:37:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


Regarding...

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT


>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Forwarded from James Easton at his request - thanks Errol

>>Whilst Mr Clark claims the 'best evidence' presented to the
>>'Sturrock Panel', resulted that the panel "found those cases
>>impressive and worthy of further scientific inquiry, at the end of
>>which - presumably a long process - it would be possible to come to
>>a far more firm judgment about the nature and origin of UFO
>>phenomena", like yourself, others note the panel's reported
>>conclusions that, "Further analysis of the evidence presented to the
>>panel is unlikely to shed added light on the causes underlying the
>>reports...".


>I was addressing the curious argument, made by some, that the panel
>offered a final - and negative - conclusion about the UFO phenomenon
>and its origins. Such was not the case. The cases presented to it
>convinced panel members that further UFO study is worthwhile, though
>some (not all) expressed pessimism about what more could be learned
>from existing cases. The quoted material below confirms as much.


Jerry,

Interpretations of what the 'Sturrock Panel' concluded should
have been an engaging and appropriate discussion.

No matter.


We were latterly dealing with factual statements and you claimed
the panel found those selected 'best cases' were impressive and
worthy of further study.

For information, where did the panel conclude the 'best cases'
were "impressive"?


It was already proven that the panel had declared further study
was unlikely to be advantageous and I've now also confirmed
Francois Louange reiterated, "The panel stated that no progress
was to be expected from further analysis of the cases presented
in Pocantico, and I share this point of view".

It's no big deal...


>It's worth remembering here that Easton and (it is clear) Stewart
>have essentially a negative view of the UFO phenomenon.

Whilst I can't answer for Ed, I can certainly speak for myself.

Even if your assertions were true, what significance could our
'views' possibly have in relation to the factual statements
cited.

Shouldn't you perhaps similarly have noted that, "It's worth
remembering here that I take essentially a 'positive' view of
the UFO phenomenon".


There is a difference between an objective interest in 'UFOs'
and what is tantamount to religious fervour, masquerading as
objectivity.

The former comes with a preference for scientific standards of
evidence, the latter is recognisable by copious misuse of
'debunker', when denigrating anyone who questions the 'faith'.


Your stated beliefs do not represent the middle-ground,
common-sense basis of many people's interest in the subject.

I'll be damned if I, or anyone who shares that impartial
interest, is categorised as 'negativist' because they aren't a
fanatic.

Fanaticism is not a prerequisite and neutrality does not equate
with heresy.


We're not all terrified by the realisation that 50 years of
'UFO' research has failed to produce any tangible, scientific
evidence which indicates, although by no means necessarily
'alone', we have never had any contact from an ET civilisation.

Even though there's considerable, related evidence which doesn't
have an obvious explanation, as many witnesses will testify,
that does not equate with the explanation in any one case
defaulting to confirmation of non-terrestrial phenomena.

Ask the 'Sturrock panel'... ;)


You state:

>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 19:27:48 PDT
>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:09:03 -0400
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>It is more and more apparent that the extraordinary claims are being
>made by debunkers and their apologists inside and outside ufology.
>When the history of this sad episode (the UFO phenomenon and the
>refusal of those who ought to have known better to confront it
>honestly) is written, I do not doubt that it will be cautious,
>sensible ufologists who are judged the conservatives in the debate,
>the debunkers the wild-eyed cranks.

>I just hope we live long enough to see this thing through. If not,
>we can go to our rest certain of one thing: we were right, and they
>were wrong.


'Debunkers, apologists, cranks'...

What do you think any prospective, interested scientists
browsing the UpDates list would conclude on seeing these
sentiments?


Whilst not wishing your premature 'departure', we might note
that all you could currently be certain of packing are your
beliefs, convictions and faith.

Same as any religion.


>I must say I feel better about ufology's prospects than I've felt in
>quite a while. Reading Prof. Eshleman's remarks above gets my day off
>to a happy start. Thanks, Ed and James, for sharing them.

Always delighted to toss snippets of perceived manna.

However, the remarks quoted were not made by Prof. Von Eshleman.
They were, as stated, from Francois Louange.

What Prof. Von Eshleman actually said, at least in response to
my correspondence, was:

"The extremes of the UFO reports and the adamant ridicule by
much of the scientific community represent [sic] irreconcilable
stands. However, I believe that there is a middle ground where
it is possible to conclude something sensible about the subject,
and that this could possibly represent progress".

Note it isn't 'considered caution', 'reserved judgement' or even
'downright scepticism', it's "adamant ridicule".

I've only been involved with the subject of 'UFOs' for some four
years. With your vast experience, tell me, how did we reach the
point where 'ufology' is predominately held in _contempt_ by
scientists?

What do you think the dismal failings were and who was
responsible for them?


Ed Stewart wrote:

>>Not only that, but there is already one voice of dissent on the
>>public record from the participating group of scientists in the
>>panel, Dr. H.J. Melosh, a meteorologist who was interviewed for BBC.
>>Dr. Melosh is reputed to have said that the panel wasn't independent
>because they had connections with the UFO community and it was
>>allegedly clear to him that the panel was not clean.

>>Dr. Melosh went on allegedly to say that the so-called evidence was
>>not convincing and it was un-scientific with no hard evidence
>>available. He went on to say that he for one was not going to spent
>>any more time on the subject of UFOs.


Jerome Clark replied:

>Mr. Sunshine's intellectual sloppiness never ceases to amaze me. He
>is passing on what is clearly a rumor, perhaps generated by the
>wishful thinking to which Mr. S is susceptible. Note the following
>in the above account:

>"reputed to have said"
>"allegedly clear to him"
>"went on allegedly to say"

>Pretty impressive, Mr. S. Thank God you're not attempting to do UFO
>history.


Rather than being sloppy, rumour-mongering, engaging in wishful
thinking, or, Lord save us, attempting to re-write UFO history,
Ed is in fact referring to a transcript of the BBC World Service
program, "A Question of Science", broadcast on 4 October 1998.

Featuring opinions and comments from a number of scientists
including Dr. Richard Wiseman, Prof. John Durant and Dr. Susan
Blackmore, together with contributions from others, such as Jane
Watkins, editor of 'Fortean Times', the program debated the
'Sturrock Panel' report.

Noting I've written to Dr Melosh asking if he would clarify his
overall views, this is a relevant extract from the available
transcript, documented by a 'radio ham' in Croatia:

- BBC reporter Graham Easton presents a short review of the
Peter Sturrock statement from end of June, 1998. Peter stated
that science can find new things and it can learn from UFO
reports. The investigation of the panel was supported by Mr.
Rockefeller. World Wide media broadcasted the news in June when
astronomer Peter Sturrock said that UFOs are serious thing.

- BBC plays a clip recorded in June where Peter says that we
must investigate the psychological part of UFO claims together
with physical evidence.

- After that BBC plays recorded interview with Dr. J. Melosh
from The Lunar and Planetary Laboratory in Arizona. He is a
meteor expert. He says that he was invited, along with others,
to the meeting where the panel presented the best evidence of
UFOs. But Melosh says that the panel wasn't independent because
they have connections with UFO community. He said that it was
clear that they are not clean.

- Graham speaks about Peter Sturrock again. He says that
Sturrock is President of The Society For Scientific Exploration.
Other members of panel are convinced in theories of remote
viewing, cold fusion, reincarnation and warp drive - they are
'Star Trek' scientists.

- But then BBC again plays recorded statement from Peter
Sturrock where he says that UFO phenomenon was ignored and
ridiculed in the past. He says that in the past, a few hundred
years ago, people were convinced that meteors - "rocks from the
sky" and ball of lighting were a joke. But today we know that
they are real. So we could maybe learn something from UFOs in
the future although we don't know what that is for now.

- BBC plays continuation of the recorded interview with Dr.
Melosh. He says that the so called "evidence" from scientific
panel is not so convincing and it is un-scientific. There is no
hard evidence or fragments from UFOs which could change our
mind. Melosh states that he will not devote his time any more to
UFO subject. [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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:33:35 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:50:22 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:45:34 -0500 (EST)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>From: Rebecca <XianneKei@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:57:36 EST
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>>UFO is the _perfect_ description for the phenomenon of
>>Unidentified Flying Objects. We don't know what they are or
>>where they come from.

>>Rebecca

>OK, but we don't know that they are objects, and they don't
>"fly" in the same sense that an airplane or rocket does, so the
>only part that really fits is unidentified.

>Lets just call them U.

>Bob


Better yet, now that Ur is the present favorite catchphrase
among the cognoscenti, why not just call them Ur-U?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:58:31 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:46:56 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:47:39 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:49:55 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>>>>S N I P <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>What do Bruce Maccabee and the VideoMeister think of such
>>>images?

>>>Regards,

>>>Leanne Martin

>>Good guess. Be tough to prove with these data, however. Would
>>have to know the distance of the "sun shade" from the camera,
>>among other things..

Hi there,

Leanne,
The _sun shade_ was a folded umbrella at a 3 ft distance.


>Hi Guys,

>Just a quick observation. Why shoot into the sun at all? Sunshade
>or no. The posibilities of bounced reflections on the many lens

Just another quick observation.

I couldn't find Sunshade in my dictionaries. The correct spell
is  _possibilities_  and not posibilities.

>elements plus the 'backlit' appearance of any images that are
>captured, make the whole technique a no-go from the start. I have
>gotten daylight footage of these objects without having to shoot
>(into) the sun. I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't know what I was
>looking at afterwards if I did. I try to _eliminate_ extraneous
>influences on the finished video, not increase them!

I think Leanne's question was directed to Bruce and Jainno,
anyway, a professional investigator's duty is to verify _all_
the data available of any material presented with anomalies,
this investigation ends when _all_ the possibilities are
extinguished, if not then, there was no _real and complete_
investigation.

>I have copies of the tapes in question. There _are_ some very
>intriguing shots of anomalous objects in those tapes. But there

This anomalous objects are part of the UFO investigation, I
don't want to argue with you John, but your background is not
enough for me to stop my serious and dedicated investigations.

Recommendations about the use of cameras against the sun light
is not only healthy, it is obvious for neophytes and amateurs,
in this case I have risked my health and security many times in
many complicated investigations of my own, that's part of my
duty, like a firemen, you must tell your kids not to play with
fire but firemen must work with fire, understand?

If you are trying to stop my intervention I ask you please to
reconsider your participation at least in those related to my
posts, respect my intervention and you will be respected.

>are also so many goddam bugs buzzing around that after a few
>seconds of viewing the whole thing looks like air borne bugs at

Buzzing is referred to _noise_, they are flying, and they
definitely have been on the ground, correct, they were airborne
sometime.

>different distances to the camera's lens. Can't tell em apart in
>some of the sequences. Everything is moving in the same
>direction! Don't get me wrong, there's some genuinely anomalous
>stuff on there, it's just damn near impossible to tell which is

Correct! John, nice appreciation, then as you know this
anomalous stuff  is what _we investigators_ must work with, it's
obvious this anomalies are not for enthusiastic people or fans!

>which without dedicating some serious time and resources to the
>project. I can give neither.

Well, then go straight to your business and let the Video Technique
for me.

>How about concentrating (also) on educating folks on the _best_
>techniques rather than the worst? I would like to learn (from
>guys like Bruce) what they consider "good video" or well taken
>video. What's involved? What should we do/not do? That, would

Bruce and other members including me, are not the panacea.

>serve a far more practical purpose than discussion of this faulty
>and dangerous 'sunshade' method.

Danger is one of many challenges for the _real_ field investigator.

>First thing -anyone- learns when they get their first camera is,
>_don't_shoot_into_the sun!_ If you should move, or alter your
>angle slightly while shooting you could _easily_ recieve

English is not my native language but check your spelling,
you must say _ receive_ not recieve.

>permanent and irreversible damage to the eye/vision. I don't
>recommend that _anyone_ try this 'John Bro' technique unless they
>are highly experienced observers and very familiar with their
>equipment. It _could_be_ very dangerous for an amateur.

In this case send your message to the amateurs, not to me.

>I have something like 27 years of experience with complicated
>astronomical and photographic equipment and I would _never_ take

Good!, maybe we can share our knowledge between your experience
and my 35 years in astronomy and related _sofisticated_
equipment and your _complicated_ equipment.

>chances with my vision by employing the use of a technique such
>as the one being discussed here.

>My wife has worked with the blind for 19 years, I do not wish to
>join their ranks! I'm much more interested in learning how to
>record daylight video of these objects safely/correctly/
>properly.

I hope you learn ahead enough to participate with your own
experiences.

>There, I feel better! I'll crawl back into my cave now. <G>

Now, I feel better too!

Regards

Alex





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. <aura@telekabel2.nl>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:18:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:57:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.

>Regards

>Roy..

Hiya Roy!

I play the guitar, sing and write lyrics. Although I must admit
I haven't got as much time as I would like to do so...

Greetings,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Rebecca <XianneKei@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:38:31 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:00:47 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:45:34 -0500 (EST)
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change?

>OK, but we don't know that they are objects, and they don't
>"fly" in the same sense that an airplane or rocket does, so the

>Lets just call them U.

>Bob

Hi Bob!!!

Do you really want to get into this with me? <G>

A butterfly isn't made of butter nor does it make butter and it
doesn't fly in the same manner as a rocket or an airplane,
should we change its name as well?

Long time, no chat.

Rebecca







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                            'SETI Signals' - More

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:43:11 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:23:14 -0500
Subject: 'SETI Signals' - More


"seticontact@my-dejanews.com" has just updated his page on the
possible signals received by means of SETI methodology including
essential new information and photos. Please check:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193

Here's a txt-version of the page. Links are preceded by asterisks.

Stig

*******


Pictures of SETI Signals from unknown engineer in the UK.


Updated 10-27-98


(Photo of graph) October 22, 1998 21:13 UTC

(Photo of graph) October 23, 1998 21:17 UTC


I have contacted the engineer and requested more information.
One thing of interest is that the position of these signals
coicides (roughly) with the position of a star named EQ Pegasi
which is about 22 light years away in the constellation Pegasus.
The SETI Institute thought they might have picked up signals
from this star back on September 17th and their description of
the events that followed is *here.

Here is the text of the message that appeared on the SETI email
forum 10-26-98:

<Begin Quote>

Several days ago I sent the message below to the executive
director and the"Hits" list without a response.(This may be due
to me not being amember of the SETI League) I am very excited
about this yet it seems no one at the SETI League leadership is
interested so I send this along to the members and appeal to
them to help confirm this interesting signal. I have tried
sending this several times all to no avail. This
is my last attempt as I think I may be censored.

_message follows_


Hello,


I am sending this along to inform you of a possible SETI Hit.
First let me state, I am *NOT* a member of the SETI League for
reason's I would rather not go into. I have however been
conducting Amateur SETI for little over a year and a half. I am
an engineer at a major telecomunications firm in England and I
have for the last year conducted SETI from one of the large (10
Meter) dishes we have here that was taken offline some year
sago. This is a "parasitic" experiment and no one around here
knows I mounted a 2nd feedhorn on the dish due to the fact that
I am the engineer.

The station is as follows:

One 10 Meter dish ----> into a custom built (by me) 1450 Mhz
Feedhorn>-----> into a custom built (again by me) -----> a
"waterhole" filter (again designed and built by yours truely)
-----> an Inmarsat LNA with about 25db gain ----->an ICOM R7100
whose output is sent to two Pentium II's (one running SETIFOX,
the other FFTDSP42)

Here is what happened: On 22 Oct 1998 at about 21:13UTC FFTDSP
loggeda "Hit". Whilst I was working outside the signal faded
into view. Ilooked at the FFTDSP screen when I came inside to
take a break to find the last bit of signal trailing into
static. I quickly used the REPLAY.EXE program to replay the data
to find what you see in the gif file HIT.GIF. The antenna was
pointed at RA: 23 degrees 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx),
Declination:19 Hours 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx).

Several times during my shift I moved the antenna to that
position butthe signal did not reappear. Today 23 Oct 1998 at
approximately thesame time (21:17UTC in this case) the same
signal was picked up at the same RA and declination. I hadcome
in prepared to check again for the signal. Between last night
and tonight I checked out all equipment to ensure it was in good
health so you can imagine my excitement when SETIFOX alerted me
at about the same time that it detected a carrier. I had FFTDSP
logging the data again and you can see by looking at HIT02.GIF
the signal did almost the exact same thing as the night before.
I hurried to move the antenna off the source and when I did so
the signal went away I moved it back on and lo and behold there
it was. I ran two more on-source, off-source tests of this type
before finally keeping it onsource by putting the antenna in
tracking mode. I during this time I recorded several minutes of
data in the form of a .WAV file to disc.

Now that said, I am very reluctant to give my name due to the
nature of my work and the fact that my supervisors know nothing
of my SETI endeavor. I have a wife and kids and don't want to
risk my job unless I know for sure this is the real thing. I was
hoping your lot could check it out over the weekend since I will
be unable to take data during my days off. I don't risk having
the programs running when I am not there just in case someone
from the company comes nosing around. Anyway if this sequence
occurs again Monday or Tuesday I will alert Jodrell Bank, and
the media (BBC, CNN,Skynews, and the like) due to the fact that
I don't trust many people, SETI folks included. (No offense
meant)


73's (I'd give my call but that would give me away.)

So I'll just sign this, anonymous (for now)



THE LATEST NEWS AND IMAGES FROM THE ENGINEER.


On Tuesday October 27th the engineer posted the following images
and news to the *SETI discussion group


Hello again. Quite a few people here have asked me to post
yesterday and today's data which includes the on-source, off
source demonstration as well as signal fade out. For those still
skeptical, I've been in contact with a major radio observatory
in Europe (It is NOT Jordell Bank.) One astronomer there has
told me they are following the source when they have time and so
far they have only detected two anomalies which they are trying
to sort out. The interesting thing is one of the anomalies
happens to coincide with the yesterday morning's "hit". Let me
stress to you that they were very reluctant to follow up on my
data but eventually agreed that I *might* have picked up
something. Since their dish is several orders larger than mine I
expect a confirmation tobe made soon and a telegram sent to the
IAU as per the Declaration of Principles Concerning Activities
Following the Detection of Extraterrestrial Intelligence. They
have also cautioned me about speaking to the press until that
time. Unfortunately, I had already as they say, "jumped the gun"
spoken with a reporter from the Telegraph and The Independant
here in the UK. In the USA I've done email interviews with the
New York Times, a science reporter for the San Francisco
Chronicle, The National Enquirer, a fellow at MSNBC, a lady at
Fox News and a rather rude bloke named Matt Drudge who has been
been filling up my mailbox with all sorts of silly questions
like "What do they look like?" "What do they eat?" "What
language do they speak?" "Is their math like ours?". I am doing
my best to see to it that they embargo their stories at least
until confirmation from the observatory I mentioned above. Most
have told me the story will run in a matter of days unless it
breaks before then elsewhere. I am continuing to work on them to
set right the mistake I made in going semi-public. Unfortunately
one large, international news organisation which I will not
mention by name, has already figured out my identity and one of
their news teams has set up camp down the road from our
installation. Good luck holding them at bay...

On to yesterday and today's (so far) data.

The GIF file's 1026-1 and 1026-2 are screenshots again from
FFTDSP which show what happened the other morning when I moved
the dish off-source by about 7 degrees and then back on. One can
clearly see the signal fade and then fade back. One can also
clearly see the modulation and side bands. GIF 1027-1 is another
screen shot of what happened this morning when once again the
signal presented itself and faded out. The biggest difference
between these signals and the first two seem to be the
modulation and sidebands are clearly visable AND they are much
shorter in duration. The aquisition times are as follows:

1027-1.GIF Date: 27 Oct 1998 Time: 07:15 UTC

1026-1.GIF Date: 26 Oct 1998 Time: 05:58 UTC

1026-2.GIF Date: 26 Oct 1998 Time: 06:45 UTC (Re-aquired at
06:30 after moving off the source and running equipment checks
for 15 minutes)

1027-1.GIF Date: 27 Oct 1998 Time: 07:15 UTC

1026-1.GIF Date: 26 Oct 1998 Time: 05:58 UTC

1026-2.GIF Date: 26 Oct 1998 Time: 06:45 UTC (Re-aquired at
06:30 after moving off the source and running equipment checks
for 15 minutes)

-<snip>-


By the way I did some nosing around and found the Decleration of
Principles referenced above. *Click here:

I also was suprised to see there is already a framework for a
reply.

Click here:

It should be noted that the exact frequency of the signals he is
talking about is (according to him): 1453.07512Mhz plus or minus
about +400 hz due to the doppler shift of the planet as well as
the earth.

Some basic data on the star EQ Pegasi:

Star Name Ascension Declination Distance (Lightyears) Spectral
Type

Eq Pegasi 23h31m52.2s 19deg56m15s 21.97 M4V

Part of a binary system with an M6V companion.

(Photo of EQ Pegasi Courtesy of the STSci Digital Sky Survey)

Ron Blue from the JPL (The Jet Propulsion Laboratory) writes:

M type stars were thought to flare and any earth type planet
would have to be at the Venus location putting them in danger
during flaring. M type stars live the longest and assuming the
universe crunches maybe be present near the end.


Ron Blue - JPL


WARNING: Everything below is total speculation


So if EQ Pegasi does have an earthlike planet with intelligent
life what the planet look like? Below is a rendering of such a
world.


Notice the star is redish in hue (cooler than our sun) so the
planet orbits quite close. Additionally you can dimly see EQ
Pegasi's M6V companion near the edge of the world the signal
(may) have come from.

John M Dollan - a graduate assistant at Montana State University
wrote the following to USENET:

Okay, I'm going out on a limb here. While I am an avid believer
in life beyond Earth, intelligent and otherwise, I find myself
constrained to think of these matters in a scientific light. In
that respect, I would have to say that EQ Pegasi is an unlikely,
if not impossible site, for indigenous intelligent life.

EQ Pegasi is a double star system, with both members being red
dwarf stars, M4 and M6 V respectively. Being of this class star,
an Earthlike world is almost certainly out of the question,
since either member would be too dim to support a viable
ecosphere. Granted, if they were very close to the star, then
there might be the possibility for liquid water, but the planet
would almost certainly be tidally locked, in which case the
surface climate would probably be altered enough to preclude any
of the prerequisites for life. Also, both stars are flare stars,
meaning that they are quite young, and that their massive solar
flares would be quite lethal to life.

Now, understand, this does not mean that there can't be life at
this system. Certainly, if the planet has the proper
"ingredients", then simple life forms might have already
developed. But intelligent life? Unlikely at best.

Please don't misunderstand me...this does not mean that
intelligent life cannot exist there...simply that it is likely
not to be indigenous. Who knows, perhaps some spacefaring
culture decided to make a jaunt there for some reason, and the
reported signal was some sort of status report or something. In
light of this, there are two solar like stars within 10 light
years of EQ Pegasi: G 130-4 and HR 222 (Gliese 33). Both ofthese
are K-type stars, which may fall into the range of spectral
classes that should be able to support "standard" Earthlike
worlds. I realize that this explanation may be viewed as an
incredibal amount of wishful thinking in the eyes of some, and a
desperate attempt at debunking of intelligent life by others.
Who knows? Maybe science has it all wrong, and life CAN exist
around a star like EQ Pegasi. And maybe the signal was just an
artifact of nature, somehow. All I wanted to do here is offer
some possibilities.


best regards....

--

John M. Dollan

Montana State University - Northern Graduate Assistant


<snip>


Who knows indeed! It should be noted that while this scientist
is skeptical he has kept an open mind on the issue. It is
possible that no habitable world exists at EQ Pegasi and what
was picked up was a robotic space probe from another star
system. It is also possible that the signals did not come from
EQ Pegasi but perhaps one of those Solar type stars he
mentioned. The dish the engineer used is small enough that it
would have a fairly wide observing area. The point to remember
is this: science has suprised us before. Just when we think we
have the universe all figured out we are thrown another curve
ball. Remember no one expected a Jupiter mass planet to be
orbiting a solar type star as close as the one at 51 Pegasi .
Now many stars have been observed with planets that orbit that
close. No one expected planets around pulsars either. Or planet
forming disks around a dyng star.One thing is sure. If this is
indgenous intelligent life it would have been receiving signals
from earth in the form of radio, television, radar and satellite
communications for a good 50 years now. Perhaps this is an
answer. Another thing is certain should this be proven beyond a
doubt: our ideas about life and intelligent life in the universe
will have to be revised a great deal as any intelligent life on
a planet in the EQ Pegasi system would have to be *VERY*
resilient. Only time will tell what lay ahead. I will continue
to track this story and provide updates when needed.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                       Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:24:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:30:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:08:36 -0500

[...]

>I understand that Ed is no piece of cake. This is no reason to
>treat him like a piece of shit. If you find pleasure in
>insulting people then you have a big problem.  Not being a
>hater, but deliberately provoking hate, is a dishonorable
>attitude: hypocrite at best.

Let's at least try to be consistent here, Serge. Jerry didn't
exactly start this insult fest so I think your comment that
Jerry is the one who has been "deliberately provoking hate" is
way off. At most, Jerry has been simply dishing out what he was
served first.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that Ed Stewart came first when
he openly admitted his - rather venomous - disdain (and that's
putting it mildly I think) for Jerry's published work, which he
followed up with disgusting attacks on Jerry's character - like
suggesting Jerry was obviously "intellectually dishonest".

Stewart may have the right to freely express his own opinions,
but please, that's no excuse for acting like a pompous,
insulting ass who then starts whining when then opposition gets
irritated about his inexcusable behavior.

>You are not a gentle man, Jerome.

He was, until Ed Stewart tried to piss all over him.

Perhaps Ed ought to consider taking a few communication classes,
I am sure he could use some practice in that particular skill.

And I am stumped you are accusing Jerry of starting all this,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: George Barkouris <apurimac@compulink.gr>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:35:06 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:36:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs

>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.


Hello Roy!

I am a musician! And a UFO researcher...

regards,

George

 From Athens, Greece





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                 BAR 199810

From: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:28:25 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:38:43 -0500
Subject: BAR 199810


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).

October, 1998 (Vol 1, #10)

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, From the Publisher, Recent Additions, and Most
Intriguing.

FEATURED TITLE:

Everything You Know Is Wrong: Book One, Human Origins
(<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966013433/bufosweirdworld">
Everything You Know Is Wrong, Book One: Human Origins</A>)
by Lloyd Pye
Trade (large-size) Paperback, 322 pages
January, 1997
Illustrations, Bibliography, Index
The author appears to be sincere, and the book is erudite and well-written.
That said, I can't let the name pass.  As many people reading this probably
know, EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG was the name of a comedy album by the very
successful group, FIRESIGN THEATER. The album was released in 1974, and was a
satire of believers in UFOs, etc.  Giving a serious book this title is a bit
like writing a serious book on the American West and naming it BLAZING SADDLES
(without ever mentioning Mel Brooks).

That aside, the book is a minor classic in the worlds of both hairy biped
(bigfoot, yeti, et al.) and Sitchin-esque alternative astronomy (the solar
system didn't form the way most people think).  In the first two parts of the
book, the author takes a reasonably well-argued position that supposedly pre-
human fossils are actually much more like hairy bipeds than they are like homo
sapiens.  This follows a general refutation of both Darwinian evolution and
Creationism.  I want to stress that this argument is well-researched and will
present a good challenge to supporters of either doctrine.

In the third part, the author presents his views on hairy bipeds.  While again
apparently well-researched, he asks us to accept statements without citing
specific cases.  For example, on page 89, he says,

>"...encounter reports number in the thousands, and a consistent thread among
>eyewitnesses is that larger ones do indeed have ankles set noticeably forward
on >their feet."

I would be very interested to read even ten cases out of the purported
thousands in which this particular was spontaneously noted (to avoid leading
questions) by an eyewitness.  It seems unlikely: "It was nine feet tall!  It
had glowing red eyes!  It was huge!  And its ankles were set noticeably
forward on its feet!"  Note that I am not saying that such cases do not exist:
if they do, it would have been nice if they were specifically cited (such as
with a footnote) to justify the statement.

Pye seems willing to use the "facts must follow the theory" line of argument
that he rightfully challenges in others.  On page 84, he says:

>"...genuine tracks never start and stop like magic.  They come from some
place >and go to some other place.

I presume that this is just logically derived.  Interestingly, one of the
handful of specific cases he does cite allegedly has this very feature of
"like magic" tracks.  On page 37 of CREATURES OF THE OUTER EDGE by respected
authorities Jerome Clark and Loren Coleman, they note that leading up to the
1924 Washington Ape Canyon case, the miners found "...humanlike tracks sunk
four inches deep in the center of the sand bar.  There were no other tracks
anywhere nearby.  Either whatever made them had a 160-foot stride, the men
reasoned, or...".  Coleman and Clark claim to have based their account on a
book by the principal witness, Fred Beck (I FOUGHT THE APEMAN OF MT. ST.
HELENS).  Again, this is one of the few that Pye calls "...the most
substantiated..." (page 150).  In the probable future books in the EVERYTHING
YOU KNOW IS WRONG series, Pye would benefit from less definite statements in
which sweeping generalizations are made about all future data.

The fourth and final part is entitled THE TRUTH? and leans heavily on the
works of Zecharia Sitchin who is admiringly profiled in a piece called GENIUS
AT WORK.  Pye expands on Sitchin's Sumerian-inspired theory about a presently-
unscientifically-recognized planet periodically wreaking havoc in the solar
system.  Pye suggests that homo sapiens was genetically engineered by
colonists from that planet, primarily for use as a labor force.  The
development of the idea leans heavily on the current state of the art of DNA
manipulation, with which Pye once again seems familiar.

I do highly recommend this book.  It is rare that a serious, well-researched
book on hairy bipeds comes out.  Even though more mainstream sasquatchologists
may have trouble with the origin theories, and fringe ones may have trouble
with the exclusion of evidence of non-corporeality in at least some cases,
they will all find it a  valuable reference in those discussions with
Skeptics.

I want to take a moment here to thank a correspondent who sent me the book.
This person is not connected with the publication, but had heard Mr. Pye speak
and was impressed.  The featured title is always something which I have read,
and I really appreciate being pointed towards new titles.

----------

FROM THE PUBLISHER (this is as received: I have not yet read the book):

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0963916122/bufosweirdworld">
Cosmic Test Tube</A>

>Just published-- COSMIC TEST TUBE by Randall Fitzgerald is an important.
>new 395 page all-in-one reference source on Ancient Astronaut theories, UFO
>sightings, contact and abduction, extraterrestrial intelligence, SETI
programs, and >even the ideas of skeptics. It's an essential addition to any
serious UFOlogist's >library.
>
>This encyclopedic volume explores the ideas of Sagan, Vallee, Sitchin,
>Strieber, von Daniken, Budd Hopkins, Carl Jung, and dozens more. COSMIC
>TEST TUBE provides detailed summaries (chronologically) of all the most
>significant UFO-related literature from 1919 to the present. This
>complete UFO history answers questions about which theories evolved
>first, who contributed the research, and what evidence is the most
>compelling.  Woven throughout are the insightful perspectives of
>investigative reporter Randall Fitzgerald--currently a contributing
>editor to READER'S DIGEST.


RECENT ADDITIONS:

Thanks to a new system, I have added many more items this month.  The first
place they go is into the Master List (
<A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Weirdware2/master.html">Master List</A>), and
then into their respective topics.  It is also possible that they may appear
in BAR first, as I try and list the latest releases here. Some of the recently
added titles include:

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1556708041/bufosweirdworld">
1999 UFO Calendar (Huneeus)</A>
Wall Calendar, August 1998
List Price: $14.95, Amazon Price*: $11.96
Huneeus, a columnist for FATE, is one of the authoritative voices of the day
on ufology, particularly on happenings outside the U.S.
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0791439062/bufosweirdworld">

Edgar Cayce in Context</A>
by K. Paul Johnson (from the State University of New York series)
Paperback, October 1998
List Price: $18.95, Amazon Price*: $15.16

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0713726857/bufosweirdworld">
Electric UFOs</A>
by Albert Budden
Paperback, September 1998
List Price: $14.95, Amazon Price*: $11.96

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0609800213/bufosweirdworld">
Field Guide to North American Hauntings</A>
by W. Haden Blackman
Paperback, October 1998
List Price: $15.00, Amazon Price*: $12.00
Blackman's FIELD GUIDE TO NORTH AMERICAN MONSTERS was recently a Featured
Title in BAR.

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1852839244/bufosweirdworld">
Fifty Years of Flying Saucers (Spencer)</A>
by John and Anne Spencer
Hardback, October 1998
List Price: $39.99, Amazon Price* $27.99
It's good to see a book by British ufologist John Spencer, author of THE UFO
ENCYCLOPEDIA.

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/072253549X/bufosweirdworld">
Gods of the Dawn</A>
Subtitle: The Message of the Pyramids and the True Stargate Mystery
by Peter Lemesurier
Hardback, September 1998
List Price: $24.95, Amazon Price*: $17.47

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0306459833/bufosweirdworld">
Lessons From the Light</A>
Subitle: What We Can Learn From the Near-death Experience
by Kenneth Ring and Evelyn Elsaesser Valarino
Hardback, October 1998
List Price: $29.95, Amazon Price*: $20.97
Ring is perhaps the best author supporting the NDE if you are scientifically-
oriented.  He has also compared NDE experiencers with UFO experiencers, and
follows the process of using control groups.  If it is like his previous
books, it is not to be missed.

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0773759735/bufosweirdworld">
UFO Files (The Canadian Connection Exposed)</A>
by Palmiro Campagna
Paperback, September 1998
List Price: $14.95, Amazon Price*: $11.96

----------

MOST INTRIGUING:

The five most visited books at Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books last month were:

1.<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0609800175/bufosweirdworld">
Field Guide to North American Monsters</A>
2.
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0440221161/bufosweirdworldA/">
Abducted! (Jordan)(paperback)</A>
5. (tie)
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0486230945/bufosweirdworldA/">
The Complete Books of Charles Fort</A>
5. (tie)
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0915024594/bufosweirdworld">
The W-Files</A>
5. (tie)
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0609802631/bufosweirdworld">
How to Defend Yourself Against Alien Abduction</A>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*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.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                Re: 1450 Mhz

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:01:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:42:14 -0500
Subject: Re: 1450 Mhz


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:54:06 +0100 (MET)
>From: pharabod@in2p3.fr
>To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
>Subject: 1450 Mhz

>Warning: it seems that 1450 Mhz is currently used in receivers of
>satellite TV and in CPU of some computers (search for "1450Mhz" and
>"1450 Mhz" on dejanews).

>J. Pharabod

I started a random search on "1450mhz" and the first list I
found the statement below;

 "....satellite signals at 950-1450 MHz"

And 122 other similar sites. Looks like it could be a satellite
to me, but hey, I'm a software engineer, I leave the electrical
work for those better suited...






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

               Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:12:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:49:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew


Regarding...

>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:20:56 +0200
>Subject: Mitchell: Secret Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

Stig mentioned:

>Source: The People [London]
>Date: Oct 25 1998
>Header: Yes, Aliens Really Are Out There Says the Man on the Moon

Subscribers may be interested in a transcript of the recent
Microsoft Network 'UFO' forum's on-line chat with Mitchell, held
on October 20. It's now available at:

http://forums.msn.com/UFO/library/tmitchell.asp

Asked, "It was reported in a newspaper, and posted on the
Internet, that you believe there is an ongoing cover-up
concerning matters of UFOs and Alien Contact. What convinces you
the most there is a cover-up and how long has it been going on,
and what do you think is the best proof of contact?", Mitchell
elaborated:

"I rely upon the testimony of contacts who I have had - old
timers - who were involved in official positions in government
and intelligence and military over the last 50 years.

These people want to tell their story. But they still feel they
are under a tight security oath and would therefore like amnesty
or immunity so they can.

They say the Roswell story is true and other such stories
following it.

The reason for coverup was in the beginning. It was not really
known where these came from.

The military would be unable to carry out it's national defense
mission with such technology. And there was a real fear that it
would fall into the hands of our adversaries.

It was considered appropriate - and I believe it was appropriate
- to find a solution to the problem before advising the public.

Unfortunately, like too many highly classified projects - but
none quite like this one.

It became a way of life - it became entrenched. It took on a
life of it's own.

So today, very few people if any at high levels of government
really know the truth at all.

The data/files are no longer accessible.

We can not say that today's government is really covering it up
- I think that most of them don't know what is going on anymore
than the public". [End]


In answer to the question, "Dr Mitchell... can we just assume
here that your knowledge on the subject is purely from the point
of view of "enthusiast" (such as most people here) and that you
have no contacts or friends who have had access to physical
proof?", Mitchell also confirmed:

"No - I have talked with people who claim to have hard physical
proof.

I have not personally seen that proof". [End]


I wonder if the 'secret files' which 'The People' reports
Mitchell as having confirmed seeing and which 'prove' the
'Roswell' cover-up, are the hoax MJ-12 'documents'.

Maybe someone could clarify this with him.



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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 19:19:57 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:32:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:24:05 -0500
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Regarding...

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

>>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Forwarded from James Easton at his request - thanks Errol

>There is a difference between an objective interest in 'UFOs'
>and what is tantamount to religious fervour, masquerading as
>objectivity.

Absolutely, James.  I couldn't agree more.

>The former comes with a preference for scientific standards of
>evidence, the latter is recognisable by copious misuse of
>'debunker', when denigrating anyone who questions the 'faith'.

And of course calling proponents or the merely open-minded
believers in a "faith" falls into the same category, I'm sure
you would agree.

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 19:27:48 PDT
>>Fwd Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:09:03 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>It is more and more apparent that the extraordinary claims are being
>>made by debunkers and their apologists inside and outside ufology.
>>When the history of this sad episode (the UFO phenomenon and the
>>refusal of those who ought to have known better to confront it
>>honestly) is written, I do not doubt that it will be cautious,
>>sensible ufologists who are judged the conservatives in the debate,
>>the debunkers the wild-eyed cranks.

>'Debunkers, apologists, cranks'...

>What do you think any prospective, interested scientists
>browsing the UpDates list would conclude on seeing these
>sentiments?

I think they'd recognize the phrases.  Except for the first,
they're used all the time in the debunking literature to
characterize those of us who dissent from the negativist party
line. (For a recent example of rhetorical excess in this regard,
see Frederick Crews's emotional anti-UFO pieces in the New York
Review this fall.)  You may have a point, though: one ought not
to descend to their level.

If you send me (off-line) your personal address, I'll be happy
to send  you a piece I wrote on that very subject, with relevant
and amusing quotes from the debunking literature.

In conclusion, let me repeat:  List readers are urged to read
(or re-read) the Sturrock panel report and make up their own
minds.  They don't need James Easton or me (or Phil Klass or
whomever)  to tell them what to think.  The report should, for
anyone who can read English, speak for itself.  'Nuff said.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Paul Stuart <pcstuart@pathcom.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:42:40 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:35:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?


I write songs, play the guitar and bass but program the drums and
keyboards.

Ahhhh, if I could just sing and carry a tune!!!!

Paul Stuart
Toronto





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:41:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

In think of two. Me. I'm a trumpet player,valve trombone and
flugelhorn. Made a living at it some years ago, then found a
steady day gig that I liked. Chris Styles is a hell of a guitar
player and made a living at it for some time. We've jammed
together a few times in a friend's group, but we don't make a
habit of it.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:16:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:29:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 06:31:09 PST

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:21:41 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:36:49 PDT

>>>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:45:40 -0700
>>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>Such was not the case. The cases
>>>presented to it convinced panel members that further UFO study
>>>is worthwhile, though some (not all) expressed pessimism about
>>>what more could be learned from existing cases.

>>That is an outright false statement and not based on what the
>>scientific review panel said and is on record stating.

>In fact, the panel would not have recommended further UFO study
>by scientists had it not found the cases investigated by
>ufologists interesting and suggestive of the potential of UFO
>study, whatever the limitations (in the panel's view) of any one
>specific case.  If panel members had not felt that way, they
>would have had  no reason to recommend that science commence to
>look at UFOs seriously.  There is no reason to believe that
>their recommendation was based on a mere psychic sense that UFO
>study might be worthwhile even if nothing in the present made it
>look that way.

>In any event, further discussion here is pointless.  List
>members who are still paying attention are urged to read the
>Sturrock report and make up their own minds about what it says.
>I suspect that their reading will be rather closer to mine (and
>every other commentator aside from Stewart and Klass), but
>everyone should decide that for himself or herself.  You are
>smart enough not to need Ed or me to tell you what to think.

>Meantime, it is more than worth your while to read (or reread)
>what James McDonald had to say about the UFO phenomenon. The
>Fund for UFO Research has reprinted some of his eloquent,
>insightful writings on the subject.  McDonald wrote from the
>experience not only of a first-rate scientist but of a
>hard-working investigator of cases; whatever their other
>virtues, the scientists on the Sturrock panel can lay claim to
>no such expertise. Along with Hynek, no scientist writing on the
>UFO phenomenon and on ufology has a more compelling claim to our
>attention.  It is a shame that his work is missing from nearly
>all current ufological discourse.

>Cordially,

>Jerry Clark


I must for once disagree with Jerry.

I have mentioned Jim's outstanding work as reported in the
Congressional Hearings of 1968 in essentially every one of my
more than 600 + presentations entitled 'Flying Saucers ARE
Real'.

For some time I have been making available copies of Jim's 71
page paper at a cost of only $10.00 including postage and
Handling from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.

I consider it the best single paper on UFOs ever done. I
consider Jim the best UFO investigator ever, bar none. I was
also very impressed by the state of his files when Richard
Greenwell and I had chance to exmaine them not too long after
Jim's death.


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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:25:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:34:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:14:51 -0500
>Subject: Music & UFOs

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

(picture me, raising my hand)

Over here!

I play (played) bass guitar for several years in a now defunct
group. In addition, I was first chair French horn in a small
orchestra, also now defunct. (geeeze, is there a pattern 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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:21:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:38:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?


Dr. Bruce Maccabee is an outstanding keyboard player and
composer.He even makes available copies of his recordings





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                       ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 2

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@ccsi.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:08:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:50:40 -0500
Subject: ELFIS ISSUE 7 FALL 1998 part 2


Subscribe to the ELFIS LIST:
http://www.listbot.com/subscribe/moistfist

Howdy ELFIS LISTERS,

     A bit late but a whopper of an issue (and I do say so myself)
tho I have yet again let precious writing time slip by. But what
of it . . . I hope the collective contents of this installment ring
at least a couple of your personal bells.

     So let me ramble on with the introductions strewn throughout
the following  - T A B L E of C O N T E N T S -

MAIN ELFIS ISSUE SEVEN page:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/A7.htm

ARCHIVE ARTICLES:

Hallucinogenic Hypno-Vision and the Plasmatic Cells of Gaia
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7hhvpcgAG.htm

Unidentified Flying Amoeboids - both by Andrew Gaze
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7ufaAG.htm

     Synchronisticly, while preparing work for my own massive
article undertaking known as "UFOs-Hermeneutic Messengers of
Gaia-Ecology of the OverMind" (to begin soon!) I came across an
old issue of JK's zine DHARMA COMBAT which featured
articles of Jeff Lewis' I had read within the pages of CRASH
COLLUSION magazine. It also featured two pieces by one
Andrew Gaze who is surely of the EXCLUDED MIDDLE bunch
somehow. His two articles cover the SPACE ANIMAL /
CRITTER hypothesis of UFOs and the title is so close to my
aboved mentioned article that I can only assume I must have
unconsciously grokked the title for I had never actually read it
before now. The synchronicity continued with the discover of
last installments articles on the Space Animal Theory
(augmented by John Walker's updated use of Hal Puthoff and
company's Zero Point Energy / Vacuum research).
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7JWufoexplnd.htm

     Moving right along to. . .

MR. BAGGINS' CORNER:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL0/mrbagginscorner/mrbbcrnr.htm

EHE AutoBiography of Mr. Baggins
     Part TWO: On the Making of a Consumate Child Actor
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7bbeheab2n3.htm
     Part THREE: The Clarence Incident
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7bbeheab2n3.htm#3

     PSI'D Kick From The Past part TWO:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7psikick2.htm

More CARGO CULTURE:
     The Gallery is open this week with new exhibits
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/images/gallery/gallerymain.htm

     In the Gallery you will find more black & white comic strips
of recent past history including the classic American Express
Alien and New Yorker humor. Also on display are some images
for that sultry X-Phyles mood and a bite into the UFO/Alien
Merchandise campaign, just in time for All Hallows Eve.
"MwooAhAhAaahhh!"

     Artificial Sun - Lighting System or Hoax Device?
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7artsun.htm

     Recently there was talk on the UFO UpDates Mailing List
concerning a certain type of hoaxed UFO sightings of the
"distant light" variety via helium balloons, florescent tubes,
and fishing line (at its basest level) in connection with crop
circle hoaxing as well. This reminded me of the time me and
several friends had the wool pulled over our eyes in just such a
way by one of the many pranksters amongst our group. The
"ufo" remained so for just under five minutes as we hooted
hollered and compared what we were seeing before breaking
out the binocs. Thanks to a nearly full moon, the objects hanging
around, and especially the binocs we didn't succumb to an
extended bout of the heebeegeebees. That and the fact that the
prankster himself, once located, faked disinterest. So to bring us
back suffice to say that the UFO UpDates list discussion on
said topics reminded me to add the ARTIFICIAL SUN lighting
system to the site. If you wanna catch a more recent use of the
lights look for the inevitable rebroadcast of MTV's Extreme
Sports & Music festival which was video-taped live in Zilker
Park on the south side of the river in downtown Austin some
time back.

REVIEWS:

     Last year's release of the movie FAIRYTALE: A TRUE STORY
prompted this ReView of the Fairy case investigated by Sir
Arthur Conan Doyle and Harry Houdini.
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7faeries.htm

PROJECTS: UFO-University "The Visible College"
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/UFOU/ufou1.htm

     In FORBIDDEN SCIENCE, the journals of Jacques Vallee, he
tells of a meeting of the then members of their "Invibile
College." (Aptly named for the terrible stigma attached to
interest in UFOs at the time [and surviving to this very day]) In
 this particular meeting the congregated scientists were
grumbling over the need for a VISIBLE COLLEGE, however
they were immediately struck with the daunting details of
funding, ego and hierarchy which most often lead to the
present state of ill-funded and ill-managed projects,
organizations and networks that makeup the emerging global
ufo research community.
     Well I am just enough of an optimist to think I can pull it off!
So, begin very soon expect to see details materialize on the
evolution of UFOU-"The Visible College" - Earth's First UFO
University; featuring multidisciplinary investigation into UFO
sightings, UFO witnesses, the phenomena of perception &
consciousness, physical science approaches to UFO trace
evidence, instrumented ufo research, as well as a whole host of
UFO investigatory tools and soft science approaches including
anthopological / folkloric reports.
     In the meantime . . . . go check out the first installment of the
UFOU
UFO GUIDE:
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/UFOU/ufoguide.htm
     and its intro to RPVs, UAVs, M-P/Ds and other Radio Control Vehicles
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/UFOU/rpvuavmpd.htm

DREAMTIME NOW!
     Lucid in Lovecraftian DreamLands by Thom Laaki
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL7/e7DT.htm

     And concluding this issue, we have a long-time hurricane-of-a
-friend, Thom Laaki, whose insightful thoughts and experiences
he is finally sharing with our ELFIS readers. Thom recounts his
recent plunge into the Pre-Atlantean Mythos of H. P. Lovecraft
and company while Lucid in a dream. Check it out!

And until next time . . . "See Ya In The DreamTime, NOW!"
--

        Stephen MILES Lewis

Writer, Designer, Producer, Editor
        & INFORMATIONALIST

E.L.F. INFESTED SPACES -
Journal of Possible Paradigms

mailto:elfis@ccsi.com

        ELFIS OnLine :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin

        ELFIS Archive :
http://www.sdgweb.com/~elfin/ELFOL0/ELFOLARC.html

        ELFIS Links :





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:17:04 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:54:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Roy

Piano, for 48 years.  Trained in classical, love to play Neil
Young and Bob Dylan, who I believe to be the greatest imagery
poet since Rimbaud _and_ Verlain.

Also don't do to badly with Toto's music from Dune.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:37:43 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:03:51 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:14:51 +0000
>To: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 43

<snip>

>PACACCINI, WITNESSES HUNT
>FOR BALDIM CAVE CREATURE

>     On Wednesday, October 14, 1998, Vittorio
>Pacaccini, UFO researcher and author of the book
>INCIDENTE EM VARGINHA, visited Sete Lagoas
>in Minas Gerais state, Brazil and met with men
>who claimed to have seen a Chupacabra in a
>cave in the Serra do Espinhaco mountains.
>     The sighting took place at 7 a.m. on October 1,
>1998 in a mountaintop limestone cave east of
>Baldim, a small city on the Rio das Velhas
>100 kilometers (66 miles) north of Belo Horizonte.
>An amateur speleologist, Marcelo Uchoa, and two
>companions encountered the creature in a cavern
>150 meters underground.  Uchoa shot two photos
>of the Chupacabra with a Kodak digital camera.

G'day List,

I am in total disbelief with this one.

If you go to the link for this photo (from the couple of times
that it has been posted already) you will see without any doubt
that such a claim is wrong, faulty, untrue, a fib/lie/porky.

In that photo you will see that there is very strong daylight in
the ceiling hole immediately behind the obviously un-awestruck
creature onlooker! Impossible in such a cavern 150 meteres
metres below ground.

Plus, our hoaxers, without a shred of real proof have labelled
this "creature" a Chupacabra.

>His friend and fellow resident of Sete Lagoas,
>Leandro da Silva, then posted the photos on his
>webpage on October 10.
>     In an interview with UFO Roundup, Pacaccini
>reported that Uchoa "could not be sure (how tall
>the creature was) but it was bigger than a dog."
>     The creature escaped through one of the many
>wall fissures in the cave after Uchoa snapped his
>pictures.
>    Pacaccini, Uchoa and da Silva left Sete Lagoas
>by car and drove east to Baldim.  "The cavern entrance
>is almost on top of a mountain," Pacaccini reported,
>"Our way up was a little vertical."
>     "Right at the cave's entrance, it became obvious
>that we'd have a hard time getting inside that place.
>We had to use ropes to get in the first gallery,
>going down about 9 meters (29 feet).  The cave's
>walls were very slippery and dangerous."
>     "Usually the first gallery of a cave is particularly
>dangerous because it is the easiest place to find
>the scorpions, the spiders, the snakes, the jaguars."
>     "To reach the second gallery, we went down for
>60 more meters (198 feet).  Our goal was to reach
>the fifth gallery--150 meters (495 feet) below the
>surface--where the picture was taken."
>     "After a lot of struggle, we went down 30 more

<snip>

Some sanity in the posts, please!

Regards,
Leanne





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:21:47 +0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:05:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,
>
>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Hi Roy,

I play the flute, purely for relaxation and fun, and love to
sing in choirs.

I think you really need something to pull yourself away from
absorbing issues such as ufology!

What's your choice of instrument?


Sharon. 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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                Music & UFOs

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:53:37 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:08:34 -0500
Subject: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.

>Regards

>Roy..

Dear Roy:

My first college degree was in Music. Then I taught for a while
(hated it) and just played for a few years.

Since then I went back to school taking a science and
engineering courses.

While I no longer play, I have also noted that many people into
UFOs do have a musical backbround of some sort. I don't know if
this is a disproportionate number or not,  but I have noticed
this.

Best

-  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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 04:35:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:14:15 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:58:31 -0600
>From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:47:39 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>>Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:49:55 -0400
>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

[...]

>>>>What do Bruce Maccabee and the VideoMeister think of such
>>>>images?


Alex wrote:

>In this case send your message to the amateurs, not to me.

I wasn't talking to you! The post was directed to the list
members in general and some of it to Bruce Maccabe specifically.
Alex, I'm not going to respond to your rather egocentric tirade.
Next time, _before you blow a gasket_ check to see if your name
is even mentioned! Not everything is about _you_, or directed to
_you_ personally. You are _way_ too sensitive man. I merely
expressed my opinion. I don't know what country you are in, but
here in the USA stuff like that is allowed.

As the kids in the ghetto say, "Chill out man!" Failing that,
(and based solely on the vehemence of your response) you may
want to look into a psychological management tool such as
Prozac!

Peace,

John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                Re: 1450 Mhz

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 04:52:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:17:32 -0500
Subject: Re: 1450 Mhz


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:16:08 +0200
>Subject: Fwd: 1450 Mhz

>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:54:06 +0100 (MET)
>From: pharabod@in2p3.fr
>To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
>Subject: 1450 Mhz

>Warning: it seems that 1450 Mhz is currently used in receivers of
>satellite TV and in CPU of some computers (search for "1450Mhz" and
>"1450 Mhz" on dejanews).

>J. Pharabod

Hi All,

For all you ham operators out there, why don't you check out;

4215 KHZ!

I got some e-mail with a .wav file attached that was requesting
help to check out this wavelength. I don't own a radio myself
but I do have several people checking this out.  So far it has
them stumped. One guy is going to check it out at night to see
if it is atmospheric reflection or not. Let me know what you
guys think. It's way down there in the low frequencies.

Maybe Navy?

Peace,

John Velez
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                         SETI Email Discussion List

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:13:16 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:30:43 -0500
Subject: SETI Email Discussion List


Source: SETI League's website:

http://www.setileague.org/admin/setilist.htm

Stig

*******

SETI Email Discussion List

SETI League member Bob Cutter (KI0G), who chairs our Internet
Committee, has very kindly set up an unmoderated SETI email
reflector on his Internet server. Bob's list provides yet
another medium of communications for anyone with an interest in
SETI. This list is open to the general public, and is intended
for discussions about SETI philosophy and strategies in general.

*All administrative coordination between SETI League officers,
committee chairs, and volunteer Regional Coordinators should be
conducted over the closed "Volcor" email discussion list.

*All technical discussions regarding equipment design,
construction, and operation should be conducted over the closed
"Argus" email discussion list.

*All coordination activities between registered Project Argus
participants regarding validation of SETI candidate signals
should be conducted over the closed "Hits" email discussion
list.

Although Bob's open list is not an official SETI League
activity, all SETI League members have been invited to utilize
the service. To subscribe, send an email to MajorDomo@sni.net ,
and type "subscribe seti me@email.adr" in the body (where
"me@email.adr" must be replaced by the email address from which
you will post messages to the List).

Once registered, users will receive a detailed email telling you
how to post to the list. Your postings should then be addressed
to <SETI@sni.net>. Postings will be sent to the email address
from which your subscribe message originated. Please do not send
email to this address if you are not registered to the SETI
list. Users are asked to keep posts short, to the point,
respectable, and on topic.

If you later wish to unsubscribe from this list, it will be
necessary to send an email to MajorDomo@sni.net, with
"unsubscribe seti me@email.adr" typed in the body (where
"me@email.adr" is as described above). Please do not email to
the Executive Director, or the Secretary, or post a message to
the list asking to be removed; nobody else can unsubscribe you
from the list. And please note that any unsubscribe requests
must be sent from the exact email address under which you
subscribed, as the MajorDomo program looks at the "from" line to
know who to remove.

Our list manager respectfully requests that you not attach files
to your emails posted to the list. Remember that your
attachments (especially graphics) are extremely
bandwidth-intensive, and that they would be going to not one,
but perhaps hundreds of recipients, many of whom may be paying
by the minute for connect time. If you have a graphic or other
file which may be of interest to the list, please post a text
message describing it and declaring its availability, and then
send it individually (off-list) to anyone requesting it. Thanks
for your cooperation.

Archives

SETI League member Stephen Zarkos has graciously volunteered to
maintain monthly archives of List discussions, arranged by
thread, on his Website at
http://www.duhnet.com/SETI/archive/index.html.

Have You Disappeared From The List?

Occasionally, participants will report that they haven't
received any messages in quite some time, and ask if they have
been removed from the list. Yes, despite our best efforts to
maintain email lists, people do occasionally inexplicably
disappear from them. SETI League Internet Services chair Bob
Cutter explains: "If mail is bounced back to the server, the
name is removed from the list. Why is the mail bounced back?
Many reasons: mailbox full because you are on holiday, you are a
student and the term has ended, you dropped your AOL account,
one of the computers in the chain had a bad day, etc. Nothing
sinister going on or intended."

If you feel this has happened to you, simply query the list
manager software about your status. To do this, send an email to
majordomo@sni.net with "who seti" in the text, and you will get
back a list of registered participants. If your email address
isn't listed there, simply re-enroll per the above instructions,
and accept our apologies for the inconvenience.


entire website copyright =A9 The SETI League, 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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                 Re: SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI?

From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:23:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:35:13 -0500
Subject: Re: SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI?


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:51:59 +0200
>Subject: SETI Signals At 1450MHZ From EQ PEGASI?


>I got on the track of this thanks to a message posted to
>"alt.ufo.reports" on October 26. The message from the SETI
>discussion forum is at the end. Unfortunately the downloading of
>the graph pictures is very slow, so I have given it up for the
>present.

>*******

>SETI signals at 1450Mhz from EQ Pegasi?

>Author: seticontact
>Email: seticontact@my-dejanews.com
>Date: 1998/10/26
>Forums: alt.tv.x-files, alt.fan.art-bell, alt.ufo.reports

>At

>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193

>is a message I found posted on the SETI discussion forum today.
>It reads like something out of science fiction but to the best
>of my knowledge it's true: Apparently Jodrell Bank is looking
>into this. Oh yeah, the .GIFs mentioned in the message are on
>this website:

>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193


Stig, ebk, list, et al.,

This is very cool.  Because I saw "Contact" and the Charlie
Sheen movie, I sort of understood what "unknown" was excited
about. Since this is just breaking, will you keep posting
"updates" because I haven't seen any mention of this on the
news.  I hope it's not some sort of hoax.....folks sometimes
have a very weird sense of humor which can only be appreciated
in context, but if you're not "in" on the context, it can be
disconcerting and
troublesome.

I believe there are List members who are really up on this
stuff......their insights and thoughts would be most
appreciated.

John White  mjawhite@digitaldune.net







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

              Concern Re. General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:02:42 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:41:45 -0500
Subject: Concern Re. General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message


This is a Special Request for assistance with information re the
General Ramey office photos of the Roswell 'flying saucer' crash
taken on July 8, 1947:

There is growing concern that pressure may have been placed by
unknown forces on the University of Texas at Arlington to
suppress distribution of close-up enlargements of the message
held in General Ramey's hand shown in the photos I took of him
in his office at 8th Air Force Headquarters in Fort Worth,
Texas, on July 8, 1947. Since last month I have been attempting
to purchase duplicate negatives of each of the photos and
close-up enlargements of the Ramey Message for use by RPIT
(Roswell Photo Interpretation Team) in its continuing efforts to
completely decipher the message and to better study the
anomalous objects and glyphs previously discovered in the
photos. UTA has refused to provide the duplicate negatives and
has not delivered the Ramey message enlargements. Further, they
have not responded to inquiries as to reasons for delays in
delivering the enlargements, which had been promised within a
week.

It would be helpful to know if any members of the List have been
able to obtain either duplicate negatives or close-up
enlargements of the Ramey Message. Please provide this
information either thru UFO UpDates or directly to me at
JBONJO@aol.com. Your cooperation will help to advance the
serious research of RPIT currently in progress.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:47:01 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:50:42 +0100
>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change


>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:03:13 -0800
>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change

>>Been there, done that.

>>Having been around the UFO scene for a longer while than most, I
>>should point out that the push for a name change has been with
>>us for some time. We should remember that one of the reasons UFO
>>was coined in the first place was because the USAF thought
>>'flying saucer' was too descriptive and inaccurate for sighting
>>reports. See how that turned out.>

>>Now, we want to change the term again in the hope that UAP won't
>>be equated with LGM. Sorry, it won't matter. The media will
>>never accept the new term, and most of popular ufology will
>>continue to use UFO rather than UAP.

>>What's more, if you do a literature search for this in
>>scientific archives, you'll find that UFO was already replaced
>>by TOPA (Transient Optical Phenomena of the Atmopshere). This
>>happened in a scientific paper in either JRAS or JRASC (I can't
>>remember which at the moment) by a scientist who was reporting
>>his own personal sighting and wanted to differentiate his
>>"objective" account from the riff-raff he and his peers were
>>reading in the tabloids.

>>His suggestion was ignored completely.>

>When this idea was first put forward I figured it to be a light
>hearted suggestion and entered into the discussion with that in
>mind. Let's not treat this too seriously. It seems to have taken
>on a life of its own.


I have often used the term TRUFO, short for TRue UFO, to
designate a case which has been thoroughly invesigated and no
reasonable explanation found. Until complete invesigation is
done, any particular case could be called a UFO sighting based
on the general definition given by Condon: anything not
recognized by the witness. Generally the witness is not an
expert at identifying things in the sky, so the witness makes a
report and an investigator takes on the case (this is the
traditional method going back to early Air Force invesigation in
1947..namely, try to explain reports). A case which upon initial
investigation resists identification could be called a
"candidate TRUFO case. In fact, from the point of view of the
dyed-in-the-wool skeptic (self description by Phil Klass to me
during our first-ever conversation in 1973 or 1974) the BEST one
could hope for is a candidate TRUFO case because...there are no
TRUFOS with the EXCEPTION of heretofore unacknowledged natural
UNINTELLIGENT phenomena. It is "OK" to have unintelligent
phenomena ...and, in fact, Klass appealed to a barely accepted
unintelligent phenomenon - "ball lightning" - to explain what he
considered to be "candidate TRUFOs" back in 1968 (his book UFOS
IDENTIFIED). Where the real resistance to acceptance comes is
not in the possibility that a TRUFO case --thoroughly
investigated and no known explanation available - might point to
the discovery of some previously unknown natural UNINTELLIGENT
phenomenon. Consider, for example the recent "discovery" of
"sprites" -- atmospheric glow discharges from clouds upward-
which have been report for years by pilots who were told they
were seeing things. Since some of these reports may have been
grouped with "UFO" sightings, most upper atmosphere scientists
who had no goo theoretical reason to "believe" in such, passed
the sightings off as not worthwhile of study. Then the evidence
got "too good" and a collection of "candidate TRUFOs" got
explained. (We still have DOL - domes of light - phenomenon
reported over the years in which an expanding glowing hemisphere
of light reaching many miles in size is reported occasionally.
Watch for this "candidtae TRUFO" type report to be explained
someday as a natural unintelligent phenomenon.)

But let a TRUFO case point toward INTELLIGENT BEHAVIOR... and
then comes the resistance, the screaming and yelling... "it
can't be therefore it isn't we need better data witnesses make
mistakes investigators can't be trusted everyone has an agenda
all ufologists are believers why do people immediately jump to
conclusions its all natural phenomena space brothers are the
dreams of weak personalities flying saucers are round with domes
because they are fantasies about breasts and we can make
analogous comments about the cigar shaped or cylindrical ufos
it's all birds or planes or superman or motes in the eye or
reflections of shiny surfaces or lightning flashes and
persistence of vision or meteors or stars or planets or
satellites or mirages or jokes or hoaxes or weather balloons or
gas bag balloons and besides we have no really credible
information and besides there always will be sightings that
can't be unexplained because there isn't enough information for
a positive identification and whenever there is enough
information from credible witnesses for a positive
identification if one were possible then it can't be
unidentifiable because these intelligent craft don't exist
because there is no evidence that they exist because they have
never been reported and all UFO reports are from people who are
99 44/100% kooks and nuts and of course you can't believe them
because they have desire to and besides.... if you can't trust
the scientific honesty of Donald Menzel, Philip Klass, James
Oberg, Robert Shaeffer and numerous others...(most of whom know
much less about the subject than these men)


who can you trust?


In general a TRUFO case is one which resists identification
after investigation. The cause of such a case could be evidence
of unknown natural unintelligent phenomenon or...... a
(natural?) intelligent phenomenon not of human origin. This
latter is the most interesting to me and probably most people on
this list (although undiscovered unintelligent phenomena are, of
course, interesting and can lead to numerous publications in
"straight" scientific literature... perhaps even a Nobel prize).


So the next question is, are there are TRUFO cases indicative of
non-human intelligence, or what I call Other Intelligences (OI).
In other words are there any TRUFO/OI cases?

I would say there are. Some have been debated on this list but
most have not. One that was discussed ad nauseum was the Kenneth
Arnold case. As a result of recent discussions ove the last
couple of years I suppose that some people now think that Arnold
saw (a) geese, (b) pelicans or (c) high speed jet aircraft
developed from German war research. (Note: mirages, atmospheric
effects, nearby ordinary aircraft, hoax and delusion were
debated years ago and have been rejected as acceptable
explanations. In the summer of 1997, in honor of the 50th
anniversary of the sighting, a science writer published the
suggestion attributed to Klass that these were meteors. I think
the newspaper needs a new science writer.) Arnold's sighting is
a candidate TRUFO/OI because the reported characteristics of the
9 objects (shape, speed, dynamics of motion) were not
characteristic of any known natural phenomenon (geese, pelicans
included) but rather appeared to be characteristics of something
manufactured. But manufactured by whom? It is a stretch to say
that 9 semi circular jet aircraft with no obvious aerodynamic
surfaces or aerodynamic shape, 8 with convex rear ends and 1
with a double concave crescent rear end, had been manufactured
by the Army Air Force and so well tested and operational that
they were allowed to fly over unrestricted and civilian areas
hundreds or thousands of miles from their base. If Arnold had
seen these objects flying over a restricted air base there might
be more reason to think "American".

Anyway, here we have a case in which there is enough information
so that the objects SHOULD be identifiable. That is, the
characteristics are so well described that an experienced
investigator should be able to identify the underlying
phenomenon. However, when a whole series of Candidate
Explanatory Phenomena (CEP) are tested against the reported
characterstics, all the phenomena are found to fail (airplanes,
mirages, birds, etc. do not have the reported characteristics)
we end up with a TRUFO/OI case..

Note:where skeptics have failed science is that they have
proposed explanations without really testing the explanations
against the report. This is typical of the skeptics.....
Maccabee Rule for Debunking UFO Sightings: ANY PUBLIC
EXPLANATION IS BETTER THAN NONE with the corollary, if the first
explanation seems unsatisfactory, publicize a second, and if
that isn't convincing, a third, etc.

So, where does this get us in changing the name? Nowhere,. UFO
will be used.. in most cases (unidentified to the observer) but
with the connotation of "ET" to the press and general public. If
researchers were to generally adopt nd consistently use a
modification like TRUFO and TRUFO/OI (where TRUFO/N could be a
previously unknown natural UNITNELLIGENT phenomenon) then
eventually that designation would be picked up by the press. Of
course, there would still be arguments over the terminology.
Even though the TRUFO designation is intended to indicate an
exhaustive investigation, with all CEP rejected, debunking
skeptics would argue that any case which is unexplained hasn't
been investigated enough. They would argue that there must be
investigation until an explanation is found (because there can
be no unexplained sightings!). Debunking skeptics could also
argue over the quality of the investigation or the credibility
of the investigators, etc. Note: true skeptics, who are
skeptical of BOTH sides of the issue, might become skeptical of
the debunking skeptics if the investigation does appear to be
highly credible. After analyzing the Menzel treatment of
several\ early cases I became "skeptical of the skeptics".

Bottom line: UFO will be around even after they land and take
over.... or whatever.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:06:48 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Michel M. Deschamps <739411@ican.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO Name Change?
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:28:55 -0500

>Too many folks are accustomed to hear the term "UFO".

>When I say "UFO", I refer to the definition given by Edward
>Ruppelt who "invented" the term. He came up with it because
>there were many unusual objects from 'someplace else'
>other than the typical saucer shape.

>In the early days, 'UFO' meant 'some type of unknown object from
>outside the earth'. But nowadays, the term 'UFO' is a
>free-for-all. People will tell me: "Yeah, you say you saw a UFO.
>But if it were investigated further, you would find that what
>you saw was a....weather balloon, or a...satellite!"...or an
>airplane, or this, or that.

>Well, that's bull! I think Ruppelt had it right, and we've
>forgotten that. "UFO" is good enough for me. I should know
>because I've had 14 separate sightings since 1974; each
>different in shape and appearance than the others, plus
>_no_sound_, and _definitely_ weren't from earth. That, I'm
>absolutely sure of.

In another message I have discussed the use of the term TRUFO to
designate a case which remains unexplained after all the
Candidate Explanatory Phenomena (CEP) have been rejected.
TRUFO/OI designates a case which has strong indications of Other
Intelligence. The actual object reported in a TRUFO/OI case
could be called Alien Flying Craft, AFC.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                  Assessing 'The Estimate Of the Situation'

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:16:43 -0500
Subject: Assessing 'The Estimate Of the Situation'


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:29:41 -0500
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Assessing The ''Estimate' Of the Situation'

>I am posting this material as a separate thread as I incorrectly
>posted an older, incomplete version of my commentary in the
>Obergian Debunking thread where Stewart and Clark are
>entertaining those who are easily distracted. If you are looking
>for character attacks then resume your reading of their ongoing,
>enlightening and amusing thread of personal attack and
>counter-attack, the UFO equivalent of World Wide Wrestling
>(WWW). Now lest anyone think that I don't appreciate WWW just
>understand that I spent many, many hours watching it with my
>grandfather who thoroughly loved the sport - he lived to 103 so
>maybe it has a undiscovered gerentological benefit - time will
>tell.

>And so I begin:

>There are three key sentences which have been omitted in most
>discussions of the 'Estimate' of the Situation. For readers
>unfamiliar with Ruppelt after reading these sentences and
>understanding their implications just ask yourself why the other
>the discussion. This way the next time you see these hypocrites
>discussing the 'Estimate' you will know where they are coming
>from. The following is abstracted from some material I have
>written to accompany my long in forthcoming index of Ruppelt's

<snip>

>"The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects".
>Secret Documentation

>There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
>yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
>despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
>recent promises of de-classification. The 'Estimate' of the
>Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
>public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. Be certain to review
>the 'Estimate''s index entry for Ruppelt's discussion of this
>legendary document. The 'Estimate' was considered by its creators
>at ATIC to contain "proof positive" of the reality of the UFO
>and that they were interplanetary! Ruppelt discusses the
>peculiar fate of this estimate, after noting that it was not
>accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Hoyt
>Vandenberg.>

>The estimate died a quick death. Some months later it
>was completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator.
>A few copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of
>the golden days of the UFO's.


Thanks for your discussion of the 'Estimate'. I have written about
this in in my manuscript 'The UFO/FBI Connection' recently
discussed on the Art Bell show (with Hilly Rose as the host).
The following is an excerpt with adaptation to this thread.

....................................

From: The UFO/FBI Connection/The Real X files ('The Truth is In
      Here')


Capt. Ruppelt wrote about it in 'The Report on Unidentified
Flying Objects'. He wrote, in the published version of his book,
that he personally read the 'Estimate' and that it presented the
extraterrestrial conclusion based on sightings by scientists,
pilots and other credible observers. Ruppelt did not state in
his book exactly when the 'Estimate' was sent to General
Vandenburg for approval. However, a clue to the date is
available in the draft of the manuscript of his book, which has
become available to researchers only in recent years. The draft
lists 10 of the sightings discussed in the 'Estimate', only 3 of
which were published in his book. One of the unpublished
sightings occurred at the atomic energy research facility known
as Los Alamos in New Mexico (which would play an important role
in sighting history in the months and years following the demise
of the 'Estimate'). According to Ruppelts draft manuscript, "A
group of people were waiting for an airplane at the landing
strip in Los Alamos when one of them noticed something glint in
the sun. It was a flat, circular object, high in the northern
sky. The appearance and relative size was the same as a dime
held edgewise and slightly tipped, about 50 feet away." This
sighting occurred on September 23, 1948 (exactly a year after
Twinings letter to Schulgen which said flying saucers are
real!). Since the 'Estimate' seen by Ruppelt included this
sighting it must have been written and sent to Vandenburg after
September 23 rather than in August as suggested by Ruppelt's
description..

According to Ruppelt, the Top Secret 'Estimate' was passed,
without comment, upward through the ranks to General Vandenburg.
General Vandenburg then rejected it for "lack of proof."

Several of the Project Sign officials then went to the Pentagon
to discuss the 'Estimate' with Vandenburg. It is logical to assume
that they tried to convince him that all their analyses
logically pointed toward interplanetary vehicles but, according
to Ruppelt, Vandenburg repeated his rejection.

Lets suppose the aircraft and intelligence experts at
ATIC/Project Sign really didnt have about any "hard" evidence
(debris, pieces, bodies, whatever) yet honestly arrived at the
interplanetary conclusion. Why wouldnt Vandenburg accept it? Why
tell the experts that, in spite of months of analytical work,
they were wrong? Was he truly unconvinced by their logic or did
he have a hidden agenda? Was he trying to cover something up or
prevent the consequences of acceptance?

(Methinks he did protest too much!)

Since there are no documented answers to these questions (at
least no documentation available) I can only speculate that he
didnt want the ET conclusion to be accepted because, if it were
accepted, flying saucer reality, with all the attendant
consequences, would become official Air Force policy. The
conclusion might then leak out and the Air Force would have a
big problem. It would have to admit to the American people that
alien craft were flying around and the Air Force could do
nothing about it.

Vandenburgs rejection of the 'Estimate' was an important turning
point .. a "watershed event"...in the history of the Air Force
investigation. When Vandenburg rejected the 'Estimate' he
effectively set forth a policy that UFOs or flying saucers could
not be officially identified as extraterrestrial vehicles. One
may imagine that the captains and colonels and other personnel
working at ATIC were disappointed, perhaps even stunned, at the
rejection because they were the acknowledged experts in
understanding foreign aircraft technology. They had worked
diligently for months, using their best logical reasoning, to
arrive at an answer and then Vandenburg, in a discussion which
couldnt have lasted more than several hours, and may have lasted
less than an hour, had rejected their answer. He had essentially
told them, "Sorry, wrong answer." They knew that Vandenburg,
because of his rank at the top of the military establishment,
knew things they didnt. Perhaps they assumed that he rejected
the ET conclusion because he knew the objects were something
else, although they couldnt imagine what since they had already
considered and rejected the "secret US project" and the
"advanced foreign aircraft" theories. Perhaps they assumed
Vandenburg rejected it simply because he couldnt deal with the
consequences of acceptance. Whatever the reasons, they were sent
home with the understanding that they would have to arrive at
other explanations. Sometime later the order came to destroy all
copies of the ET 'Estimate'. (Evidently at least one survived for
Ruppelt to read about three years later, but then it, too, was
destroyed.) When a four star general speaks, lower generals,
colonels, captains, etc., listen and act accordingly. The
saucers appeared to be solid, mechanically engineered objects
rather than natural phenomena or figments of the imagination.
Therefore if they couldnt be extraterrestrial vehicles they had
to be something else....man-made aircraft or missiles.


By late October the ATIC/Sign invesigators had settled on this
as the only possible non-ET explanation. The problem then was to
justify this explanation. Since they were not our missiles they
had to be of foreign origin. The only way the investigators
could imagine the missiles to be of foreign origin was if the
Soviets had pushed German WWII technology far beyond anything
that we had imagined. And yet, they could not really accept that
either. They were confident that the USA had the most advanced
aircraft technology. Furthermore, they didnt believe that, even
if the Soviets had such advanced aircraft, they would fly them
over the United States where one might crash or be shot down.
They were caught on the horns of a dilemma! They were being
forced to justify explanations they really didnt believe. Thus
began the decline in quality of the Air Force flying saucer
investigation, a decline that would not be reversed until 1952.

(End of excerpt)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:19:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:31:41 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:13:11 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>In other words, no evidence for the ETH and the MHH is not
>>falsifiable contrary to Mark Cashman's commentary otherwise.

>Determining The
>Truth Or Falsity Of The
>Misperception/Hoax/Hallucination
>Hypothesis (MHH)
>Copyright 1998 by Mark Cashman

>http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/analysis/mhh.htm>

>Introduction

>In a communication to the UFO Updates mailing list from Ed
>Stewart, Stewart claims that the hypothesis that UFO reports
>are soley caused by>

>    Witness misperception of known phenomena (incorrect
>   interpretation of stimulus by perceptual systems).
>
>    phenomena, based on imagination, literature and cultural
>    context.

>    Witness experiencing altered mental states which generate
>    the appearance of UFO events in the absence of any
>    external stimulus.

>cannot be validated because it amounts to attempting to prove a
>negative. His citation of part of the Project Sign report is to
>the point:

>"No definite and conclusive evidence is yet available that would
>prove or disprove the existence of these unidentified objects as
>real aircraft of unknown and unconventional configuration. It is
>unlikely that positive proof of their existence will be obtained
>without examination of the remains of crashed objects. Proof of
>non-existence is equally impossible to obtain unless a
>.reasonable and convincing explanation is determined for each .
>incident."

>However, it is my contention that the MHH
>(Misperception/Hoax/Hallucination Hypothesis) can, indeed, be
>proven or disproven. This document discusses the discriminators
>which I believe exist for this hypothesis.


Very nice commentary.

See my somewhat analogous (and much shorter) comments in the "
UFO name" thread were I discuss the meaning of TRUFO and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:48:37 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:15:27 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:58:31 -0600
>Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:46:56 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:47:39 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>>Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:49:55 -0400
>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


There seems to be a discussion regarding whether it's safe to
shoot into the sun with a video camera (I think). As long as you
keep your eye to the viewfinder, there is no danger at all. If
the camera is a CCD type, then the camera is safe, also (though
the results on a consumer camera might be questionable). If the
camera is an older "tube" type, then one should not point it at
the sun or any another bright, raw light source as the imaging
tube will get a permanent burned spot.

Later,
Roger Evans






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bill Weber <koran@cchat.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:06:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:19:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 13:13:17 PST


>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:13:11 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 10:07:02 PDT

>>>>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0700
>>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>To the list:

<snip>

>Enough, in short, is enough. I have a life to live, a book to finish,
>and a new house to move into with the woman who is the love of my
>life.  Have a good and long life, Ed. I hope that your health continues
>to mend, and I hope, too, that one day happiness finds you.
>Meantime, keep at your splendid bibliographical work.

>Cordially,

>Jerry Clark


Its a pleasure to read a classy, sincere and thoughtful post
from an honorable guy.  Thank's, Jerry.

Double Cheers,

Bill







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                       Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:18:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:23:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:24:08 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:08:36 -0500

>He was, until Ed Stewart tried to piss all over him.

>Perhaps Ed ought to consider taking a few communication classes,
>I am sure he could use some practice in that particular skill.

>And I am stumped you are accusing Jerry of starting all this,
>really boggles the mind.

Jean,

You have my post all wrong. Please read it again carefully and
read Jerome's prior intervention in this thread.

In any case, Jerome Clark and I have agreed not to address this
subject publicly. We have been exchanging our respective points
of view on this matter through private channels. Any further
discussion from my part on this subject would be a breach of my
ethical code.

I will instead give the last word to Jerome (extracted from his
last personal message to me):

>Glad we got the air cleared.

My best,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:10:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:23:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.


I've played a 12-string for more than 20-odd years and many
years ago was a member of a couple of bands that primarily
played in a garage or basement. But it was a lot of fun, and
sometimes miss those simpler days.

It would be interesting if some of us could coordinate to meet
during the next MUFON Symposium in Washington, DC next summer.
The cacophony might be righteous.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 28

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:28:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
>yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
>despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
>recent promises of de-classification. The Estimate of the
>Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
>public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. The Estimate was
>considered by its creators at ATIC to contain "proof positive"
>of the reality of the UFO and that they were interplanetary!
>Ruppelt discusses the peculiar fate of this estimate, after
>noting that it was not accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air
>Force, General Hoyt Vandenberg. Ruppelt states:

>    "The estimate died a quick death. Some months later it was
>completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator. A few

>copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of the golden
>days of the UFOs."

>Readers familiar with the handling of secure documents will
>recognize the unusual way this document was treated,
>declassified and then destroyed. This is a highly irregular
>procedure, after all the purpose of declassification is to make
>the documentation available to the public, not suppress it. Also
>most unusual is that although the document was declassified
>neither Ruppelt, nor any of the other people who have have had a
>copy to read has ever made it publicly available. All of these
>readers were probable signors to the National Secrets Acts given
>their connections to the intelligence community. [15] Don't miss
>Ruppelt's revelations about the role the Estimate played in the
>battle of the pro and anti-UFO factions in the military and
>intelligence communities. An interesting footnote to the history
>of Project Sign's Estimate of the Situation has been documented
>by Loren Gross. He compiled a list of individuals who publicly
>acknowledged that they had read the "momento copies".


Hi  Gary and List

As some one who has had 'hands on experience'of Classified
Document Security and their destruction,I find it hard to
believe that a document of this magnitude would have been down
graded prior to destruction.With this in mind I do not believe
that once the decision had been taken to destroy the document
that-any-copies would have escaped destruction.Classified
documents are counted and rigorously controlled.Contrary to what
one might believe it realistically is virtually impossible to
steal one!(Which is why most spies photograph/copy them)

From my experience once the decision had been taken to destroy a
particular document it was destroyed.Its destruction was always
by fire and witnessed by two Officers who signed acknowledging
the deed accordingly.Classified Document destruction is not
carried out 'light heartedly',it is a serious business.Do it
wrong and one could end up really in the Mire!The ashes were
always raked over.Each HQ had its own small furnace for the
purpose.

I recall how we were not allowed to shred certain
classifications as it was thought possible that given time and
resources the document might of been reconstructed.Its probably
changed now.

I feel once a document had been down graded to none
status(declassified) then any one,regardless  of any
Official/National Secrets Act would have been free to
discuss/publish any information that it contained.

I find it very hard to believe that anyone would admit to having
a copy of this particular document and not be prepared to show
it.After all unauthorized possession of a classified document is
an 'Offence against the State' to admit to owning one is an
admission of guilt. In this particular case of course the
document is allegedly 'Unclassified' so one would be free from
any form prosecution,so why not come clean?What is there to
lose?Publish and be damned as some one famous once said.

I cannot help but feel that either this document never existed
or,my personal choice,it was totally destroyed.

I hope I am wrong on both counts.

Regards

Keith......Keep the Faith!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:07:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:16:11 -0400

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 06:31:09 PST

>I must for once disagree with Jerry.

>I have mentioned Jim's outstanding work as reported in the
>Congressional Hearings of 1968 in essentially every one of my
>more than 600 + presentations entitled 'Flying Saucers ARE
>Real'.

I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>For some time I have been making available copies of Jim's 71
>page paper at a cost of only $10.00 including postage and
>Handling...

For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
not invited.

Words from the publisher:

"In 1969, a panel of fifteen distinguished scientists attended a
symposium sponsored by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science. Representing the fields of astronomy,
physics, meteorology, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology,
these renowned experts reflected the entire range of responsible
opinion on the subject of unidentified flying objects. Exploring
widely divergent views and applying them to the traditional
scientific method, they presented photographs and detailed
descriptions of sightings and subjected eyewitness reports and
physical evidence to intense scrutiny. This book collects the
papers presented at the symposium, several of them substantially
revised. While the book takes no stand on the issue of UFO
reality, it shows that there are still many unanswered questions
regarding the physics and psychology of the phenomenon."

A real bargain at $6.98.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                       Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:38:04 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:07:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:24:08 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchets
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:08:36 -0500

>Let's at least try to be consistent here, Serge. Jerry didn't
>exactly start this insult fest so I think your comment that
>Jerry is the one who has been "deliberately provoking hate" is
>way off. At most, Jerry has been simply dishing out what he was
>served first.

Yes, let's at least try to be consistent here, Jean van Gemert.
I wrote a satirical message on the demonization of Robert Todd.
My reference to Jerome Clark in that missive happens to be fact
and can be independently verified. His three volume encyclopedia
has no mention of any of Robert Todd's contributions to this
field, even though anybody discussing government involvement and
UFOs cannot do so without refering to some piece of government
document which in all probability was uncovered through the
efforts of Robert Todd.  In my opinion, I find that to be
intellectually dishonest on Jerome Clark's part.

His reply to this list included the following:


"Huh? Can anybody explain to me what Ed is trying to say here?"

"Uh huh. Exactly. You must have telepathic powers, dude. Or,
anyway, you think you do, and that's all that matters, right? I
must say, though, that it would take someone as far removed from
ufological reality as a Todd or an Ed to draw all of these
people, of widely varying approaches, views, and reputations,
into the same rant. But of course the point is not to offer any
insights but to smear by association, isn't it?"


Accussing me of something that Robert Todd said and which I made
a satirical observation about. With his typical appeal to
authority talking down to whomever he perceives as being in
disaggrement the above started the barrage of ad hominens from
Jerome Clark which included, as shown with the above quote,
Jerome Clark's habitual need to mal-psychoanalyse his perceived
target. In other words, demonize the person, build a straw man
argument, attribute the argument to the individual and then
demolish the straw man argument hoping that the ufological
gullible does not know a logical fallacy when they see it. The
technique is about as effective as looking at the bathroom
mirror and arguing with oneself.

If that wasn't enough, Jerome Clark accused me of attributing to
him a position that I never attributed to him. The satirical
missive I wrote on the demonization of Robert Todd was mostly
written in the third person and the only part directly
attributable to Clark was the reference to his encyclopedia.


"Not my position at all (as Dennis Stacy, with whom I've been
discussing the very topic of late, will testify), but hey, why
let the facts get in the way of self-righteous posturing? You've
never let them do it before, so why start now?"


And slurring me with the false inmplication that that is my
modus operandi. Sorry, but that dog don't hunt!

BTW, Jerome Clark has never admitted that he left Robert Todd
out of his three volume encyclopedia. Maybe I really struck a
nerve and he is truly ashamed. I guess we will never know.


"Incidentally, Bob Todd is mentioned in the Encyclopedia (pp.
188 and 606)."


In his two volume revision, the above is not relevant to any of
Robert Todd's real accomplishments which are still ignored.
Instead Jerome Clark felt that it was important to mention
Todd's 'The Cowflop Quarterly' and the fact that the Skyhook
balloon that Mantel was chasing has been definitively identified
through Robert Todd's efforts.


"A wonderfully perceptive observation, as usual. Whatever it
means. You're badly in need of the services of a translator, my
friend, not to mention a dictionary which will inform you of the
difference between "loud" and "laud" and tell you how to spell
'non-existent'."

When lost for words or an acceptable argument, Jerome Clark
reverts back to his favorite treatment of his perceived target
and mounts non-relevant attacks on the individual.

>Let's not lose sight of the fact that Ed Stewart came first when
>he openly admitted his - rather venomous - disdain (and that's
>putting it mildly I think) for Jerry's published work, which he
>followed up with disgusting attacks on Jerry's character - like
>suggesting Jerry was obviously "intellectually dishonest".

It was not a suggestion. It is fact, supported by the archival
record on this mailing list. Any questions?

As far as his encyclopedias go. I have no venom or disdaim for
them. But, they are terribly skewed and reflective of Jerome
Clark's present day philosophy and ufological wisdom for however
long that lasts.

>Stewart may have the right to freely express his own opinions,
>but please, that's no excuse for acting like a pompous,
>insulting ass who then starts whining when then opposition gets
>irritated about his inexcusable behavior.

What you call insults happen to be statements of fact supported
by the archival record. If one was to call a murderer a
murderer, or a child molester, a child molester, would those be
insults? Not if a matter of fact and supportable.

I am not whining. As a matter of fact, I am not going anywhere.
Do you have a problem with that?

>He was, until Ed Stewart tried to piss all over him.

For those not aware, please visit  Jean van Gemert's web site
which is a tribute to ufological wisdom, the ETH, and apparently
Jerome Clark.

>And I am stumped you are accusing Jerry of starting all this,
>really boggles the mind.

My perception is that it is not hard to boggle your mind. Look
up all of the archival record starting about the end of
September and October 1st for assistance in the unboggling of
your mind.

Just getting warmed up.

Ed Stewart
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:33:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:20:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0300
>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>Hi All,

>>>This is purely for self interest.

>>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>In think of two. Me. I'm a trumpet player,valve trombone and
>flugelhorn. Made a living at it some years ago, then found a
>steady day gig that I liked. Chris Styles is a hell of a guitar
>player and made a living at it for some time. We've jammed
>together a few times in a friend's group, but we don't make a
>habit of it.

>Don Ledger

Hi Guys,

I don't want to interrupt the thread but,

We already have the components of a _kickass_ Chicago Blues
band - horn (brass) section and all! If I was a millionaire I'd
fly us all to some killer studio on some tropical island so
that we could all jam together just once.

Already we have; Song writers and composers, guitar players,
trumpet, sax, (other brass) a bass player, keyboards, and me on
drums!

If Jerry Clark smoked too many cigarettes and slung back one too
many Margarita's along the way maybe we can talk him into doing
the vocals. Errol (EBK) is an old radio DJ and he could produce
and market us! I'm starting to sound like an old Mickey
Rooney/Judy Garland movie where at some point they always round
up all the kids in the town so that they can, . . . 'Put on a
show!' <VBG>

Ahhh, sweet home Chicago! <G>

Love you guys.

Back to the real world. :(

John Velez ;-)
________________________________________________
                                jvif@spacelab.net
INTRUDERS FOUNDATION/ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                            http://www.if-aic.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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                       Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet

From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:30:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:31:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Unidentified Flying Hatchet
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:18:26 -0500

>You have my post all wrong. Please read it again carefully and
>read Jerome's prior intervention in this thread.

Serge,

There's nothing I could have 'misread' since you worded it
pretty clearly, if I may say so.

But as you've "cleared" the air with Jerry I see no point in
adding any more words on this issue. Hope you guys resolved all
your differences.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:15:49 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:37:40 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:48:37 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:58:31 -0600
>>Fwd Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:46:56 -0500
>>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:47:39 -0500
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>>>Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:49:55 -0400
>>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Video Technique
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>There seems to be a discussion regarding whether it's safe to
>shoot into the sun with a video camera (I think). As long as you
>keep your eye to the viewfinder, there is no danger at all. If

I send the original _Video Technique_ post, I don't know how
here and there are some _experts_ that instead of providing
learning information are creating difficulties and searching not
for the truth about the UFOS but for victims.

Thank you for your kind and asserted opinion.

>the camera is a CCD type, then the camera is safe, also (though
>the results on a consumer camera might be questionable). If the
>camera is an older "tube" type, then one should not point it at
>the sun or any another bright, raw light source as the imaging
>tube will get a permanent burned spot.

The video cameras are provided with filters and coated lenses
also with this new CCD technology we can film or shoot more
safely. Not to mention telescopes that were made to amplify the
images and those can be a _real danger_ to our eyes.

Best regards,

Alex Franz






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:06:35 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:44:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


In a message dated 10/28/98 4:08:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,
updates@globalserve.net writes:

>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>Short & Sweet as they say.

>Regards

>Roy..


Dear Roy:

Yes, even Roswell investigators can be musically "talented". On
my last visit to the Int'l UFO Museum in Roswell, I fortuitously
learned that the Museum's chief investigator, Dennis Balthaser,
used to play drums and sing harmony backup in another life for
some major country & western bands. Making him prove it on the
spot, I broke into my best imitation of Buck Owens as we
performed an impromptu version of "Cryin' Time" to a somewhat
startled group of UFO buffs. "Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, it's cryin' time
again  . . . . . . . . ........ "

Regards,

Tom





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                        _Proof_ Of Ancient Astronauts

From: Drew Williamson <werd@interlog.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:20:38 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:48:01 -0500
Subject: _Proof_ Of Ancient Astronauts


For those of you who have believe in the notion of ancient
astronauts, proof has finally been released. John Glenn, 77,
will be launched into space today at about 3 pm EST. <g>

Drew Williamson







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Re: UFO Name Change?

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:48:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:55:27 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?


>From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:37:06 EST
>Fwd Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:54:52 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change?

Previously Stephen opined:

>We have identified saucers in our skies that fly with
>intelligence. The debunkers demand that we know their origin,
>the nature and composition of the materials of their
>construction, their reason for being here and whatever else they
>see fit to demand in the service of their obtuseness, in order
>to consider them identified.

Actually, you give far too much credit to debunkers. Debunkers
don't even recognize that there are "saucers that fly with
intelligence". In fact, just that kind of recognition would make
the field of UFOlogy a much easier place to work in.

>UFO and Ufology are terms so wedded to the efforts of
>disinformation and subversion, they have to go.

<snip>

>UFO and Ufology are "slave names" - they are part of the
>nomenclature we used when we were, in too great a measure,
>unwilling participants in one of the most intricate and unique
>propaganda campaigns ever waged.

Really? By whom? Was it by the government trying to fool
everyone into believing that UFO's don't exist? Or was it by
overzealous fringe elements within UFOlogy determined to make
UFO's a reality at any cost?

If we change the name "UFO" to something else, do we leave those
undesirable elements behind? Does the government get fooled by
the name change and continue with disinformation about "UFO's"
while we snicker to ourselves and continue with research under
the new banner, secure in the knowledge they'll never catch on?

>They [the terms UFO and UFology] need to go and we to stop
>apologizing to debunkers, the government, the media or anyone
>else for what we know from the evidence.

1) I apologize to no one for my beliefs.
2) What evidence?

>In my work I use the phrase "extraterrestrial related
>phenomena." If the odd reporter or editor or congressperson is
>offended by this, once again - tough.

Why take a stance for your own terminology and not "UFO" or
"Ufology"? It strikes me that if the people you speak of are
"offended" then your terminology doesn't work any better than
the one we already have.

As I pointed out before, a name change is simply that; a name
change. We won't leave behind the stigma that "UFOs" brings with
it until we get results. Calling it "extraterrestrial related
phenomena" doesn't produce any new results that I'm aware of.
Without results, a name change is about as effective new wood
veneer on an old particle board desk. It may look different but
the quality (or lack thereof) is still the same.

Later,

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:05:28 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

Best regards and happy halloween!

Stig Agermose


Forwarded from the SETI Email Discussion List.

Stig

*******

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:37:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Johnson <kris_johnson@yahoo.com>
To: MarcusJohn@aol.com, drseti@eudoramail.com, seti@sni.net
Subject: Re: SETI EQ Pegasi

Hi.

Some of you might be interested in the following attached GIF.
(trust it or not, whatever). I've used Photoshop to find the
difference between the two images.  When properly aligned, the
two images cancel out, resulting in a black block.  This is an
exact, pixel for pixel mathematical match.  If these are based
on the original images (they were taken from the web site that
sprung up) then they indicate that the two images are infact
based on one single image.  For whatever that
means to y'all.

Hope this helps,

Chris J.
==
.-[ Kris_J ]=--=< http://come.to/cjweb >=--=[ Kris_Johnson@yahoo.com ]=.
|    Join the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence (SETI) at...    |
|          The SETI Club - http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/seti           |
'-[ No Junk Email ]=[ Distributed Computing Now! www.distributed.net ]='


[The attachment doesn't make much sense unless you've been
 following along. I've not included it. Suffice to say 'Hoax'
 is a distinct probability and I've saved us all bandwidth.]








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:03:23 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:42:40 -0800
>From: Paul Stuart <pcstuart@pathcom.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>I write songs, play the guitar and bass but program the drums and
>keyboards.

>Ahhhh, if I could just sing and carry a tune!!!!

>Paul Stuart
>Toronto


Hey What are you guys up to?

Forming the "The Roswell Rockets" or some such?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                          Re: CFS Newspaper Article

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:59:17 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:18:24 -0500
Subject: Re: CFS Newspaper Article


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:55:21 EST
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: CFS Newspaper Article

>Subj: CFS Newspaper Article Date: 26/10/98 09:28:07 GMT From:
>Doc Barry <docbarry@webtv.net> To:   alienhype1@aol.com

> The Denver Post  Sunday, October 25, 1998 Page 11A SCIENCE
>TODAY

> Renaming Illness Debated Chronic-fatigue patients, researchers
>seek more respect by Richard A. Knox The Boston Globe

> It says a lot about chronic-fatigue syndrome in 1998 that a
>main topic at a national conference on the subject in Cambridge
>last week was what to call the elusive disorder.
>
> A spirited two-hour debate on whether to junk the current name
>was "very polarizing," says one researcher. Patients and their
>advocates insist that the "fatigue" label is pooh-poohed and
>joked about among those who haven't experienced chronic-fatigue
>syndrome, also called CFS.
>
> "The name sounds so trivial. People think, "Well, I get tired
>by Friday afternoon, too", says K. Kimberly Keeney, executive
>director of the North Carolina-based Chronic Fatigue and Immune
>Dysfunction Syndrome Association of America. "The illness is
>much more devastating than the name would imply."
>>
> No less a public health figure than Dr. Philip Lee, the former
>U.S. assistant secretary of health and human services, declares
>it's time to change the name. Scientists in the field are
>sympathetic.
>
> After all, they have put up for years with colleagues who look
>askance at their research on such an ill-defined (read
>"imaginary?") disorder. But, researchers counter, what do we
>call it when we can't yet agree on what its essence is? Is it at
>
>bottom a brain disease? A metabolic disorder? An immune
>derangement? There's evidence for all and consensus on none.
>"There's unanimity on one point: The current name is really bad
>because it trivializes the illness," says Dr. Anthony Komaroff
>of Harvard Medical School, one of the most respected CFS
>researchers. "But we don't know enough to choose the right name.
>
>And we'd damn well better get it right and be prepared to live
>with it for the next decade."
>
> Whatever it's called, whatever it is, there is new evidence
>that many more people suffer from it - in the most strictly
>defined terms- than many people think, or than previous studies
>had demonstrated. A new $1.7 million study by the Centers for
>Disease Control and Prevention - the largest and most rigorous
>ever on CFS - has found that the syndrome afflicts 183 out of
>every 100,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 69. By
>contrast, the previous CDC study found between four and nine
>cases per 100,000 people.

> The new study was based on 90,000 residents of Sedgwick County,

>Kan., where Wichita lies - one quarter of the county's
>population. Researchers identified about 4,000 people who said
>they suffered serious fatigue for a month or more, and
>interviewed them in greater depth. Among those, 500 appeared to
>have the syndrome; researchers persuaded 300 of these to undergo

>physical exams and lab tests.

> Of the 300, a panel of physicians decided that 39 had bonafide
>CFS by the most strigent definition. That definition requires at

>least six months of severe unexplained fatigue plus four or more

>of these symptoms: impairment in short-term memory or
>concentration; sore throat; tender lymph nodes in the neck or
>armpit; muscle pain; pain in multiple joints without
>inflammation; unusual headaches; unrefreshing sleep, and
>long-lasting malaise following exertion.

> The most striking new information from Wichita is that CFS
>rates are much higher among women than men - 303 cases per
>100,000 for all adult women, 340 cases for white women. To put
>the rates in context, chronic fatigue syndrome in adult women
>appears to be less common than diabetes (which is more than
>three times as prevalent) or high blood pressure (66 times more
>prevalent). But it is roughly three to five times more common
>than lung and breast cancer. (CFS is not considered fatal,
>althuogh it often disables victims for years.)

>== Doc Barry


G'day Doc, Max & List,

As a CFS sufferer I find this thread interesting. A point that
may interest others is that a recent study was done here in Oz
and it found that CFS is medically provable, in a majority of
cases, via a simple physical.

The trials were done at a uni here and found that those
experiencing CFS at its most severe would 'hit the wall' - high
levels of lactic acid (?) in the blood just like athletes -
after a minute amount of effort (and often with no effort).

Thankfully I am not in the worst category (yet?) with a few of
the main symptoms (joint pain, sleep exhaustion, frail memory,
etc.). But I find the lack of physical energy the most draining
(in the way it seems to have a compounding effect on everything
else). Double that with Adult Onset Attention Defecit Disorder
(they may have started around the same time) and I lead an
'interesting' life (in the Chinese context).

Regards,
Leanne.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:26:57 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:23:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:53:37 -0800
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>>Short & Sweet as they say.

>>Regards

>>Roy..

>Dear Roy:

>My first college degree was in Music. Then I taught for a while
>(hated it) and just played for a few years.

>Since then I went back to school taking a science and
>engineering courses.

>While I no longer play, I have also noted that many people into
>UFOs do have a musical backbround of some sort. I don't know if
>this is a disproportionate number or not,  but I have noticed
>this.

>Best

>-  Larry Hatch

It would be interesting to know how many of those of us who
are/were musicians, had UFO sightings as well as being in the
business of investigating the phenomenon.

Chalk me up.

Don





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:05:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:33:47 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:11 -0500
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:50:42 +0100
>>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change

>>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:03:13 -0800
>>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change

>>>Been there, done that.

>I have often used the term TRUFO, short for TRue UFO, to
>designate a case which has been thoroughly invesigated and no
>reasonable explanation found. Until complete invesigation is
>done, any particular case could be called a UFO sighting based
>on the general definition given by Condon: anything not
>recognized by the witness. Generally the witness is not an
>expert at identifying things in the sky, so the witness makes a
>report and an investigator takes on the case (this is the
>traditional method going back to early Air Force invesigation in
>1947..namely, try to explain reports). A case which upon initial
>investigation resists identification could be called a
>"candidate TRUFO case. >

>Bottom line: UFO will be around even after they land and take
>over.... or whatever.

>(let me introduce Klaatuu Fitzklaatuu. He's came from a UFO!)

Bruce,

I believe that a better terminology for what you are trying to
explain is UAI - Unidentified After Investigation or Unexplained
After Investigation.  This is the terminology I am using in my
index. This terminology correctly explains the status of the
observed phenomenon from the investigator's point of view
whether its a:

        UFO: unidentified flying object
        ULO: unidentified landed object
        USO: unidentified submerged object
        UWO: unidentified walking object, ad nauseum....

I think it is incorrect to claim that an investigation can
classify an object as a true or false UFO.  The investigation
can only fail to resolve the unknown's identity.  On subsequent
investigation that status can either remain unresolved or be
resolved by further investigation.

Calling an investigated object a TRUFO just compounds what
Ruppelt did to the field by creating the terminology UFO in the
first place.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                 DISPATCH # 107 -- the weekly newsletter of

From: ParaScope@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:10:10 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:53:53 -0500
Subject: DISPATCH # 107 -- the weekly newsletter of

S O M E T H I N G   S T R A N G E   I S   H A P P E N I N G

10/29/98

Quote of the Week

"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of
altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their
views...which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts
that needs altering."

--Dr. Who

-----------------------

Rant of the Week: �Don't go getting a big (psychic) head�

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, �R.B.� gives a quick diagnosis
and psychic friend advice to someone who complained that streetlights turned
on and off as he approached them. Enjoy.

"What you are experiencing is a rare form of ESP...chance are that at the
time, you were probably in deep thought about something and as you approached
the street light it suddenly went off or possibly came on for no other
apparent reason except that you were passing...Am I correct?...This is one
form of Sub Varient Telekenisis (SVT)...You are not alone...You probably have
some special ESP traits and should research the possibilities of levitation
and Remote Viewing (RV)...don't go getting a big head and think you are some
super hero...sometime these things occur, pass,and never happen again...but if
it occurs on a regular basis, you may be one of the chosen....investigate,&
research..."

------

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:


Fortean Slips: HalloFest '98!

To top off ParaScope's special Halloween roundup, D. Trull brings us an all-
new edition of Fortean Slips:

The Halloween Saturday Night Massacre: It's neither a trick nor a treat -- The
Farmers' Almanac has launched a baffling crusade to move Halloween from All
Hallow's Eve to the last Saturday of October.

Spooky Acoustics: Cold chills, a sense of dread, inanimate objects rattling
for no apparent reason, a fleeting figure creeping in the shadows... is your
house haunted by ghosts, or by an accidental standing wave of ultra low
frequency infrasound?

Embracing Your Inner Zombie: Forget about your inner child, we've all got an
inner zombie running around inside our heads! And in a scary variety of ways,
it knows a whole lot more about us than we do.

------------------

The Witches: Myth and Reality

Our present-day view of the witch is of ugly old hags huddled around a
bubbling cauldron, who possess magical powers and evoke emotions of fear and
perhaps revulsion from the "normal" people in society. Witches also arouse our
curiosity; their ability to use charms, cast spells, and divine the future
have long enticed mere mortals. These mythical archetypes are largely fiction,
but witches have a very real basis in fact. ParaScope correspondent Adrian
Nicholas McGrath outlines the history of witches and witchcraft, from their
beginnings in ancient pagan spirituality, through the persecution and mass
killings of alleged witches in medieval Europe and colonial America, and the
modern state of real witches in today's world.

------------------

Area 51 Land Grab Hearings:
Voice Your Opinions

Everybody's favorite secret base, Area 51, has gobbled up thousands of acres
of land over the past decade. Most recently, the Air Force seized 4,000 acres
at "Freedom Ridge," an overlook made popular by UFO and conspiracy buffs
wanting to get a look at America's most unsecret secret base. This
controversial move was obviously motivated by the government's desire to keep
civilian observers as far away from Area 51 as possible. Now the USAF has
filed papers to extend its occupation of the land through 2001, and public
hearings have been scheduled for citizens to express their opinions on the
matter. Regardless of your feelings on the UFO question, the military's
seizure of public land should always be closely monitored. In this action
alert, find out where and when these meetings will be held, and find out where
to send written statements if you can't attend.

------------------

Conspiracy Newsline

2-Triple-Ought is comin' up quick! Be paranoid while you still have time!
Military warns officers not to criticize Clinton; tests show that Princess
Diana's limo was going 62 m.p.h. and was definitely "brushed" by a Fiat Uno;
U.S. intelligence officials were warned by informant of Nairobi Embassy
bombing beforehand; fired CNN producer defends Operation Tailwind nerve gas
story; lots more news.

------------------

UFO Roundup

Alleged chupacabra photo taken in Southern Brazil; mountain climber claims to
have seen two Yeti on Mt. Everest; Art Bell mystery puzzles fans worldwide;
more crop circles found in Saskatchewan; NASA probe lines up for asteroid
encounter; UFO sightings & 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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Michael Lindemann's 'MJ-12' Gathering

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:43:29 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:25:39 -0500
Subject: Michael Lindemann's 'MJ-12' Gathering


I'm listening to Jeff Rense's 'Sightings on the Radio' and
Michael Lindemann is doing his weekly UFO update.  Michael
apparently orchestrated a meeting last weekend of very high
level executives, military officers, a NASA representative, a
well-known screenwriter -- highly placed individuals from all
areas of society.  These individuals met to explore the social
(and other) implications of our likely/inevitable discovery of
alien life.  These people were NOT true believers, but felt that
this issue was of such great importance that they needed to
begin exploring.  Since the government seems unwilling, it falls
to leaders like them, it was felt.

A more extensive explanation will be included in the Nov 1st
issue of CNI News, Michael Lindemann's excellent newsletter. And
you can email him at cninews1@aol.com and ask for two free
copies -- normally it's subscription only.

You can listen to the archives of Jeff's show by hopping the
link from his website at:

http://www.sightings.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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:15:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:56:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Music & UFOs
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 13:52:02 PST


>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?>

.>Short & Sweet as they say.

>Regards

>Roy..


>Roy,

>The only instrument I play is the stereo -- and boy, do I play
>it well!

>Seriously, folks: I am a huge music enthusiast, especially of
>folk and roots forms (blues, bluegrass, traditional ballads,
>fiddle tunes, old-time string bands, conjunto, Cajun, zydeco,

(SNIP of the cirriculum vitae of the most famous musical
ufologist I know)

>The one other musician I know of on this list is our good friend
>Greg Sandow, an immensely talented composer as well as a
>respected critic of classical and popular music. I've been
>lucky enough to hear some of Greg's music, and it's real swell.

>Anybody else out there?

Thought I sent you a copy of my audio tape several years ago,

At the 1997 MUFON Symposium I played a piano piece I composed in
honor of the 50th anniversary of UFOs. Title: "New Age Rising."
It is _not_ new age music. One listener compared it with
Beethoven (but I think few would make that comparison!). For
several years I have sold at UFO symposia...and elsewhere "THE
JOY OF IVORIES" .... 10 original keyboard composition (including
New Age Rising) on piano and keyboards/synthesizers/drum





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:37:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:58:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

><snip>

><snip>

>Hi  Gary and List

>As some one who has had 'hands on experience'of Classified
>Document Security and their destruction,I find it hard to
>believe that a document of this magnitude would have been down
>graded prior to destruction.With this in mind I do not believe
>that once the decision had been taken to destroy the document
>that-any-copies would have escaped destruction.Classified
>documents are counted and rigorously controlled.Contrary to what
>one might believe it realistically is virtually impossible to
>steal one!(Which is why most spies photograph/copy them)

>>From my experience once the decision had been taken to destroy a
>particular document it was destroyed.Its destruction was always
>by fire and witnessed by two Officers who signed acknowledging
>the deed accordingly.Classified Document destruction is not
>carried out 'light heartedly',it is a serious business.Do it
>wrong and one could end up really in the Mire!The ashes were
>always raked over.Each HQ had its own small furnace for the
>purpose.

>I recall how we were not allowed to shred certain
>classifications as it was thought possible that given time and
>resources the document might of been reconstructed.Its probably
>changed now.

>I feel once a document had been down graded to none
>status(declassified) then any one,regardless  of any
>Official/National Secrets Act would have been free to
>discuss/publish any information that it contained.

>I find it very hard to believe that anyone would admit to having
>a copy of this particular document and not be prepared to show
>it.After all unauthorized possession of a classified document is
>an 'Offence against the State' to admit to owning one is an
>admission of guilt. In this particular case of course the
>document is allegedly 'Unclassified' so one would be free from
>any form prosecution,so why not come clean?What is there to
>lose?Publish and be damned as some one famous once said.

>I cannot help but feel that either this document never existed
>or,my personal choice,it was totally destroyed.

>I hope I am wrong on both counts.

>Regards

>Keith......Keep the Faith!


Keith,

While I do not doubt that you have some  experience in the
"secret document" area and have trouble believing what several
credible people have testified to under their own names.

So what.  You just have to get over it.

You know, I also had trouble believing that the CIA had run
drugs in Southeast Asia and had hired terrorists to mine the
harbors of nations we were not at war with.

But, you know, my "belief" had nothing to do with it because
these things happened, were testified to by credible people
under their own names, documented and independently verified.

Do you know of any nation which has not had its secure documents
compromised?

Weren't those classified documents found in Aldrich Ames' home?
The inside operative is toughest to find as James Angleton knew
to well.

How about the voluminous amount of documents transferred by
Pollard to our embarrassment.

As to your statement "I find it very hard to believe that anyone
would admit to having a copy of this particular document". Well
all of these men - Ruppelt, Keogh and Hynek did go on record
saying they had read the document and at least transiently had a
copy of it.

Wishful thinking won't solve the questions raised. Your dog
doesn't hunt.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: Now that's what I call Music!!

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:45:28 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:01:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Now that's what I call Music!!


Hi Everyone,

Well what can I say, I am totally overwhelmed by the response
from the you guys and girls.

It seems that music does play a significant role in most of our
lives one way or another.

I play the keyboards, and compose my own songs which are put
together in my home studio. There are two passions in my life,
and for those who may know me and those who dont, they are quite
obvious :MUSIC & UFOs.

I feel that music is a very powerful medium in which you are
able to express certain things which you may not be able to say.
I have written songs about UFOs and have based them around mine
and friends experiences within ufology.

I must state for the record (no pun intended) and that is I
cannot sing. I write Ambient music,which is aimed to take your
mind to other plains of thought. I get ideas from any source,
and will often experiment on different styles and sounds.

Soon I hope to get into some kind of Music / Video producing as
I would like to share my thoughts and imagery of my music to a
much wider audience. I also intend on using the images within
ufology as a wake up call to the music buying public,the fact
that it is no longer about little green men.

It's been good to hear all the different kinds of musicians, we
have on the list and well maybe one day we could all release a
song with UFO under tones?

Can you imagine it :And here we have sitting at No 1, the:
UFOnauts with the: Plaiedien serenade, well almost.

Anyway friends it's been a pleasure, and like me, you only know
why you do music, and isn't it so special.


Kindest Regards

Roy..

(Quote of the Night) Now where has that old Album got to.....






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Cheyne D Conrad <chyren23@q-net.net.au>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:05:40 +0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:05:48 -0500
Subject: Re:  Music & UFOs


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:33:39 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0300
>>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>>Hi All,

>>>>This is purely for self interest.

>>>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>>In think of two. Me. I'm a trumpet player,valve trombone and
>>flugelhorn. Made a living at it some years ago, then found a
>>steady day gig that I liked. Chris Styles is a hell of a guitar
>>player and made a living at it for some time. We've jammed
>>together a few times in a friend's group, but we don't make a
>>habit of it.

>>Don Ledger

>Hi Guys,

>I don't want to interrupt the thread but,

>We already have the components of a _kickass_ Chicago Blues
>band - horn (brass) section and all! If I was a millionaire I'd
>fly us all to some killer studio on some tropical island so
>that we could all jam together just once.

>Already we have; Song writers and composers, guitar players,
>trumpet, sax, (other brass) a bass player, keyboards, and me on
>drums!

>If Jerry Clark smoked too many cigarettes and slung back one too
>many Margarita's along the way maybe we can talk him into doing
>the vocals. Errol (EBK) is an old radio DJ and he could produce
>and market us! I'm starting to sound like an old Mickey
>Rooney/Judy Garland movie where at some point they always round
>up all the kids in the town so that they can, . . . 'Put on a
>show!' <VBG>

>Ahhh, sweet home Chicago! <G>

>Love you guys.

>Back to the real world. :(

>John Velez ;-)

Roy, John, Don, et al,

Not only am I a musician and UFO researcher, but I earn a living
as a sound engineer and recording technician!

I _do_ think we have the makings of a unique album here!! LOL!!

Yours musically,

C D Conrad








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:13:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:08:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?


Hi List,

I've been playing the guitar for about 20 years now - more or
less, though I've  never had any special interest in playing in
a band. (Sometimes I do play at private parties - but, I don't
sing.)

The (steel) string instruments I've got in my 'collection' are:
Six & twelve string guitars, and a Greek Bouzouki (eight
string).

Mostly, I listen to, and 'play along with' (on my stereo),
European and South/North American folk, rock and pop music.
Especially, I've been listening to the American folk musician
Doc Watson, of Deep Gap, North Carolina, and - to some extent, I
think(!) - I've adopted some of his style of playing. America's
John Fogerty and CCR are also some of my favourites. (Luckily, I
had the oppurtinity of attending JF's concert in Oslo in
September this year.)


Best Regards,

AWS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: RobIrving <RobIrving@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 04:46:37 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:11:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:31:41 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>These claimants will be shown to follow known
>psychological profiles for hoaxers.

To which known profiles do you refer. Any actual references?

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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                       The UFO Anthology Vol.1 CD-ROM

From: DREAMLAND INTERACTIVE <ovni@4dreamland.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:54:15 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:16:50 -0500
Subject: The UFO Anthology Vol.1 CD-ROM


Please read this review of The UFO Anthology Vol.1 CD-ROM, by
Tom Garrett, Section leader of the Microsoft Network UFO Forum.
Ordering info at the end of this review.

"When I opened the shrink wrapped CD, the first thing I did was
read the brief install pamphlet. Installation was a snap, even
for me. Then I read the credits (which is unheard of ) and it
reads like a UFO Who's Who. So when I actually started the CD, I
clicked on the How To Use this CD bar, and then clicked on the
Introduction. It is performed by Robert Dean, retired US Army
Command Sergeant Major. He gives a very honest appraisal of what
you will see in the CD and warns you that your life will be
forever changed. Now I am really excited!

Since we had Linda Moulton-Howe scheduled for a chat on Tuesday
evening, and this being Monday, I decided to check out the
Cattle Mutilations section first. During the next hour I learned
more than I had in the past year. And, Yes, a picture IS worth a
thousand words. This CD has plenty of pictures, video, sound
bites, and diagrams.

After exploring the Mutilations and Crop Circles, I started
jumping around from area to area, and topic to topic. This is a
fun CD! Some sections present intense details that I have to
stop and rewind just to absorb the information. It's like eating
a fantastic pie; the first taste makes you want to devour the
whole thing, and you just can't do it fast enough. OK, let's
move on=8A

As an example, let's follow a path through the CD, to show you
how it's laid out. When the opening screen appears, you have a
three-selection choice. Introduction, Anthology, and How to use
this Disk. Do the Introduction, then the How to use=8Aand then the
Anthology. Oh, yeah, make sure you have at least an hour,
because once you start, it's impossible to stop!

On the upper left of the screen there are eight menu items to
select from. Let's pick U.S. Government. That will drop down a
center screen menu, of 10 selectable items. Let's pick Crashes;
that drops down a menu on the upper right of the screen, listing
an intro. and 12 selectable items. Pick one of those and you
will learn not only of Roswell, but of the other "classical"
crashes.

In the major area of U.S. Government, you might have selected
Astronaut Sightings, and that would have brought up a menu of 12
different sightings. If you had clicked on Secret Bases, you
would then have been able to select from seven different bases,
some of which I had no idea even existed. But here are the
pictures to prove it!

Another major topic area is UFOs in History. This all-inclusive
area is further subdivided into nine sections. One of those,
Biblical, has four subsections with Biblical references. Talk
about detail! Just this section alone will take you into areas
you might not have considered before.

I would love to be able to discuss each section and subsection,
but that would take at least a book or two, and besides, I want
the adventure of discovery to be yours! Although this would be
described as an educational tool, I found it to be a lot of fun
too. The ad for this CD says it can be completed in six hours,
however, to fully experience everything it has to offer, and to
contemplate all the information presented, it will take much,
much longer. However, that just increases the pleasure because
as you use the information you keep wanting more. Time does
indeed fly. What starts as five minutes is quickly an hour. But
this CD will keep your attention even as the dinner burns on the
stove.

Recommendation: This one CD is the equivalent of a library on
the subject of UFOs and other Unexplained Phenomenon. The cost
is an infinitesimal amount compared to what you would have to
spend to buy all the books. And this is much easier to use. This
is a MUST HAVE product. I quarantee you will be glad you bought
it. Time after time I kept going back to the CD to obtain
clarification of things discussed in the newsgroups, and by our
guests in the chats. It is an instant reference tool for the
serious Ufologist and since the only item actually loaded onto
your system is Quicktime, the Anthology is run totally from the
CD.

Now please excuse me so I can find out more about Lockheed's
strange facilites in California=8A

Tom Garrett Section Leader Screening Room MSN UFO Forum

SETI, MUFON and other organizations find out more on how you can
offer "The UFO Anthology Vol.1" and keep up to 30% of the
profits! Send us a reply email and tell us you are interested
and we will take care of the rest!

Web site owners: If you have a web site and would like to
promote The UFO Anthology CD-ROM at your site, we will pay you a
commission for every disc sold via a special link (that we
provide ) that leads directly to our secure order page.  Send
us an E Mail for more info to: ovni@4dreamland.com

ORDERING INFO:
We ship anywhere in the world.
Only $34.95
Order NOW Toll free in the U.S.A.
At: 1-888-UFO-WAVE.
Outside the U.S.A. call: 818-843-2945

You can also order directly from the Dreamland Interactive Web
Complex with a major credit card and our secure 128 bit
encrypted server and online shopping cart system! Online
transactions with us are always SAFE and guaranteed against
fraud with our "Safe Shopper" Guarantee!
http://www.4dreamland.com

Thank you very much
Dreamland Interactive






  DREAMLAND INTERACTIVE
  859 Hollywood Way Suite 343
  Burbank, Ca 91505
  Email: Ovni@4dreamland.com
  Internet: http://4dreamland.com
  Phone: 818-843-1162
A California State Registered Corporation

 The World Will Know...






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Break Open That Bottle Of 'Grange'

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:30:47 +1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:27:50 -0500
Subject: Break Open That Bottle Of 'Grange'


Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
tkbnetw@fan.net.au
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw

Australasian UFO HOT LINES

http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/Hot%20line.htm

 Please Post

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 *    Oh Happy day - Y'all sing along now - Oh Happy day...    *
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The Australian UFO Hotline is no longer Mr R D 1900 has gone-
Yes, for I say to you all that it is NOT listed in the new
Hobart Phone directory. We TUFOIC (Tasmanian UFO Investigation
Centre) are now the only listing under UFO in the book.

This must surely be the day to break open that bottle of
"Grange" and drink until there is not a drop left, for we have
defeated the foe.

In the immortal words of Monty Python: He is a late parrot, He
has gone to meet his maker, He is pushing up daisies - HE IS A
DEAD PARROT.

These are surely times of wonderment indeed.

Regards
Paul Jackson

P.S. I will recover - But not for a few daze at least! Oh what a
feeling.  Oh happy day ........

=-----=

Great Paul I'm having a drink with you keep up the great work.
United we stand divided we fall ~<:>)

Regards Diane Harrison :>)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:48:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:33:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:16:11 -0400

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 06:31:09 PST

>>I must for once disagree with Jerry.

>>I have mentioned Jim's outstanding work as reported in the
>>Congressional Hearings of 1968 in essentially every one of my
>>more than 600 + presentations entitled 'Flying Saucers ARE
>>Real'.

>I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>>For some time I have been making available copies of Jim's 71
>>page paper at a cost of only $10.00 including postage and
>>Handling...

>For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
>reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
>James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
>of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
>the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
>not invited.

>Words from the publisher:

>"In 1969, a panel of fifteen distinguished scientists attended a
>symposium sponsored by the American Association for the
>Advancement of Science. Representing the fields of astronomy,
>physics, meteorology, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology,
>these renowned experts reflected the entire range of responsible
>opinion on the subject of unidentified flying objects. Exploring
>widely divergent views and applying them to the traditional
>scientific method, they presented photographs and detailed
>descriptions of sightings and subjected eyewitness reports and
>physical evidence to intense scrutiny. This book collects the
>papers presented at the symposium, several of them substantially
>revised. While the book takes no stand on the issue of UFO
>reality, it shows that there are still many unanswered questions
>regarding the physics and psychology of the phenomenon."

>A real bargain at $6.98.

>Ed Stewart


I certainly agree that the Sagan-Page book at $6.98 is an
excellent buy. Jim gives in depth reports of 4 important cases.
The Congressional hearings document is longer and has 41 cases.
As I noted in TOP SECRET/MAJIC, Carl Sagan himself didn't
reference this book in "Demon Haunted World" though he not only
was a co-editor, but it was original;ly published by Cornell
University Press! Of course he did reference articles from
Weekly World News and also neglected to reference the
Congressional Hearings though he was also a contributor.

I was actually invited to speak at  the AAAS Symposium, but was
delisted along with Markowitz, a debunker, when the schedule was
changed.

I would respectfully note that I didn't start the Roswell
Investigation until 1978, but had already been lecturing "Flying
Saucers ARE Real" for 11 years.

It is hardly true that my 600 lectures have all been  the same.
I do occasionally add and delete materials and Roswell and MJ-12
are indeed covered now.

Since I continue to find that most people have not read any of
the 5 large scale scientific studies I describe, I think it is
important to educate them.

I have never claimed that my lecture is intended as a graduate
course for those very familiar with the subject. The responses I
get from the sponsoring colleges, management clubs, technical
groups etc indicate that I am very well received even if Ed
isn't happy.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 05:21:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:58:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:10:40 -0500
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

I started in the fourth grade playing trumpet, and in Junior
high I played french horn. As a youth I played trumpet in bands
and French horn in the youth orchestra, learned flying, and read
about UFOs.

In Community College and University I learned singing, piano,
electronic music, and recording engineering/producing. For 18
years I have worked with Cyrille Verdeaux, a genius artist
making symphonic rock and electronic space music (now all
digital). We have been on music labels of various types. We also
make film music.

Today I live in Santa Monica, CA with a woman named Miko who has
been an innovative pop star/singer, composer and leading actress
in Europe, 4 major hit albums on Polydor. She was based out of
Berlin and received the equivalent of the Emmy award for hosting
her own show. We are developing an international campaign based
out of LALA Land.

In these wee hours of the morning I am very happy. I am also the
above artists' personal manager, co-producer, duo singer with
Miko, and collaborator. I am happy because there are major
movers and shakers (loaded with lots of $) who are interested in
both artists and are offering large deals. We will meet over the
next few days to iron out plans and contracts. I'm so happy
because we have put in so much work and struggle to get to this
point.

I'm also patting myself on the back because I have overcome the
loss of a leg, constant physical pain, and a very recent 2 1/2
month battle with the symptoms of hepatitis C. I succesfully
chased out the trauma demons from Vietnam combat and health
traumas. In the last few days I finally became healthy again and
I am very happy about the way my life is going. I'm doing very
well despite being disabled, working at what I love.

By the way, I still research and investigate the UFO
phenomenon(third decade). I'm still involved in MUFON LA.

I'm hoping that British engineer detected a real alien radio
signal. I'm rooting for Jerry Clark, Ferrari in F1 Saturday, and
my team, the 49'rs over Green Bay Sunday. Someday we'll have
Nordics, Grays, and Reptilians in their sports leagues. Who can
guess what games they would play?

Any fans who like the above artists, we'd love to hear from you
and put you on the mailing list. Please post me directly.

Thanks,
Josh Goldstein





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Rogher Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:51:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:00:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:03:23 PST
>Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:12:20 -0500
>Subject: Re: Music & UFOs

Earlier, Leanne wrote:

>Hey What are you guys up to?

>Forming the "The Roswell Rockets" or some such?


Well, the 80's brought us groups like "The Clash".

Maybe we could call ourselves "The Crash"?

Sorry, bad puns are my weakness.

Roger Evans





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:07:00 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:03:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:16:11 -0400

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 98 06:31:09 PST

>>I must for once disagree with Jerry.

>>I have mentioned Jim's outstanding work as reported in the
>>Congressional Hearings of 1968 in essentially every one of my
>>more than 600 + presentations entitled 'Flying Saucers ARE
>>Real'.

>I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>>For some time I have been making available copies of Jim's 71
>>page paper at a cost of only $10.00 including postage and
>>Handling...

>For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
>reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
>James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
>of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
>the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
>not invited.

>Words from the publisher:

>"In 1969, a panel of fifteen distinguished scientists attended a
>symposium sponsored by the American Association for the
>Advancement of Science. Representing the fields of astronomy,
>physics, meteorology, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology,
>these renowned experts reflected the entire range of responsible
>opinion on the subject of unidentified flying objects. Exploring
>widely divergent views and applying them to the traditional
>scientific method, they presented photographs and detailed
>descriptions of sightings and subjected eyewitness reports and
>physical evidence to intense scrutiny. This book collects the
>papers presented at the symposium, several of them substantially
>revised. While the book takes no stand on the issue of UFO
>reality, it shows that there are still many unanswered questions
>regarding the physics and psychology of the phenomenon."

>A real bargain at $6.98.

>Ed Stewart

Those of you in Canada. If you sniff around Coles or W Smith
book stores you might find a new copy of "UFO's A scientific
Debate" for $4.50. I did and so did Chris Styles, just a few
months ago.

Stan, I'd be interested in a copy of Jim's 70 page paper. What's
the price Cdn.?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mh

From: Donnie W. Shevlin <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:32:12 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:12:08 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mh


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The World'

>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the

<snip>


>Forwarded from the SETI Email Discussion List.

>Stig

>*******

>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:37:13 -0800 (PST)
>From: Chris Johnson <kris_johnson@yahoo.com>
>To: MarcusJohn@aol.com, drseti@eudoramail.com, seti@sni.net
>Subject: Re: SETI EQ Pegasi

>Hi.

>Some of you might be interested in the following attached GIF.
>(trust it or not, whatever). I've used Photoshop to find the
>difference between the two images.  When properly aligned, the
>two images cancel out, resulting in a black block.  This is an
>exact, pixel for pixel mathematical match.  If these are based
>on the original images (they were taken from the web site that
>sprung up) then they indicate that the two images are infact
>based on one single image.  For whatever that
>means to y'all.

>Hope this helps,

>Chris J.

<snip>

>[The attachment doesn't make much sense unless you've been
> following along. I've not included it. Suffice to say 'Hoax'
> is a distinct probability and I've saved us all bandwidth.]

Where's the image at? I don't know about anyone else but I'm
interested in seeing it.

Donnie






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:35:16 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:14:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash


A response has just been received from the UTA Library re my
orders for enlargements of the Ramey Message (in connection with
the Roswell Event).

They now promise to process my order for enlargements of the
Ramey Message for research only use by RPIT. UTA cites copyright
concerns for not providing duplicate negatives.

Just a passing thought: Can there be any copyright protection
after 51 years? And does copyright protection extend to the 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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:31:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:29:02 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The World'

>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
>alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
>that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
>which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
>'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

>Best regards and happy halloween!

>Stig Agermose


<snip>

Before we give up on this being something real, check out:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/latest.html

including the links, one of which says that SETI has inhibited
their real time feeds.

Ooooeeeeooo!

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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:34:04 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:39:23 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The
>World'


>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
>alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
>that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
>which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
>'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

Should be 60th of course - I was very tired when I wrote the
e-mail - but I think the argument still holds.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:32:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:42:56 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:48:37 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>There seems to be a discussion regarding whether it's safe to
>shoot into the sun with a video camera (I think). As long as you
>keep your eye to the viewfinder, there is no danger at all. If
>the camera is a CCD type, then the camera is safe, also (though
>the results on a consumer camera might be questionable). If the
>camera is an older "tube" type, then one should not point it at
>the sun or any another bright, raw light source as the imaging
>tube will get a permanent burned spot.

I agree with what you say here but I question one thing:  you
say it is OK to shoot the sun with a CCD camera. This is
true..... for a short time (seconds?). But I wonder..... solar
thermal radiation collected by the lens is bound to heat the CCD
at the focal spot. Therefore I would worry that _extended_
filming of the sun could damage (melt?) the CCD.

I bring this up because the "solar aureole videotapers" (SAV)
will often let a camera run for many minutes or hours to collect
images of "rods." Videotaping the sun for even minutes is not an
experiment I have tried (when my income increases to 1000 times
greater than the cost of a video camera.... then maybe I will).
Anyone out there have a videocamera "crash" while filming the
sun?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:33:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:51:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:10:40 -0500
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>It would be interesting if some of us could coordinate to meet
>during the next MUFON Symposium in Washington, DC next summer.
>The cacophony might be righteous.

Hey, this is a neat idea. We could simulate the Star Wars
cabaret band. If the band were any good maybe it could perform
at the reception Friday night.

"ET Phone Home"
"The Average Grey Band"
"Gort's Revenge"
"Sister Klaatu" (female singer)
????





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:52:03 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:58:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
>reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
>James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
>of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
>the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
>not invited.

<snip>

Thanks, Ed...

I don't think I have this book in my Library...
I appreciate you posting this.

BTW...I still like your 'Flying Saucer Review' and
'MUFON UFO Journal/Skylook' Indexes...

Great Job...

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.
My Home Telephone Number is: (502) 683-6811





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Re: UFO Name change

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:27:49 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:01:28 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name change


Of course, the discussion about the term "UFO" is a moot one.

We all know that 'UFO' is the abbreviation for 'Ukrainian 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 >
   Oct > Oct 29

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:14:26 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:08:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:28:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>>There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
>>yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
>>despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
>>recent promises of de-classification. The Estimate of the
>>Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
>>public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. The Estimate was
>>considered by its creators at ATIC to contain "proof positive"
>>of the reality of the UFO and that they were interplanetary!
>>Ruppelt discusses the peculiar fate of this estimate, after
>>noting that it was not accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air
>>Force, General Hoyt Vandenberg. Ruppelt states:

>>  "The estimate died a quick death. Some months later it was
>>completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator. A few
>>copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of the golden
>>days of the UFOs."

>>Readers familiar with the handling of secure documents will
>>recognize the unusual way this document was treated,
>>declassified and then destroyed. This is a highly irregular
>>procedure, after all the purpose of declassification is to make
>>the documentation available to the public, not suppress it. Also
>>most unusual is that although the document was declassified
>>neither Ruppelt, nor any of the other people who have have had a
>>copy to read has ever made it publicly available. All of these
>>readers were probable signors to the National Secrets Acts given
>>their connections to the intelligence community. [15] Don't miss
>>Ruppelt's revelations about the role the Estimate played in the
>>battle of the pro and anti-UFO factions in the military and
>>intelligence communities. An interesting footnote to the history
>>of Project Sign's Estimate of the Situation has been documented
>>by Loren Gross. He compiled a list of individuals who publicly
>>acknowledged that they had read the "momento copies".


>As some one who has had 'hands on experience'of Classified
>Document Security and their destruction,I find it hard to
>believe that a document of this magnitude would have been down
>graded prior to destruction.With this in mind I do not believe
>that once the decision had been taken to destroy the document
>that-any-copies would have escaped destruction.Classified
>documents are counted and rigorously controlled.Contrary to what
>one might believe it realistically is virtually impossible to
>steal one!(Which is why most spies photograph/copy them)

>From my experience once the decision had been taken to destroy a
>particular document it was destroyed. Its destruction was always
>by fire and witnessed by two Officers who signed acknowledging
>the deed accordingly.

There was a another Top Secret UFO document very similar to the
Estimate and written just a few months afterwards that suffered
exactly the same fate described by Ruppelt. We know this because
the declassification order, destruct order, and a copy of the
document have survived, were "declassified" in 1985, and can be
seen in Clifford Stone's book "UFOs Are Real." This was "Air
Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79," or "Analysis of Flying
Object Incidents in the U.S.", dated 10 Dec 1948, henceforth to
be called the "Analysis." You can also see a copy of the
Analysis on the Project 1947 Web site.

The initial document relating to declassification and
destruction was dated 11 Aug 1950, and interestingly, the
original request seems to have come from the Commanding General
of Alaskan Air Command, namely Gen. Nathan Twining.  (I leave it
to the skeptics to explain why Twining would be involved with
this at all, since it is the claim of some that being CG of
Alaskan Command would have totally taken him out of any UFO high
secrecy loop.) The documents states, "Subject document, for
which your Command requests downgrading action, contains info
and speculation on the 'flying saucer' situation which have
never been released or intimated publicly by the Air Force."

In Plainspeak, the Air Force didn't want the public to know
about this. The Analysis came to the conclusion that UFOs were
real machines, but unlike the Estimate that just preceded it and
was rejected at the top, stopped short of calling them ET.

This was followed on 25 Sept 1950 by an official request for
destruction. "It is requested that action be taken to destroy
all copies of Top Secret Air Intelligence Report Number
100-203-79 ...."

Then this was followed on 6 Dec 1951 by the following memo: "
All extra copes of this document were ordered to be destroyed.
Copy being kept for record purposes only. Not to be disseminated
without permission of AFOIN-A."

So first the document was "downgraded," then all copies were
ordered destroyed. Yet a year later, it was noted that one copy
was being kept for historical records, but even this downgraded
copy could not be disseminated. (The Air Force still didn't want
the public to know even after it had been downgraded.) And
oddly, even after being supposedly "downgraded" in 1950, this
document was still stamped "Top Secret" when it was finally
fully declassified and made public in 1985 under FOIA. In short,
it sounds exactly like Ruppelt's description of the fate of the
Estimate, except nobody knows if the Estimate still exists.

<snip>

>I feel once a document had been down graded to none
>status(declassified) then any one,regardless of any
>Official/National Secrets Act would have been free to
>discuss/publish any information that it contained.

Ruppelt did discuss the contents publicly in his 1956 book.
Others, such as Dewey Fournet, have also publicly stated that
they read the document while they were affiliated with Blue
Book, and further that it came to an ET conclusion.

>I find it very hard to believe that anyone would admit to
>having a copy of this particular document and not be prepared
>to show it.

Ruppelt and others didn't admit to having a copy in their
personal possession. They said they read a surviving copy. This
sounds exactly like the situation with the surviving copy of the
"Analysis" which was kept in an intelligence archive, but which
could "not be disseminated without permission."

>After all unauthorized possession of a classified document is
>an 'Offence against the State' to admit to owning one is an
>admission of guilt. In this particular case of course the
>document is allegedly 'Unclassified' so one would be free from
>any form prosecution,so why not come clean?What is there to
> lose?Publish and be damned as some one famous once said.

I think you misunderstand. Insiders like Ruppelt and Dewey
Fournet did publicly state that the conclusion of Project Sign's
Estimate was that the saucers were extraterrestrial. Ruppelt
went into some detail. But nobody every claimed to "owning" a
copy.

>I cannot help but feel that either this document never existed
>or,my personal choice,it was totally destroyed.

>I hope I am wrong on both counts.

If the fate of the Top Secret "Analysis" is any guide, there may
yet be a surviving copy of the "Estimate." Correct me if I am
wrong, but isn't it common for one copy to be retained for the
historical record, as was the case for the "Analysis?"

In any case, there have been more people than just Ed Ruppelt
who have said they read the Estimate during their affiliation
with Blue Book. The document clearly existed. I would also
like to point out that Ruppelt wrote about a great number of
things that were previously unknown, but subsequent release of
documents have proven to be correct. Two such examples were the
Robertson Panel of 1953 and the Twining memo of Sept. 23, 1947,
where Twining called the saucers real, high-performance,
metallic objects. Twining was in this up to his eyeballs right
from the beginning.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:55:17 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:11:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Hi Roy

In my younger days I taught myself to play the electric guitar.
I remember that I once spent two weks learning how to play
Cavatina. I was so chuffed that I could play it I went round to
a friends to show him and he asked me to show him the music. He
read the music and played it straight away. He was a studying to
be a classical guitarist. I gave up playing the guitar after
that because I lost interest very quickly after al that hard
work only to have some one walk it.

Of course now I realise it doesn't matter how good you are at
anything there is always someone better and that it shouldn't
stop you from trying to achieve your dreams.

---
    In an infinite universe inifinitely anything is possible.
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: James Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:35:10 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:20:26 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:05:46 -0500
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change

>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:25:11 -0500
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:50:42 +0100
>>>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: UFO Name Change

>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:03:13 -0800
>>>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO Name Change

>>>>Been there, done that.

>>I have often used the term TRUFO, short for TRue UFO, to
>>designate a case which has been thoroughly invesigated and no
>>reasonable explanation found. Until complete invesigation is
>>done, any particular case could be called a UFO sighting based
>>on the general definition given by Condon: anything not
>>recognized by the witness. Generally the witness is not an
>>expert at identifying things in the sky, so the witness makes a
>>report and an investigator takes on the case (this is the
>>traditional method going back to early Air Force invesigation in
>>1947..namely, try to explain reports). A case which upon initial
>>investigation resists identification could be called a
>>"candidate TRUFO case. >

>>Bottom line: UFO will be around even after they land and take
>>over.... or whatever.

>>(let me introduce Klaatuu Fitzklaatuu. He's came from a UFO!)

>Bruce,

>I believe that a better terminology for what you are trying to
>explain is UAI - Unidentified After Investigation or Unexplained
>After Investigation.  This is the terminology I am using in my
>index. This terminology correctly explains the status of the
>observed phenomenon from the investigator's point of view
>whether its a:

>       UFO: unidentified flying object
>       ULO: unidentified landed object
>       USO: unidentified submerged object
>       UWO: unidentified walking object, ad nauseum....

>I think it is incorrect to claim that an investigation can
>classify an object as a true or false UFO.  The investigation
>can only fail to resolve the unknown's identity.  On subsequent
>investigation that status can either remain unresolved or be
>resolved by further investigation.

>Calling an investigated object a TRUFO just compounds what
>Ruppelt did to the field by creating the terminology UFO in the
>first place.

>Gary

Geeze... you guys forgot the most important of the acrimonious
acronym of all!

GaZMINAA!  Which stands for "Gadzooks, mommy, it's not an
airplane!"

I still like, "TMOGTOGIY"

There's more of gravy than of grave in you!

Dr. Jaime Gesundt
Canal Street Ufoillogical Society of Brooklyn
We moved.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:36:21 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:25:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


In a message dated 10/28/98 19:06:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,
updates@globalserve.net writes:

>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:06:35 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO Update: Music & UFOs

Responding to various abductees' statements on this service in
which they express their talent and interest in music, Mr. Carey
said....

>Yes, even Roswell investigators can be musically "talented."

I'm not sure why this thread continues. Yes, I'm an abductee,
and yes, I do occasional D-J work (for the last eight years).
I'm also a dancer.

Should I (given some sort of premise that seems to peak through
these messages) be also asking how many dancers there are among
abductees? I've taught line dancing to thousands (literally - no
exaggeration here, folks) in the last eight years.

This all started "late in in my life." Didn't know one dance
step until 1978 (have been an abductee since 1930s....with
recent conscious encounters among alien interaction episodes).

My late entry into the dancing and D-J activity raises certain
pertinent questions. Why should anybody jump to a musical
interest conclusion when talking about abductees?

I could just as well ask how many of you are avidly into
dancing....





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 05:38:25 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:30:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?


Just for the record!

I have an Honours degree in Music from Lancaster University. I
play keyboard, piano and organ professionally as well as
teaching privately.

You have to pay for this UFO research somehow......

By the way; Spice Girls are great!

Tim Matthews







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

               Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:26:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:46:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Mitchell: Secret Files Show Government Knew



>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:12:48 -0500
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:20:56 +0200
>>Subject: Mitchell: Secret Files Show The Government Knew About Roswell

<snip>

>I wonder if the 'secret files' which 'The People' reports
>Mitchell as having confirmed seeing and which 'prove' the
>'Roswell' cover-up, are the hoax MJ-12 'documents'.

>Maybe someone could clarify this with him.

And I'll bet you .03$ CAN that, whatever the answer, you won't
change your mind.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             'The UFO Evidence'

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:00:57 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:50:17 -0500
Subject: 'The UFO Evidence'


THis may be old news but I thought I'd let you know that I just
picked up a copy of the NICAP study 'The UFO Evidence' edited by
Richard Hall.

Reprinted by Barnes & Noble in the USA I bought my copy here in
the UK at a book stall in the SAinsbury Savacentre. A real
bargain at just =A33.99 and a must for all collectors of UFO data.

All the best,

Philip.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Sighting In Virginia?

From: Michael Hodges <mwhod@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:42:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:56:35 -0500
Subject: Sighting In Virginia?


I have been watching the sky for some time now and mostly have
seen planes and helicopters, this morning at 6 am, I decided to
go out and smoke my pipe, it had not gotten light yet and I
happen to look up and to the west and noticed the stars, but
then I noticed one that I would say looked like what I call the
evening star as far as size was moving, I ran in to get my
binoculars.

It was moving from West to East and appeared to be lower than a
lot of the jets that pass over here from several airports.

Looking through the binoculars first at 8x and then 20x, it
appeared to be a steady bright ball of light.

Normally if would have taken a jet about 6-8 times longer to
cover the distance of view.

It appeared to be passing over the central part of the state.

I live in Virginia.

I just wondered if possibly anyone one else saw it or could give
their opinion as to what it might have been.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:08:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:06:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:05:40 +0800
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Cheyne D Conrad <chyren23@q-net.net.au>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:33:39 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0300
>>>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs

>>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>>>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>>>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>>>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>>>>Hi All,

>>>>>This is purely for self interest.

>>>>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>>>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>>>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>>>In think of two. Me. I'm a trumpet player,valve trombone and
>>>flugelhorn. Made a living at it some years ago, then found a
>>>steady day gig that I liked. Chris Styles is a hell of a guitar
>>>player and made a living at it for some time. We've jammed
>>>together a few times in a friend's group, but we don't make a
>>>habit of it.

>>>Don Ledger

>>Hi Guys,

>>I don't want to interrupt the thread but,

>>We already have the components of a _kickass_ Chicago Blues
>>band - horn (brass) section and all! If I was a millionaire I'd
>>fly us all to some killer studio on some tropical island so
>>that we could all jam together just once.

>>Already we have; Song writers and composers, guitar players,
>>trumpet, sax, (other brass) a bass player, keyboards, and me on
>>drums!

>>If Jerry Clark smoked too many cigarettes and slung back one too
>>many Margarita's along the way maybe we can talk him into doing
>>the vocals. Errol (EBK) is an old radio DJ and he could produce
>>and market us! I'm starting to sound like an old Mickey
>>Rooney/Judy Garland movie where at some point they always round
>>up all the kids in the town so that they can, . . . 'Put on a
>>show!' <VBG>

>>Ahhh, sweet home Chicago! <G>

>>Love you guys.

>>Back to the real world. :(

>>John Velez ;-)

>Roy, John, Don, et al,

>Not only am I a musician and UFO researcher, but I earn a living
>as a sound engineer and recording technician!

>I _do_ think we have the makings of a unique album here!! LOL!!

>Yours musically,

>C D Conrad

That day gig I mentioned was as a sound engineer, now I do video
as well. I am aware of another researcher up here who is also a
musician and a sound tech for television.

Don






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:24:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:11:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:57:33 -0400
>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


<snip>

>>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:28:08 -0500

>>On their own, the late night videos of the Phoenix lights were
>>perfectly congruent with the dropping of flares...  The only
>>guessed wrong. Now that one of the more trusted writers here has
>>taken time to analyze the vids and placed the lights just where
>>tlares.  It doesn't diminish my life for that to be true.

>>But then again, in the unexpected rustle of a sudden breeze, I
>>swear I can almost hear the ethereal rumbling of an old woman
>>crying out, "Off with her head..."

>>Bye...  Ted..

>All is not (yet) lost. The 8-9 PM events of that night are still
>unexplained. And.... because I took on the Phoenix lights I have
>been privileged to investigate what seems so far to be an
>astounding case of photographically proven missing time!

>Investigation proceeding, witnesses want anonymity......
>so the best I can say is...

>not yet proven but stay tuned!

In further supporting my point...  Rather than waxing
polemically over the readily explained later sightings,
distracting Bruce in relentless replies pointing to well
annotated web pages, would we not find more promise in
discussing the earlier sighting, where people for over a hundred
miles and many people throughout Phoenix looked up, at often
very high elevation angles, to witness a collection of lights
perhaps enclosing a misty object?

Does any one of us have any unreported information about the
early sighting that could be passed on to Bruce that would add
to his investigation?  Each new report with approximate time,
azimuth, elevation, apparent angular size and duration would add
to the data that Bruce has to work with.  His conclusions might
be esoteric or they might be mundane.  Yet any possible
conclusion would bring light to an obscure and widespread
event...





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Re: UFO Name Change

From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:34:00 -0700 (MST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:13:31 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Name Change


'UFO' signifies, 'Unleaded Fuel Only'.


~~~~~Get BREAKING news plus UFO/ET news - NOW - click on "What's Up
Doc?" http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/5518





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                      Re: Michael Lindemann's Gathering

From: Michael Lindemann <CNINews1@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:18:16 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:23:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Michael Lindemann's Gathering


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:43:29 -0800
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Michael Lindemann Book/Meeting


>I'm listening to Jeff Rense's 'Sightings on the Radio' and
>Michael Lindemann is doing his weekly UFO update.  Michael
>apparently orchestrated a meeting last weekend of very high
>level executives, military officers, a NASA representative, a
>well-known screenwriter -- highly placed individuals from all
>areas of society.  These individuals met to explore the social
>(and other) implications of our likely/inevitable discovery of
>alien life.  These people were NOT true believers, but felt that
>this issue was of such great importance that they needed to
>begin exploring.  Since the government seems unwilling, it falls
>to leaders like them, it was felt.

>A more extensive explanation will be included in the Nov 1st
>issue of CNI News, Michael Lindemann's excellent newsletter. And
>you can email him at cninews1@aol.com and ask for two free
>copies -- normally it's subscription only.

>You can listen to the archives of Jeff's show by hopping the
>link from his website at:

>http://www.sightings.com

>--

>Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>


Dear Errol and all,

The comparison to "MJ-12" misses the point of the exercise, and
I would like to remove any MJ-12 reference or comparison from
future discussion. While most of the participants do wish to
remain anonymous for now, the content of the discussions will be
made public, in summarized form through CNI News and later in
other ways. Please note that this group was a one-time gathering
-- it does not constitute a "membership" in anything at all.
Although followup meetings are anticipated -- since this was
only the first step in a large inquiry -- new participants will
be invited in at later stages. Also, this group has no agenda
other than discussion of possibilities; it harbors no secrets
other than the confidentiality of participant names; it has no
control function at all; and those who participate do so as
individuals, not as representatives of any other organization.
In all these ways, at least, the present undertaking is
different in both letter and spirit from "MJ-12," and I think
any MJ comparison can only serve to undermine the purpose and
integrity of our present efforts.

Thanks and best regards,
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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:36:12 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:29:58 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:32:14 -0500
>Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:42:56 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:48:37 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

Earlier, I had written:

>>There seems to be a discussion regarding whether it's safe to
>>shoot into the sun with a video camera (I think). As long as you
>>keep your eye to the viewfinder, there is no danger at all. If
>>the camera is a CCD type, then the camera is safe, also (though
>>the results on a consumer camera might be questionable). If the
>>camera is an older "tube" type, then one should not point it at
>>the sun or any another bright, raw light source as the imaging
>>tube will get a permanent burned spot.

In response, Bruce asked:

>I agree with what you say here but I question one thing:  you
>say it is OK to shoot the sun with a CCD camera. This is
>true..... for a short time (seconds?). But I wonder..... solar
>thermal radiation collected by the lens is bound to heat the CCD
>at the focal spot. Therefore I would worry that _extended_
>filming of the sun could damage (melt?) the CCD.

Actually, the only real danger (if any) would be to the auto
iris and not the CCD it self. Since the auto iris is capable of
closing down completely, if necessary, to compensate for any
increase of light, it places itself in the path of any
concentrated "hot spots" that might occur.

Bob Shell might want to weigh in on this (since he has actually
designed lenses), but it is my understanding that the light
collecting on the iris isn't anywhere as concentrated as it
would be on the CCD where the image is really focused to a
pinpoint. However, despite this pinpoint focusing, the intensity
of the image isn't any greater than a pinpoint image from a
Christmas tree light. This is due to the iris, which opens or
closes to keep the exposure falling on the CCD element constant.

Regarding the amount of time; it shouldn't make a bit of
difference. CCD's are very rugged, compared to pick-up tubes of
older cameras (the whole reason CCD's were invented).

One note:

Older consumer tube cameras almost always had a manual iris
control. I was always amazed, since cranking them open could
ruin them in a second (and quite often did!). Ironically, the
newer home video cameras (with virtually indestructable CCD's)
usually lack this very useful feature, which is why most current
night shots of UFO's are washed out.

Too bad.

Later,
Roger Evans






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:04:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:35:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:36:21 -0600
>Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:25:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Music & UFOs

Previously, Ms. Trout asked:

>I'm not sure why this thread continues. Yes, I'm an abductee,
>and yes, I do occasional D-J work (for the last eight years).
>I'm also a dancer.

<snip>

>I could just as well ask how many of you are avidly into
>dancing....

Well, actually you could and everyone would be delighted to
respond!

Actually, Beverly, this thread started when Roy Hale asked how
many people with an interest in UFOs (not just abductees) had an
interest in music.

But, to answer your question, this thread continues because it's
always comforting to find a common bond within any group of
people; especially a group that mutually gravitates toward
something as controversial as UFOs. I can't speak for everyone
else on the list, but it certainly adds a sense of "normality"
to an otherwise mystifying, though always interesting, subject.

I hope you connect with other dancers, since that seems to be
something you are interested in, as well as UFOs.

Take care.

Two-steppin' in Houston,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Stefan Duncan <swduncan@foto.infi.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:31:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:39:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


I played guitar in coffee houses at college.


Stefan Duncan
Director of XPI
Editor of AUFON
5396 Sumac Circle
Fayetteville, N.C. 28304
swduncan@foto.infi.net
http://www.aufon.com
ICQ 11878618
(910-425-2976)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:10:38 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:43:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax


Thanks to Michael Lindemann for this one.

Stig

*******


Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:24:57 EST
From: CNINews1@aol.com
To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Subject: SETI Signal a hoax

Scientist Denounces Elaborate Alien Signal Hoax

BOSTON--(BUSINESS-WIRE)--Oct. 29, 1998--On Monday, October 26,
an anonymous enthusiast of the search for extraterrestrial
intelligence (SETI) made a startling anonnouncement: we are not
alone in the universe. But within minutes of analysing the
alleged data, Professor Nathan Cohen of Boston University gave
the verdict: "A hoax", said Cohen. Not even a good one."

The alleged discoverer claimed that he was a ham radio operator
piggybacking his SETI search off a British company's 30 foot
satellite dish. "He talked the talk but didn't walk the walk",
said Cohen. Calling himself 'anon', the hoaxster sent copies of
the data all over the internet, which Cohen quickly
reviewed--and was the first to reject.

"It stuck out like a sore thumb", said Cohen. Unwilling to
elaborate on all of the signal's failings as an alien 'hit',
Cohen said "my colleagues and I share the belief that we
shouldn't help the hoaxsters by telling them all that's wrong
with the fake."

The major problem is that the signals were carbon copies on two
separate days of data, a probability that Cohen says would be
astronomically small as reality. But the main problem was the
signal lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal.
"The signal loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic
distances and you have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen
showed in 1993 that distant SETI signals would be spread out in
frequency like teeth on a comb, in what is now called
'polychromatic SETI'. "These 'sidebands' of the alleged signal
do nothing for helping detect it and are characteristic of an
Earth-based modulation method." While anon gave the position
close to that of a known star, Cohen asserts the star's position
information lacked a key detail which invalidates it as a real
one.

Cohen asserts that the 'signal' is a fabricated one or a snip of
a terrestrial satellite's signal being passed off as otherwise.
"A hacker gone wild. Too many 'Contact' reruns. Case closed",
said Cohen.

This information is provided by SETINOW which sponsors
dissemination of important breakthroughs in SETI. Professor
Cohen may be contacted through the following listing.

CONTACT:

Boston University

Office of Public Relations, 617/353-2240

KEYWORD: MASSACHUSETTS







BW1124  OCT 29,1998

5:54  PACIFIC

08:54  EASTERN






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:25:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:51:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:07:00 -0300
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>>For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
>>reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
>>James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
>>of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
>>the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
>>not invited.

>>Words from the publisher:

>>"In 1969, a panel of fifteen distinguished scientists attended a
>>symposium sponsored by the American Association for the
>>Advancement of Science. Representing the fields of astronomy,
>>physics, meteorology, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology,
>>these renowned experts reflected the entire range of responsible
>>opinion on the subject of unidentified flying objects. Exploring
>>widely divergent views and applying them to the traditional
>>scientific method, they presented photographs and detailed
>>descriptions of sightings and subjected eyewitness reports and
>>physical evidence to intense scrutiny. This book collects the
>>papers presented at the symposium, several of them substantially
>>revised. While the book takes no stand on the issue of UFO
>>reality, it shows that there are still many unanswered questions
>>regarding the physics and psychology of the phenomenon."

>>A real bargain at $6.98.

>>Ed Stewart

>Those of you in Canada. If you sniff around Coles or W Smith
>book stores you might find a new copy of "UFO's A scientific
>Debate" for $4.50. I did and so did Chris Styles, just a few
>months ago.

>Stan, I'd be interested in a copy of Jim's 70 page paper. What's
>the price Cdn.?

>Don Ledger


For you, Don,  and any others on the List $10.00 Canadian will
do from me at 79 Pembroke Crescent, Fredericton, NB E3B 2V1.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:25:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:51:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:07:00 -0300
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

<snip>

>>For only $6.98 from Barnes & Noble Books, one can get the
>>reprint of Sagan/Page 'UFOs: A Scientific Debate' which includes
>>James E. McDonald's paper 'Science in Default: Twenty-two Years
>>of Inadequate UFO Investigations' and fourteen other papers on
>>the subject including one by J. Allen Hynek. Stan Friedman was
>>not invited.

>>Words from the publisher:

>>"In 1969, a panel of fifteen distinguished scientists attended a
>>symposium sponsored by the American Association for the
>>Advancement of Science. Representing the fields of astronomy,
>>physics, meteorology, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology,
>>these renowned experts reflected the entire range of responsible
>>opinion on the subject of unidentified flying objects. Exploring
>>widely divergent views and applying them to the traditional
>>scientific method, they presented photographs and detailed
>>descriptions of sightings and subjected eyewitness reports and
>>physical evidence to intense scrutiny. This book collects the
>>papers presented at the symposium, several of them substantially
>>revised. While the book takes no stand on the issue of UFO
>>reality, it shows that there are still many unanswered questions
>>regarding the physics and psychology of the phenomenon."

>>A real bargain at $6.98.

>>Ed Stewart

>Those of you in Canada. If you sniff around Coles or W Smith
>book stores you might find a new copy of "UFO's A scientific
>Debate" for $4.50. I did and so did Chris Styles, just a few
>months ago.

>Stan, I'd be interested in a copy of Jim's 70 page paper. What's
>the price Cdn.?

>Don Ledger


For you, Don,  and any others on the List $10.00 Canadian will
do from me at 79 Pembroke Crescent, Fredericton, NB E3B 2V1.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                        BBC: SETI Hoaxster Identified

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:31:20 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:55:08 -0500
Subject: BBC: SETI Hoaxster Identified


BBC update. URL:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_203000/203133.stm

Stig

*******

BBC News Online: Sci/Tech

Thursday, October 29, 1998 Published at 18:42 GMT


Puzzle over alien 'discovery'


By our Science Editor David Whitehouse


The scientific world is buzzing with the suggestion that signals
from aliens living in another star system may have been picked
up by a part-time astronomer.

Other astronomers are scrambling to confirm or deny them.

It could either be the most important discovery ever made, or
more likely, a case of mistaken identity or an elaborate hoax.

At first the part-time astronomer who discovered the signals
would not reveal his identity. However he has since been named
as Paul Dore of Siemens Plessey Systems in the UK.

He has been using a small radio telescope belonging to his firm
to scan the sky for intelligent signals.

On October 22 and on the following night, he reported detecting
signals from the EQ Pegasi star system which is 22 light years
away.

The signals were not the type that occurs naturally. The data
has been distributed to several astronomers and observatories.

However astronomers at the Jodrell Bank Observatory in England
say it is all a case of mistaken identity. Astronomer Ian
Morrison told BBC News Online: "I think he has detected signals
from a satellite."


The truth is out there


The same search for extra-terrestrial life is being carried out
by professional astronomers using the world's largest radio
telescopes such as the one in Arecibo, Puerto Rico.

They call it Seti, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial
Intelligence.

With the development of radio astronomy in the 1950s,
astronomers realised that they had telescopes that could send
and receive radio signals between the stars.

The first search for radio signals from space was in 1960. Two
nearby stars were observed but no signals were detected.

Since then about 40 searches have been made. Many unusual
signals have been detected but astronomers think that none of
them were from intelligent life.

Last month astronomers at the giant Arecibo radio telescope
conducting 'project Phoenix,' a detailed search for radio
signals from intelligent life in space, detected a signal from
EQ Peg but concluded that it was man-made interference.

The EQ Peg star system is unlike our own. It consists of two dim
red dwarf stars orbiting each other. From time to time
explosions, so-called stellar flares, occur on both stars.

Detecting signals from some form of intelligence living in a
nearby star system would be the most important scientific
discovery ever made.

At the moment it seems likely that the 'alien' radio signals are
just man-made interference.

Terrestrial signals can easily fool astronomers into thinking
that they have detected ET.

The searchers of project Phoenix recently tracked a signal for
14 hours before they realised it was a scientific satellite.

Many astronomers involved in searching for life in space have
expressed regret that the EQ Peg observations were released
without going through the procedure agreed to tell the public
about possible ET signals.

Because of this they say they are suspicious that it is all a
hoax.

Even if it is it will have caused many scientists to think again
about how they would release the news of a real discovery.


Relevant Stories

*Is anybody out there?  (29 Oct 98=BF|=BFSci/Tech)
*Anyone out there?  (29 Oct 98=BF|=BFSci/Tech)


Internet Links

*Seti Institute
*British UFO Research Association
*Ufology Society International


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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:59:53 PST
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:58:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash


>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:35:16 EST
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message

>A response has just been received from the UTA Library re my
>orders for enlargements of the Ramey Message (in connection with
>the Roswell Event).

>They now promise to process my order for enlargements of the
>Ramey Message for research only use by RPIT. UTA cites copyright
>concerns for not providing duplicate negatives.

>Just a passing thought: Can there be any copyright protection
>after 51 years? And does copyright protection extend to the web?

>James Bond Johnson

JBJ & List,

There is the International Copyright Convention that comes in to
play as far as the internet goes. Otherwise there are the laws
of each country that need to be looked into if the country in
question is not a signatory to the convention.

In Oz I believe I read somewhere that music copyright expires 12
years after the composer's death -  but I could be way out
there.

Regards,

Leanne ];-)  :





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                          Re: Sighting In Virginia?

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:44:41 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:00:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting In Virginia?


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>To: UFO UpDates Subscribers:;
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Sighting In Virginia?
>Date: Thursday, October 29, 1998 4:56 PM

>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:42:35 -0500
>From: Michael Hodges <mwhod@roanoke.infi.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>Subject: Sighting In Virginia?

>I have been watching the sky for some time now and mostly have
>seen planes and helicopters, this morning at 6 am, I decided to
>go out and smoke my pipe,

<snip>

It's been my observation that pipes are far more effective than
telescopes, cameras, or any other instrument in the detection of
UFOs. This probably also accounts for why fewer UFO reports are
generated by women.

Kind regards,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:35:40 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:08:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI


Forwarded from the SETI Email Discussion List. Information on the list
can be found at

http://www.setileague.org/admin/setilist.htm

Stig

*******

At 06:47 PM 10/28/98 -0800, Brian Wong wrote:

>Dr. Shuch, I feel a public statement is in order or we will all look
bad.

Thanks, Brian. My public statement, already sent to the press through
another forum (though all of you are free to disseminate it to your
local media), follows:

---------------------
You may by now have seen claims in the press about a signal from EQ
Peg, allegedly received by an amateur in England.  The nonprofit,
membership-supported SETI League has been analyzing this claim since
Friday night. None of our 63 active stations around the world has been
able to confirm it. The signals were reported anonymously in a message
hacked into a *closed* signal verification email list. Still, David
Whitehouse at BBC decided to run with the story, without contacting
Seth Shostak or me. (I wonder why?). The perpetrator asserts that
he/she is NOT a SETI League member, which is scant consolation to us.

The "signal" has been thoroughly discredited by a host of radio
astronomers, amateur and professional, who have analyzed the GIFs
posted to the Internet. The person who reported the alleged signals has
violated every principle of responsible science. He has NOT followed
the carefully crafted SETI League signal detection protocols to which
all of our participating stations are signatory. See

http://www.setileague.org/general/detect.htm

He has NOT adhered to international policies regarding signal
verification. See
http://www.setileague.org/general/protocol.htm

He has NOT identified himself, and NOT answered emails from our
volunteer Regional Coordinator in England, making any meaningful
follow-up impossible. And he has NOT waited for backup analysis before
announcing his "find" to the press. If this is not a blatant hoax, it
is the worst kind of irresponsible science (the kind which gives The
SETI League, and all credible scientific endeavours, a bad name).

Anonymity and scientific integrety are mutually exclusive.  A
responsible scientist, amateur or professional, owns his mistakes as
well as his accomplishments. Unfortunately the media sometimes fail to
make that distinction.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D.    Executive Director, The SETI League, Inc.
433 Liberty Street, PO Box 555, Little Ferry NJ 07643 USA
voice (201) 641-1770;  fax (201) 641-1771; URL
http://www.setileague.org/
email work: n6tx@setileague.org;  home: drseti@usa.net

"We Know We're Not Alone!"

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:03:59 -0500
From: "Dr. H. Paul Shuch" <n6tx@setileague.org>
To: Brian Wong <logis@logis.com>
Subject: Re: SETI EQ Pegasi Again and spreading.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:59:09 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:26:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:48:13 -0400

>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
>>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>I would respectfully note that I didn't start the Roswell
>Investigation until 1978, but had already been lecturing "Flying
>Saucers ARE Real" for 11 years.

>It is hardly true that my 600 lectures have all been  the same.

I said "basically unchanged and still the same" and not "all
been the same". Please note the difference.

>I do occasionally add and delete materials and Roswell and MJ-12
>are indeed covered now.

I would of thought you would have removed MJ-12 hoax from your
lecture material after the online debate we had on this mailing
list towards the end of 1996. I must admit that since 1992, I
have had the pleasure of listening to your speeches only about
six times. Of note is the number in the audiences that were
capable of lip-synching in unison with your speeches, as many on
this list could attest to if they so desired.

As a matter of fact here are some reviews of your recent
Australian tour that were posted in your absence. From Brisbane,
8/12/98:


        "The lecture never got past Roswell and there was
absolutely _nothing_ new that none of us haven't already read
about. I don't want to sound like a wowser but I thought it was
crap and all I got at the end of the night was a sore bum from
the seat!"


The full review is too brutal to repost, but it can be found in
the August archives, message m13-007.shtml.

And this one from the Tassie lecture posted as message
m29-018.shtml also from the August 1998 archives:


        "Just curious if anyone knows if Mr Friedman
will be appearing in Perth, West Aust. at all
during his tour?

        There's comfort in the classics."

        "Well, if he is, don't bother wasting your time going...
I ended up going to the one in Tassie and it was the biggest
waste of time!

        He seemed more interested in his self praise and
attempted humor (which wasn't very funny!) than anything else...

        Mind you, I did feel sorry for him when it came to
question time...  Some of the questions that where asked where
absolutly stupid but then in the same respect, his answers where
more or less right off the topic and some where not even answers
to the questions....

        All in all, I was very disappointed with it and I hope
his book is a lot better..

        Does anyone else who has been to his lectures feel the
same way or is it just me?"


And from message m31-010.shtml, also from the August archives:


        "I decided to pass on the Friedman Lecture here in
Perth, swayed by the not too positive reviews and the price.

        But this sort of thing should be happening here more
often.

        Perhaps a panel of Local and International experts and
witnesses debating important and current issues in Ufology. I'd
like to see that......"


>Since I continue to find that most people have not read any of
>the 5 large scale scientific studies I describe, I think it is
>important to educate them.

Your fans quoted above were looking for an education, but
apparently never got it.

>I have never claimed that my lecture is intended as a graduate
>course for those very familiar with the subject. The responses I
>get from the sponsoring colleges, management clubs, technical
>groups etc indicate that I am very well received even if Ed
>isn't happy.

Don't take me wrong. I find your lectures very humorous and
illuminating. You are a veritable treasure to ufological wisdom
and a personal insperation to me to continue posting on the UFO
problem.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
+---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                         CPR-Canada Update (10/29/98

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:02:09 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:30:16 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada Update (10/29/98


Circles Phenomenon Research Canada Update
October 29, 1998


Main Web Site:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310
1998 Updates:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1998



SCANS OF SASKATCHEWAN "SPLIT NODES"
NOW AVAILABLE

I have just made some preliminary scans of wheat samples from
Outlook, Saskatchewan (see August 11 report, group of six
circles, one with a "cross" feature). A number of stalks from inside
the circles display unusual "split nodes" where the growth nodes
are split cleanly in half, right around the circumference. You can
slide the two halves apart. I have seen similar splits in samples
from Oregon, USA (1994). Some nodes appear swollen. Additional
samples have been sent to the lab of Dr. Levengood / BLT for
analysis. (Copies of scans on web site).

____________________________


PHOTOS OF CANDO "4:20" FORMATION

Photos, both aerial and ground, of the controversial "4:20"
formation near Cando, Saskatchewan (see August 25 report)
are now available. The most controversial formation of the year;
while may be regarded as an obvious hoax, it is noted that no
tracks or damage were initially found by the farmer, and the crop
is flattened in a fairly complex lay pattern, with bunches of stalks
laying in alternating directions in the main pathways, with other
bunches extending out into the standing crop, at right angles to
the main pathways. Samples have been sent to the lab of
Dr. Levengood / BLT for analysis. Additional ground shots
available. (Copies on web site).

____________________________


Web site updated October 28.

____________________________


For further information or correspondence, contact:



Paul Anderson

Director
CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International
Main Web Site:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310
1998 Updates:  www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1998

Director
MILLENNIUM RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Web:  mypage.direct.ca/p/psa/ (being revised)

Representative
BLT RESEARCH, INC.

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Tel / Fax:  604.731.8522
E-Mail:  psa@direct.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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:49:01 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:40:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?


Hi Roy,

This is purely for self interest too.

Is your last name related to HaleBopp?
Are we caged in your revolutionary hidden trail post?
You raised a new phenomena, your Music & UFOs subject
I think is more powerful than the UFO topic!

Next time I suggest please send a soul awakening post or at
least a soul shaker/motivator.

What about abductions and reflected symptoms?

Regards and thank you,

Alex





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:29:08 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:29:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:59:09 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:48:13 -0400

>>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
>>>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>>>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>>>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>>I would respectfully note that I didn't start the Roswell
>>Investigation until 1978, but had already been lecturing "Flying
>>Saucers ARE Real" for 11 years.

>>It is hardly true that my 600 lectures have all been the same.

>I said "basically unchanged and still the same" and not "all
>been the same". Please note the difference.

>>I do occasionally add and delete materials and Roswell and MJ-12
>>are indeed covered now.

>I would of thought you would have removed MJ-12 hoax from your
>lecture material after the online debate we had on this mailing
>list towards the end of 1996. I must admit that since 1992, I
>have had the pleasure of listening to your speeches only about
>six times. Of note is the number in the audiences that were
>capable of lip-synching in unison with your speeches, as many on
>this list could attest to if they so desired.

<snip>

>       Mind you, I did feel sorry for him when it came to
>question time... Some of the questions that where asked where
>absolutly stupid but then in the same respect, his answers where
>more or less right off the topic and some where not even answers
>to the questions....

>       All in all, I was very disappointed with it and I hope
>his book is a lot better..

>       Does anyone else who has been to his lectures feel the
>same way or is it just me?"

>
>And from message m31-010.shtml, also from the August archives:


>       "I decided to pass on the Friedman Lecture here in
>Perth, swayed by the not too positive reviews and the price.

>       But this sort of thing should be happening here more
>often.

>       Perhaps a panel of Local and International experts and
>witnesses debating important and current issues in Ufology. I'd
>like to see that......"


>>Since I continue to find that most people have not read any of
>>the 5 large scale scientific studies I describe, I think it is
>>important to educate them.

>Your fans quoted above were looking for an education, but
>apparently never got it.

>>I have never claimed that my lecture is intended as a graduate
>>course for those very familiar with the subject. The responses I
>>get from the sponsoring colleges, management clubs, technical
>>groups etc indicate that I am very well received even if Ed
>>isn't happy.

>Don't take me wrong. I find your lectures very humorous and
>illuminating. You are a veritable treasure to ufological wisdom
>and a personal insperation to me to continue posting on the UFO
>problem.

>Ed Stewart


Eddie our love...

A few days ago I addressed a question to you, directly. It seems
that my question went unanswered. In truth, the question was
more challenge than comment. If you recall, I asked you what the
temperature of the sand was.

I do not at all mind being ignored by you. However I have made
an observation. It is my hope that the list will see fit to
comment on this, my discovery of the manner in which Eddie
Stewart likes to perform.

I do believe that you like to opine whenever the target is
someone more respected than you are. Perhaps this modus operandi
enhances the size of your... self image. Perhaps not. But such
is true. You never pick on the nobodies, just the somebodies.
And when you do, your mind functions like a .222Magnum with a
laser sight at one foot distance form the target and is just as
dangerous.

However Stan Friedman's guns are bigger than yours; more well
respected by virtue of the manner in which he conducts himself
in person as well as in writing. As is true with others who have
been targets of the great Stewart.

This is something which, in my opinion at least, you simply
cannot abide, can you?  Being a mensch. Mensch, Eddie. Bon
homme. Nice guy.

Y'all come back now. Heah?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:05:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:33:59 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The World'


>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
>alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
>that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
>which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
>'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

>Best regards and happy halloween!

>Stig Agermose

>Forwarded from the SETI

<snip>

Stig and List,

Please note that the Orson Welles radio show was broadcast
in the USA on 30 October 1938 - 60 years ago; check here:

http://www.bway.net/~nipper/page4.html


By the way, has halloween _really_ anything to do with
space and ETs?

This is the explanation of halloween from Encylopedia.COM:

* All Saints' Day Nov. 1, feast of the Roman Catholic and
Anglican churches, the day God is glorified for all his saints,
known and unknown. Roman Catholics are obliged to hear Mass on
this day. In medieval England it was called All Hallows; hence
the name Halloween (Hallows' eve)
for the preceding day (Oct. 31).

I _do hope_ all this info. will contribute to the possibility
of EQ Pegasi/1450 MHz _not_ being a hoax!


Regards,

AWS







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                          Re: Sighting In Virginia?

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:58:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:38:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting In Virginia?


>From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sighting In Virginia?
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:44:41 -0800

>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>>To: UFO UpDates Subscribers:;
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Sighting In Virginia?
>>Date: Thursday, October 29, 1998 4:56 PM

>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:42:35 -0500
>>From: Michael Hodges <mwhod@roanoke.infi.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>>Subject: Sighting In Virginia?

>>I have been watching the sky for some time now and mostly have
>>seen planes and helicopters, this morning at 6 am, I decided to
>>go out and smoke my pipe,

><snip>

>It's been my observation that pipes are far more effective than
>telescopes, cameras, or any other instrument in the detection of
>UFOs. This probably also accounts for why fewer UFO reports are
>generated by women.

>Kind regards,

>Keith


Keith I would say that is rather subjective. It depends on what
one puts in the pipe. Herbal ingredients tend to make it more
gender balanced. I can only speculate whether it would cause an
increase in sighting 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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                           Re: UFO Video Technique

From: Greg St Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:26:02 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:41:26 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:36:12 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>Actually, the only real danger (if any) would be to the auto
>iris and not the CCD it self. Since the auto iris is capable of
>closing down completely, if necessary, to compensate for any
>increase of light, it places itself in the path of any
>concentrated "hot spots" that might occur.

Hey Roger,

I'm venturing into unfamiliar territory here, so please forgive
me if I inadvertantly display my ignorance.

If the iris on the camera closed down "completely", wouldn't the
tape show complete darkness at that point? I have used the
technique in question with mixed results, and in many cases I've
accidentally taped the sun head on. There have been no ill
effects to the camera so far. The camera is a Minolta of about
1991 vintage. Anyway, if I'm recording the sun, even with the
iris closed as far as possible, doesn't there have to be SOME
kind of hotspot somewhere, even if reduced in size?

>Bob Shell might want to weigh in on this (since he has actually
>designed lenses), but it is my understanding that the light
>collecting on the iris isn't anywhere as concentrated as it
>would be on the CCD where the image is really focused to a
>pinpoint.

Can the iris be damaged? It's just plastic or painted metal
segments, and it doesn't detect anything per se, so damage there
isn't a concern anyway, is it?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:54:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:50:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:59:09 -0800
>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:48:13 -0400

>>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:13:10 -0800
>>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>>I must for once agree with Stan Friedman. His presentation
>>>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>>>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>>>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

>>I would respectfully note that I didn't start the Roswell
>>Investigation until 1978, but had already been lecturing "Flying
>>Saucers ARE Real" for 11 years.

>>It is hardly true that my 600 lectures have all been the same.

>I said "basically unchanged and still the same" and not "all
>been the same". Please note the difference.

>>I do occasionally add and delete materials and Roswell and MJ-12
>>are indeed covered now.

>I would of thought you would have removed MJ-12 hoax from your
>lecture material after the online debate we had on this mailing
>list towards the end of 1996. I must admit that since 1992, I
>have had the pleasure of listening to your speeches only about
>six times. Of note is the number in the audiences that were
>capable of lip-synching in unison with your speeches, as many on
>this list could attest to if they so desired.

>As a matter of fact here are some reviews of your recent
>Australian tour that were posted in your absence. From Brisbane,
>8/12/98:

> "The lecture never got past Roswell and there was
>absolutely _nothing_ new that none of us haven't already read
>about. I don't want to sound like a wowser but I thought it was
>crap and all I got at the end of the night was a sore bum from
>the seat!"

>The full review is too brutal to repost, but it can be found in
>the August archives, message m13-007.shtml.

>And this one from the Tassie lecture posted as message
>m29-018.shtml also from the August 1998 archives:

> "Just curious if anyone knows if Mr Friedman
>will be appearing in Perth, West Aust. at all
>during his tour?

> There's comfort in the classics."

> "Well, if he is, don't bother wasting your time going...
>I ended up going to the one in Tassie and it was the biggest
>waste of time!

> He seemed more interested in his self praise and
>attempted humor (which wasn't very funny!) than anything else...

> Mind you, I did feel sorry for him when it came to
>question time... Some of the questions that where asked where
>absolutly stupid but then in the same respect, his answers where
>more or less right off the topic and some where not even answers
>to the questions....

> All in all, I was very disappointed with it and I hope
>his book is a lot better..

> Does anyone else who has been to his lectures feel the
>same way or is it just me?"

>And from message m31-010.shtml, also from the August archives:

> "I decided to pass on the Friedman Lecture here in
>Perth, swayed by the not too positive reviews and the price.

> But this sort of thing should be happening here more
>often.

> Perhaps a panel of Local and International experts and
>witnesses debating important and current issues in Ufology. I'd
>like to see that......"

>>Since I continue to find that most people have not read any of
>>the 5 large scale scientific studies I describe, I think it is
>>important to educate them.

>Your fans quoted above were looking for an education, but
>apparently never got it.

>>I have never claimed that my lecture is intended as a graduate
>>course for those very familiar with the subject. The responses I
>>get from the sponsoring colleges, management clubs, technical
>>groups etc indicate that I am very well received even if Ed
>>isn't happy.

>Don't take me wrong. I find your lectures very humorous and
>illuminating. You are a veritable treasure to ufological wisdom
>and a personal insperation to me to continue posting on the UFO
>problem.

>Ed Stewart

I am sorry Ed is still so angry after Jerry's fine words.

I will never forget a call I had after a lecture in Pittsburgh
from an attendee claiming he hadn't heard anything new in my
lecture. I asked him about 7 different topics I had discussed.
He hadn't been aware of any. He surely wasn't listening to what
I had said.

Anybody who said I didn't get past Roswell in my Australian
lectures wasn't listening, since Roswell wasn't mentioned in the
first half of the program.

There was an intermission.

I won't bore the people on this list with the hundreds of
favorable responses I have had, but will give one example from
an April 6,l998, letter from a PhD who was the Programs
Committee Chairman of the Wisconsin Section of the American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics:


"I would like to extend our deepest thanks and sincerest
appreciation for sharing with us your excellent presentation
"Flying Saucers ARE Real".

The 300+ people who came to your lecture was by far the largest
attendance we have had yet at one of our AIAA meetings.

Your presentation and slides were extermely interesting and
informative. It was fascinating to learn about the various UFO
phenomena you discussed during your lecture."


I have certainly not accepted the strange notion that the main
MJ-12 documents are a hoax for reasons I have noted in several
papers and in 'TOP SECRET/MAJIC', despite Ed's strange claim,
among others, that they must be because they had no TS Control
numbers. A position he maintained even after I pointed out that
my 108 page 'Final Report on Operation Majestic 12' included
five previously TS documents without control numbers and that
the Archivist at the Eisenhower Library pointed out that control
numbers were not used all the time.

'Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up' is a good
motto for Ed.

In case anybody is wondering, I am not going to replace Jerry
as Ed's primary combatant.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

             Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:05:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:59:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:10:38 +0200
>Subject: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax

<snip>

>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:24:57 EST
>From: CNINews1@aol.com
>To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
>Subject: SETI Signal a hoax

>Scientist Denounces Elaborate Alien Signal Hoax

<snip>

Well well, a scientific hoax! Who would have guessed? Time for
the old debunker steamroller stamp.

This hoax surely implies that the whole SETI project is a hoax,
that Sagan et al. knew from the beginning, and are thus fraud,
that any data SETI ever gets will be either hallucination or
wishful thinking. Anything else? Sure. Any pro-SETI scientist is
no scientist anymore when he/she even thinks SETI, only some
poor gullible SOB.

There. This had to be said for the sake of Science.

I feel better.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                           Re: The Ed Stewart Show

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:47:10 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:07:35 -0500
Subject: Re: The Ed Stewart Show


Hello, list.

The following appeared in the ill-fated and concept-depleted
thread "Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking". Stan
Friedman had previously posted a single, very friendly message
where he actually agreed with Ed on a minor point. Instead of
taking that opportunity to close old wounds and bring
unification to different sides, Ed chose to respond by
humiliating and chastising Stan. The act was totally unprovoked
and uncalled for. Pay close attention to what is said and by
whom, because it paints the clearest picture, yet, of Ed Stewart
and his obvious disdain for everyone in ufology, even for people
that might agree with him.

After Stan's post, Ed wrote:

>His presentation
>'Flying Saycers are Real' is basically unchanged and still the
>same. If you have had the pleasure of hearing Stan Friedman
>once, you have heard him all 600+ times.

Stan gently reminded Ed:

>>It is hardly true that my 600 lectures have all been the same.

Ed's incredible response:

>I said "basically unchanged and still the same" and not "all
>been the same". Please note the difference.

What difference, Ed? Obviously you were trying to imply that all
600 of Stan's lectures were exactly the same. If not, then why
follow up with the comment about "all 600+ times"?

What's that phrase you're so fond of, Ed? Oh, yes:"Intellectual
Dishonesty". What makes this all the more offensive is the
following statement:

>I must admit that since 1992, I
>have had the pleasure of listening to your speeches only about
>six times.

So the great fact collector, Ed Stewart, was making an
assumption without the benefit of proof? Shame on you, Ed. Isn't
that what you tell everyone on the list NOT to do? More to the
point, what was your goal by making such a statement? Even if
what you were saying was true, Stan's previous post wasn't
threatening in tone or content. You could have simply
aknowledged the agreement between the two of you and quietly
moved on. Instead, you dug into your coveted archives and posted
this review regarding Stan:

>        "The lecture never got past Roswell and there was
>absolutely _nothing_ new that none of us haven't already read
>about. I don't want to sound like a wowser but I thought it was
>crap and all I got at the end of the night was a sore bum from
>the seat!"

Then with feigned chivalry, you declare:

>The full review is too brutal to repost, but it can be found in
>the August archives, message m13-007.shtml.

Gee. Thanks, Ed. You wouldn't want to post anything to "brutal".

With obvious sarcasm, you then signed off with this load:

>Don't take me wrong. I find your lectures very humorous and
>illuminating. You are a veritable treasure to ufological wisdom
>and a personal insperation to me to continue posting on the UFO
>problem.

The "UFO problem"?

The only "UFO problem" I can see around here is you, Ed. In the
final analysis, I'm afraid Jerome Clark is right. You are just a
mean spirited old fart ("old fart" are my words, not Jerry's).
As best as I can tell, you have little interest in UFOs beyond
using the information you collect as bait for some unsuspecting
soul that you can verbally attack to make yourself feel better.

Personally, I think you owe Stan and the list an apology for
such uncivilized behavior. If you can't account for yourself and
control your actions, then your precious "archives" are as
questionable in content as your are in character.

I have no use for you.

Roger Evans,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                                     Re:

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:35:06 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:09:50 -0500
Subject: Re:


Re: UFO Video Technique

>From: Greg St Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:26:02 EST
>Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:41:26 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

Previously, I had advised:

>>Actually, the only real danger (if any) would be to the auto
>>iris and not the CCD it self. Since the auto iris is capable of
>>closing down completely, if necessary, to compensate for any
>>increase of light, it places itself in the path of any
>>concentrated "hot spots" that might occur.

Greg's very good response was:

>I'm venturing into unfamiliar territory here, so please forgive
>me if I inadvertantly display my ignorance.
>
>If the iris on the camera closed down "completely", wouldn't the
>tape show complete darkness at that point?

You are absolutely correct. In fact, that was my point. The iris
(being automatic) will close down totally, if necessary, if
there is too much light coming into the CCD chamber. Therefore,
if you are seeing any kind of image at all, then the "auto
exposure" circuitry has already deemed the light level and
intensity okay.

>I have used the
>technique in question with mixed results, and in many cases I've
>accidentally taped the sun head on. There have been no ill
>effects to the camera so far. The camera is a Minolta of about
>1991 vintage. Anyway, if I'm recording the sun, even with the
>iris closed as far as possible, doesn't there have to be SOME
>kind of hotspot somewhere, even if reduced in size?

Again, I defer to my previous answer:

>>Bob Shell might want to weigh in on this (since he has actually
>>designed lenses), but it is my understanding that the light
>>collecting on the iris isn't anywhere as concentrated as it
>>would be on the CCD where the image is really focused to a
>>pinpoint.

I say this because the light hitting the iris isn't focused.
Such dispersion should prevent any real heat build up. Still,
I'd like to get Bob Shell's input on this...

Another good question:

>Can the iris be damaged? It's just plastic or painted metal
>segments, and it doesn't detect anything per se, so damage there
>isn't a concern anyway, is it?

In many ways, the iris is more important than the CCD. The CCD
(if that's what you have) is constantly "dying"; that is to say
a few of the millions of pixels that make up the CCD imaging
chip are dropping out or changing in value. This becomes more
noticable in dark shots than light ones since dead pixels go
"light" when they die. On the other hand, your camera only has
one iris. Whether plastic or metal, warpage of the "leaves" that
make up the iris can impair its ability to open or close,
therefore affecting exposure. As I said before, the light is
unfocused at the iris, so warpage from heat should not be a
problem.

Let's see what Bob has to say.

Roger Evans,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:50:29 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:20:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI


>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:35:40 +0200
>Subject: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI League'

>Forwarded from the SETI Email Discussion List. Information on the list
>can be found at

>http://www.setileague.org/admin/setilist.htm

>Stig

>*******

>At 06:47 PM 10/28/98 -0800, Brian Wong wrote:

>>Dr. Shuch, I feel a public statement is in order or we will all look
>bad.

>Thanks, Brian. My public statement, already sent to the press through
>another forum (though all of you are free to disseminate it to your
>local media), follows:

>---------------------
>You may by now have seen claims in the press about a signal from EQ
>Peg, allegedly received by an amateur in England.  The nonprofit,
>membership-supported SETI League has been analyzing this claim since
>Friday night. None of our 63 active stations around the world has been
>able to confirm it. The signals were reported anonymously in a message
>hacked into a *closed* signal verification email list. Still, David
>Whitehouse at BBC decided to run with the story, without contacting
>Seth Shostak or me. (I wonder why?). The perpetrator asserts that
>he/she is NOT a SETI League member, which is scant consolation to us.

>The "signal" has been thoroughly discredited by a host of radio
>astronomers, amateur and professional, who have analyzed the GIFs
>posted to the Internet. The person who reported the alleged signals has
>violated every principle of responsible science. He has NOT followed
>the carefully crafted SETI League signal detection protocols to which
>all of our participating stations are signatory. See

>http://www.setileague.org/general/detect.htm

>He has NOT adhered to international policies regarding signal
>verification. See
>http://www.setileague.org/general/protocol.htm

>He has NOT identified himself, and NOT answered emails from our
>volunteer Regional Coordinator in England, making any meaningful
>follow-up impossible. And he has NOT waited for backup analysis before
>announcing his "find" to the press. If this is not a blatant hoax, it
>is the worst kind of irresponsible science (the kind which gives The
>SETI League, and all credible scientific endeavours, a bad name).

>Anonymity and scientific integrety are mutually exclusive.  A
>responsible scientist, amateur or professional, owns his mistakes as
>well as his accomplishments. Unfortunately the media sometimes fail to
>make that distinction.

>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D.    Executive Director, The SETI League, Inc.
>433 Liberty Street, PO Box 555, Little Ferry NJ 07643 USA
>voice (201) 641-1770;  fax (201) 641-1771; URL
>http://www.setileague.org/
>email work: n6tx@setileague.org;  home: drseti@usa.net

>"We Know We're Not Alone!"

>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:03:59 -0500
>From: "Dr. H. Paul Shuch" <n6tx@setileague.org>
>To: Brian Wong <logis@logis.com>
>Subject: Re: SETI EQ Pegasi Again and spreading.


It seems like it's "deja view all over again" to quote the great
Yogi. Since the SETI program is rooted in the premise that there
must be life and or other civilzations out there in the
universe, driven by the law of averages and the Drake Equation,
it now appears that since alien life might be involved then the
same hoaxers that have plagued the UFO field all these years
must now muddy up the waters of the Search for Extraterrestrial
Intelligence.

The time that is wasted in chasing down these mentally disturbed
driven hoaxes is unfortunate, not to mention, detrimental, but
alas seems to be an unfortunate byproduct of the
extraterrestrial component of both fields.

Those involved in the SETI should take all reasonable
precautions to try and nip this in the bud whenever and wherever
it arises, lest it lay and fester for years as has happened in
the UFO phenomenon. All resources available should be targeted
on the source of the hoax so as to discover its purveyors and
their agenda. Is it simply some exercise of the childish mind or
something motivated by other agencies? The former is a given
however the latter is much more serious.

Good luck,

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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:39:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:16:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:42:40 -0800
>From: Paul Stuart <pcstuart@pathcom.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Music & UFOs

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

Hi,

I've been a member of an opera company that has toured
internationally for over ten years. Also sang with a New England
group that sings early American, Antibellum, music, directed a
folk choir, more than 3/4 children, for over ten years and
provided music lessons for my own children, four of which are
professional musicians, two married professional musicians.

Music is a "right brained" occupation as is art in most forms,
physic and intuitive ability and interest in the paranormal,
which would include interst in UFOs.  So why should we be
surprised that people on this list, who reach beyond the
explained and explainable, are also artists, musicians and
writers. I also believe intuitive people are more likely to be
aware of expanded reality and are more sensitive--may be able to
see and feel experiences that others who demand logic and proof
may not experience, see or feel.

Best regards,

Marie





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:23:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:21:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Music & UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi All,

>This is purely for self interest.

>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

For the record, I currently compose (and record, with the help
of computer and samplers) jazz/rock/classical fusion music under
the name Tachyon Chamber Orchestra. I was formerly songwriter,
bassist and lead singer for a local progressive rock act (Quartz
Movement), bassist for an improvisational progressive rock group
(The Throbulators), and bassist for an unpublicized fusion
recording group (Window).

Musicians are also suspected to form a large percentage of the
software development profession, but it is hard to tell if that
is due to some commonality between the disciplines (which does
probably exist) or simply the ubiquity of musicians (which
explains why it is almost impossible to make a living as one).

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.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 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                    Re: Adamski's 'Scout Ship' UFO Photo

From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:47:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:27:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Adamski's 'Scout Ship' UFO Photo


Hi List,

In the following I will present a review of the George Adamski
'Scout Ship' UFO photo and film from 1952, and in this
connection I will make a proposal of what the shown object on
the photo actually could be, and the possible origin of this
object.

A reference is made to the following URL:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AndyPage/adamski.htm

where the following is cut from the URL text:

* "The most famous contactee of all was George Adamski, a Polish
American whose adventures with the 'space people' were
chronicled in several books beginning with 'Flying Saucers Have
Landed'. This self-made man, who had an interest in astronomy
and oriental philosophies, was out with some friends on 20th
November 1952. They were picnicking in the Mohave Desert in
California when they noticed a cigar-shaped object which was
chased away by military jets - but not before it had ejected a
silver disc which landed some distance away."

* "Adamski drove out near to where the saucer lay and was
approached by a 'man' dressed in a one-peice suit. They
communicated using telepathy, and Adamski learned that the being
was from Venus. He said his race was concerned about the
radiation from Atomic Bombs reaching into space and harming
other worlds. The alien also informed Adamski that Earth was
being visited by races from other planets in the solar system
and beyond."

* "The witnesses to this encounter, observed through binoculars,
signed affidavits. Meetings with other humanoids ensued, who
took him on flights into space and around the dark side of the
moon. But his description of wooded valleys was not borne out by
subsequent space missions from Earth."

* "Adamski's photographs of cigar-shaped 'mother-ships' and
close-ups of the smaller disc-shaped 'scout craft' caused a lot
of controversy. Critics compared the latter variously to part of
a vacuum cleaner, a chicken feeder and a bottle cooling machine
made in Wigan, Lancashire. This turned out to have been designed
after the photographs were released, and purposely engineered by
a fan of Adamski's to look like the scout craft. However, none
of these items exactly matched the image captured on film."

* "In his defence, even sceptics were impressed with Adamski's
apparent sincerity. Science journalist Robert Chapman wrote in
'UFO - Flying Saucers Over Britain': "Adamski was so damnably
normal and this was the overall impression I carried away. He
believed he had made contact with a man from Venus, and he did
not see why anyone should disbelieve him. I told myself that if
he was deluded he was the most lucid and intelligent man I had
met'."

* "Others around the world who had never heard of Adamski had
sighted identical objects to the scout craft. One of them was a
schoolboy named Stephen Darbishire, who with his cousin took two
photographs in Coniston one day in February 1954. Leonard Cramp,
an aeronautical engineer used a system called orthographic
projection to prove that the object depicted in Darbishire's and
Adamski's photographs were proportionally identical."


Check the photo/film here:

http://www.gafintl-adamski.com/GAFPhoto.htm


Check these URLs regarding the craft in question, and associated
(alleged) SS drawing:

http://www.net.yu/~djordjen/Nazi2.gif

or this randomly chosen URL (in Finnish...):

http://sivut.koti.tpo.fi/klaus/wernhervonbraun.htm


This 'alleged' SS drawing is dated 7 November 1943; from
SS-Entwicklungsstelle IV.

I'm sorry I cannot validate this drawing; I just have to accept
it as it is presented on the Web - but it looks 'somewhat'
credible to me.

The (proposed/drafted) "Haunebu II" should, according to this
drawing and specifications - and assuming that it is _not_ a
fake (e.g. drawn/specified _after_ the time of - and thus
possibly based upon - Adamski's photos/sightings) - be specified
as an aircraft that is:

* Approx. 25 m in diameter, armed with 6, 8 cm, KSK, arranged in
a group of 2, located in 3 rotating, hemispheric 'towers',
underneath the 'wings' of the craft, and one 11 cm KSK on top of
the craft's dome. *(Normally) Manned with 9 persons; speed: 6
000 km/h (max. theoretical: 21 000 km/h), using pulsejet
propulsion.

Check also the drawings of the "Omega Diskus", another
proposed/projected disc-shaped craft (with rotating wings) from
Germany:

http://www.net.yu/~djordjen/omega1.jpg


http://www.net.yu/~djordjen/omega2.jpg

I guess, a possible example of how Adamski's photo object
_could_ be interpreted and used to create a
theoretical/imaginated aircraft (or a 'saucer') is shown here:

http://timelink.net/pleiades/buildufo.htm


Again, note specifically that three, small hemispheres are shown
underneath the 'wings'.

The similarities between the Adamski photo object and the
Haunebu II is 'fairly obvious', and the object is possibly a
scaled-down model, or a real, full-scale, test/research craft.
Note specifically the windows in groups of three, and the 3
domes ( underneath the craft), the 'wings', and the overall
design.

Either, he had taken the picture himself of a real aircraft
(being tested in the desert, close to the military base, where
it possibly might have been constructed), constructed,
manufactured and (test-?) flown in the USA.

Or, he got hold of the photo from other sources who had taken
photos of the real craft elsewhere, possibly in Germany or in
the USA (or England). (As mentioned above, it could also have
been scaled-down models.)

The craft might have been captured from the Germans after the
war, maybe in 1947-48, and shipped to the USA, or England. There
were several German scientists in the USA after the war, e.g.,
W. von Braun, R. Riedel, and possibly the Horten brothers; many
of them assigned to 'exotic' projects, including aircraft (e.g.,
saucers, flying wings: such as the 'Parabola', with crescent
planform), bombs and rockets.

In 1947 the US Army were searching Europe for the Horten bros.,
and Reimar Horten allegedly applied for a position at Northrop
in 1947:

http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/horten1.htm

i.e.,:

* "In the spring of 1947 Walter Horten heard about the flying
wing design in the United states by Northrop and decided to
write Northrop for employment. He was answered in the summer of
1947 by a letter in which Northrop pointed out that he, himself,
could not do anything to get him over to the States, but that he
would welcome it very much if he could come to the United States
and take up employment with the firm.  He recommended that
Walter should get in touch with USAFE Headquarters in Wiesbaden
in order to obtain necessary clearance."

*  "As far as the "flying saucer" is concerned, a number of
people were contacted in order to verify whether or not any such
design at any time was contemplated or existed in the files of
any German air research institute.  The people contacted
included the following: Walter Horten Fraulien von der Groeben,
former Secretary to Air Force General Udet Guenter Heinrich,
former office for research of the High Command of the Air Force
in Berlin Professor Betz, former chief of Aerodynamic Institute
in Goettingen Eugen, former test pilot

* "All the above mentioned people contacted independently and at
different times are very insistent on the fact that to their
knowledge and belief no such design ever existed nor was
projected by any of the German air research institutions.
While they agree that such a design would be highly practical
and desirable, they do not know anything about its possible
realization now or in the past."

Note, that these persons (allegedly) didn't - at that time -
know anything about the (allegedly) SS projected Haunebu II
aircraft(!)

It is possibly that many of them also were working for the
Soviet government.

Check the following URLs regarding saucer developments and the
Allies' requirement for German specialists just after
the war:

http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/twinng47.htm


http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/schulgen.htm


http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/cicnov47.htm


http://sivut.koti.tpo.fi/klaus/wernhervonbraun.htm


The point is that it's not _impossible_ that this aircraft
_might_ have been built in those days (e.g., 1952), because the
propulsion tech. - here pulsejet - was already being developed
before or during the war.

Thus, it can be proposed and concluded that:

It _may_ now turn out that the object/craft in Adamski's photo
and film can - possibly - be explained by:

* An aircraft similar to an alleged Nazi/SS project called
"Haunebu II", an armed aircraft; possibly modelled and built in
the USA and/or England, according to (alleged) German war-time
blueprints and specifications.


Any comments from the List on these proposals?


Best regards,

AWS






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:10:02 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:42:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash

>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:35:16 EST
>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message


>A response has just been received from the UTA Library re my
>orders for enlargements of the Ramey Message (in connection with
>the Roswell Event).

>They now promise to process my order for enlargements of the
>Ramey Message for research only use by RPIT. UTA cites copyright
>concerns for not providing duplicate negatives.

>Just a passing thought: Can there be any copyright protection
>after 51 years? And does copyright protection extend to the web?

>James Bond Johnson

Yes and Yes.

There are lawsuits being filed right now over copyright
enfridgement on the Web. It can get very expensive.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: Now that's what I call Music!!

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:36:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:43:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Now that's what I call Music!!


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:45:28 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Now that's what I call Music!!
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Hi Everyone,

>Well what can I say, I am totally overwhelmed by the response
>from the you guys and girls.

Hi, This has to be a first--A thread were everyone up to this
point has been positive--a common ground. This is really
wonderful. "Harmony", at last.

Best regards,

Marie






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                        Re: HOT GOSSIP UK - November

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:01:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:52:51 -0500
Subject: Re: HOT GOSSIP UK - November



HOT GOSSIP UK - NOVEMBER 1998
www.hotgossip.co.uk
THE "UNEXPLAINED" SECTION by Georgina Bruni
http://www.hotgossip.co.uk/unexgoss.html

NEWS FLASH - TALK BY AL BIELEK
THE HANSARD RECORDS FOR OCTOBER 1998

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


NEWS FLASH **** **** NEWS FLASH **** **** NEWS FLASH

A TALK WITH AL BIELEK EXPERIMENTS IN TIME STARTED IN 1943
ARE STILL CONTINUING

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Alfred Bielek was born 4 August 1916 as Edward A Cameron II. Al
and his brother Duncan Cameron, claim they were involved in an
experiment that took place in Philadelphia in 1943. This
experiement was allegedly commisioned by the US Navy to test
technology that was believed to make a ship Radar invisible.

The three main scientists believed to be involved in this
project were Dr Nicola Tesla, Dr Albert Einstein and Dr John von
Neumann. The Philadelphia Experiment is one of the world=92s most
intriguing mysteries. This talk, featuring one of the major
players, will cover the history of the project, a description of
the theory and hardware used, who was involved, the ET
connection, the changes in directorship and the consequences of
the second test. It will also feature The Montauk Project, an
experience in time travel, space and time manipulation and the
rewriting of history through ET involvement.

Whatever your beliefs - this talk promises to be very interesting.

Sunday 22 November 1998
Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London WC1
Nearest Tube - Holborn - Doors Open 10.30am -5pm
Details & Bookings: 0181 518 8633 [Evenings] 0956278 391
Send your cheques to: Chris Barnes, Beyond Belief,
1 Trinity Road, Wood Green, London N22 8LB.
_________________________________________________

This month I have dedicated my whole column to reproducing the
Hansard Records for October 1998 because I believe there are
some very important references to the UFO phenomena. I know Nick
Pope keeps promising to do this, but he=92s very busy writing his
new novel, so I=92m doing it instead - with his blessing of
course. As always, we must be grateful to Lord Hill-Norton for
pushing these questions in the House of Lords.

As far as I am aware, these are all the UFO related Questions
for October 1998. There are some very detailed replies,
especially the list of UFO reports, which is a breakthrough as
far as Answers go. It=92s interesting to note that =93Secret
Intelligence=94 are quoted in the records, and notice the many
references to Royal Air Force [RAF] installations. I am amazed
that the Ministry of Defence [MOD] continue to insist that these
sightings are of =93no defence significance=94 considering that
Fighter Commands and Bombing Commands were experiencing unusual
aerial phenomena as far back as 1943. These records are now
freely available at the Public Records Office for anyone
interested in viewing them.
_____________________________________________________

Written Answers - 14 October 1998 - Unidentified Flying Objects

Lord Hill-Norton asked her Majesty=92s Government: Whether they
will list the document references and titles of all open files
at the Public Record Office that contain information about
unidentified flying objects.
[HL3314]

The Lord Chancellor (Lord Irvine of Laig): I list below the
document references and titles of all open files at the Public
Record Office known to staff to contain information about
unidentified flying objects. There may be information in other
open files but this could be discovered only at disproportionate
cost.

AIR 2 Air Ministry Registered Files

AIR 2/16918 1961-1963, alleged sightings of UFO=92s. Letters from
members of the public on alleged sightings. Magazine entitled
Cosmic Voice - Mars and Venus Speak to Earth=94, dated
November-December 1961/Article entitled Men from Outer Space:
Are they visiting Britain?

AIR 2/17318 1963 UFO reports
AIR 2/17526 1964 UFO reports
AIR 2/17527 1964-1965 UFO reports
AIR 2/17982 1965-1966 UFO reports
AIR 2/17983 1966 UFO reports (with photographs)
AIR 2/17984 1966-1967 UFO reports (with photographs)

AIR 14 Bomber Command

AIR 14/2800 1943 December No.115 Squadron: News Sheet
=93Bang On=94 No.1, Aerial phenomena-reports of UFOs on RAF
bombing raids.

AIR 16 Fighter Command

AIR 16/1199 1952 September Flying Saucers:
occurrence reports by service personnel at Topcliffe station,
Thirsk, and local public.

AIR 20 Unregistered Papers

AIR 20/7390 1952 Reported sightings of UFOs: memorandum
prepared for the War Office.

AIR 20/9320 1957 Parliamentary Question from 17 April 1957 by Mr
Stan Awbery MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Air, what
recent investigations have been made into unidentified flying
objects; what photographs have been taken; and what reports have
been made on this subject. Reply by Secretary of State (Mr
Ward). Notes on UFOs provided for the Ministers use. Also: UFO
incident at West Freugh in Wigtownshire in 1957; incidents and
signals at RAF Church Lawford, RAF Bempton and RAF Lakenheath;
newspaper clippings 6 April 1957 from the News Chronicle and The
Evening Standard; photographs of object over the Channel Islands
from the Daily Sketch of 6 April 1957.

AIR 20/9321 1957 Parliamentary Question 15 May 1957 from Major
Patrick Wall MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Air, how many
unidentified flying objects have been detected over Great
Britain this year as compared with previous years; and whether
the object picked up on radar over the Dover Straits on 29 April
has yet been identified. Further questions to the Minister from
Mr Frank Beswick MP. Notes for Minister on reported sightings.
Replies by Mr Ward. Newspaper clippings April-May 1957: The
Times, News Chronicle, Daily Worker, Daily Mirror, Daily Sketch,
Daily Telegraph, Daily Express and the Evening News.

AIR 20/9322 1957 Parliamentary Question 15 May 1957 from Mr
Frank Beswick MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Air, what
was the nature of the aircraft or other aircraft sighted on the
radar defence screens on Monday night and which occasioned the
dispatch of Fighter Command. Reply by Mr Ward. Notes for
Ministers.

AIR 20/9994 Headquarters Southern Section Intelligence. Reports
on Aerial Phenomena, including =93observation of unusual aerial
phenomena at Royal Air Force Ventor on 29 July 1957=94. Two Copies
of  =93Track Tracing=94 Sheets.

Description of UFOs, for example, RAF Lyneham 9 December 1957:
=93December 1957: Description large bright crescent shaped object
or could be a sphere with trails from edges. Travelling on a
course of 290 degrees at a moderate speed. Seemed to be
descending and not at a very great height=94.

AIR 20/11887 1967 August (with maps)
AIR 20/11888 1967 September
AIR 20/11889 1967 October (with photographs)
AIR 20/11890 1967 October (with maps)
AIR 20/11891 1967 November (with maps)
AIR 20/11892 1967 November
AIR 20/11893 1967 December

AIR 22 Periodical Returns, Summaries and Bulletins

AIR 22/93 1955 Air Ministry Secret Intelligence Summary
March 1955. Volume 10, Article No 3 on Flying Saucers =93An
object was reported...=94

PREM 11/855 1952 Personal Minute from the Prime Minister, Mr
Winston Churchill to the Secretary of State for Air, Lord
Cheswell, dated 28 July 1952. =93What does all this stuff about
flying saucers amount to? What can it mean? What is the truth?
Let me have a report at your convenience.=94 Minute from Secretary
of State, dated 9 August 1952, dismissing stories about flying
saucers.

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty=92s Government: Whether they
will list the document references and titles of all closed files
at the Public Record Office that contain information about
unidentified flying objects. [HL3315]

The Lord Chancellor: I list below the document references and
titles of all closed files in the Public Record Office known to
its staff to contain information about unidentified flying
objects. There may be information in other closed files but this
could be discovered only at disproportionate cost.

AIR 2 Air Ministry: Registered Files
AIR 2/18183 1968-1969 Unidentified Flying Objects*
AIR 20 Unregistered Papers
AIR 20/11612 1967-1968 Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)*
AIR 20/11895 1968 April UFOS*
AIR 20/11896 1968 May UFOs*
AIR 20/11897 1968 June UFOs*
AIR 20/11898 1968 July UFOs*
AIR 20/11899 1968 August UFOs*
AIR 20/11900 1968 September UFOs*
AIR 20/11901 1968 October UFOs*
AIR 20/11902 1968 November UFOs*
AIR 20/12055 1969 January UFOs*
AIR 20/12056 1969 February UFOs*
AIR 20/12057 1969 March UFOs*
AIR 20/12058 1969 April UFOs*
AIR 20/12059 1969 May UFOs*
AIR 20/12060 1969 June UFOs*
AIR 20/12061 1969 July UFOs*
AIR 20/12062 1969 August UFOs*
AIR 20/12063 1969 September UFOs*
AIR 20/12064 1969 October UFOs*
AIR 20/12065 1969 November UFOs*
AIR 20/12066 1969 December UFOs*
AIR 20/12067 1970 January UFOs*
AIR 20/12297 1970 February UFOs*
AIR 20/12298 1970 March UFOs*
AIR 20/12299 1970 April UFOs*
AIR 20/12300 1970 May UFOs*
AIR 20/12301 1970 June UFOs*
AIR 20/12302 1970 July UFOs*
AIR 20/12303 1970 August UFOs*
AIR 20/12304 1970 September UFOs*
AIR 20/12305 1970 October UFOs*
AIR 20/12306 1970 November UFOs*

* =3D Thirty year closure rule applies.
___________________________________

Written Answers - 19 October 1998 - Airspace: Definition

Lord Hill-Norton asked her Majesty=92s Government: Whether they
recognise any definitions of the terms of =93airspace=94, =93outer
space=94, =93deep space=94 and =93interstellar space=94; whether they will=

detail such definitions; and whether these are the same
definitions as used by the United States Government. [HL3311}

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade
and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville):
HMG recognise and use the tern =93airspace=94. The principal of
airspace sovereignty is defined in the Chicago Convention on
International Civil Aviation (1944), which states that a country
has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above
its territory, including its territorial sea. This airspace
starts immediately above the surface of the earth.

There is no internationally agreed definition of where =93outer
space=94 starts. The most commonly used boundary between
airspace and outer space is functional. This means, for instance,
that the launching of satellites or other space objects is deemed
to be an =93outer space=94 activity and that the flight of aircraft is
considered to be an activity in airspace. The use of =93outer space=94
is governed by the United Nations Treaty on Principles Governing
the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space,
including the Moon and other Celestial Bodies (known as the Outer
Space Treaty, (1967) which covers all activity beyond sovereign
airspace. Both the UK and the US have ratified the Outer Space
Treaty and UK legislation regulating such activity (the Outer Space
Act 1986) is based on its principles.

=93Deep space=94 and =93interstellar space=94 are terms sometimes used
by space scientists and astronomers. =93Deep space=94 is a phrase
often used to describe space missions to other planets, beyond t
he combined gravitational field of the earth and moon.
=93Interstellar space=94 is not commonly used but could, for
example, denote the space between stars within a galaxy.
________________________________________________________________


Written Answers - 19 October 1998 - Unidentified Flying Objects

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty=92s Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Gilbert on 3 September
(WA 60), whether airports, observatories, RAF bases and police
stations are still required to forward details of any report they
receive of an unidentified flying object to the Ministry of Defence,
or whether such action is now only discretionary, following the
April 1997 review of procedures.

[HL3313]

The Minister of State, Minister of Defence (Lord Gilbert):
There is no requirement for anyone to submit =91UFO=92 sighting
reports to the MOD, other than for military air defence purposes.
However, any reports sent to the department will be given the
attention they deserve, commensurate with the quality of
information provided.
___________________________________________________

Written Answers - 20 October 1998 - RAF Feltwell Deep Space
Tracking Facility

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty=92s Government: Whether the
deep space tracking facility at RAF Feltwell has a role in
tracking or searching for satellites, space debris, ballistic
missiles and space probes.
[HL3312]

Lord Gilbert: RAF Feltwell is responsible for searching for
man-made objects in deep space and as such does have a role in
searching for tracking satellites, space debris and space
probes. However, it has no role in ballistic missile detection
and tracking.
_________________________________________________

Written Answers - 20 October 1998 - MoD Answering Machine

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty=92s Government:
Whether they will ensure that the answering machine which
the Ministry of Defence uses both to explain its policy on
unidentified flying objects and to provide a facility for the
public to report sightings is turned on at all times and not
switched off outside working hours.

[HL3407]

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Gilbert):
Yes.

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

Permission to distribute this text providing the authors and
publication are credited. Photographs may be copyright and
cannot be used without consent.  =A9 Hot Gossip UK 1998
www.hotgossip.co.uk The above text is taken from "The
Unexplained" section

Georgina Bruni: Editor-chief Hot Gossip UK Magazine. Published
by Camelot International Ltd. E-mail: 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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri 30 Oct, 1998 10:55
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:01:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:14:26 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
>Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:28:15 -0500
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>There was a another Top Secret UFO document very similar to the
>Estimate and written just a few months afterwards that suffered
>exactly the same fate described by Ruppelt. We know this because
>the declassification order, destruct order, and a copy of the
>document have survived, were "declassified" in 1985, and can be
>seen in Clifford Stone's book "UFOs Are Real." This was "Air
>Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79," or "Analysis of Flying
>Object Incidents in the U.S.", dated 10 Dec 1948, henceforth to
>be called the "Analysis." You can also see a copy of the
>Analysis on the Project 1947 Web site.

Could someone post the Project 1947 website URL please? 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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: Now that's what I call Music!!

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:26:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:03:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Now that's what I call Music!!


>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:45:28 -0800 (PST)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Now that's what I call Music!!
>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

It's been good to hear all the different kinds of musicians, we
have on the list and well maybe one day we could all release 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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:26:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:09:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:14:26 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
>Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:28:15 -0500
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:28:45 -0400
>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking.

<snip>

>>>There is a pivotal document in the history of the UFO that has
>>>yet to see the light of day over fifty years later. This is true
>>>despite the creation of the Freedom of Information Act and
>>>recent promises of de-classification. The Estimate of the
>>>Situation, created by Project Sign was first revealed to the
>>>public by Captain Ruppelt in The Report. The Estimate was
>>>considered by its creators at ATIC to contain "proof positive"
>>>of the reality of the UFO and that they were interplanetary!
>>>Ruppelt discusses the peculiar fate of this estimate, after
>>>noting that it was not accepted by the Chief of Staff of the Air
>>>Force, General Hoyt Vandenberg. Ruppelt states:>


>There was a another Top Secret UFO document very similar to the
>Estimate and written just a few months afterwards that suffered
>exactly the same fate described by Ruppelt. We know this because
>the declassification order, destruct order, and a copy of the
>document have survived, were "declassified" in 1985, and can be
>seen in Clifford Stone's book "UFOs Are Real." This was "Air
>Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79," or "Analysis of Flying
>Object Incidents in the U.S.", dated 10 Dec 1948, henceforth to
>be called the "Analysis." You can also see a copy of the
>Analysis on the Project 1947 Web site.

>The initial document relating to declassification and
>destruction was dated 11 Aug 1950, and interestingly, the
>original request seems to have come from the Commanding General
>of Alaskan Air Command, namely Gen. Nathan Twining.  (I leave it
>to the skeptics to explain why Twining would be involved with
t>his at all, since it is the claim of some that being CG of
>Alaskan Command would have totally taken him out of any UFO high
>secrecy loop.) The documents states, "Subject document, for
>which your Command requests downgrading action, contains info
>and speculation on the 'flying saucer' situation which have
>never been released or intimated publicly by the Air Force.">

>In Plainspeak, the Air Force didn't want the public to know
>about this. The Analysis came to the conclusion that UFOs were
>real machines, but unlike the Estimate that just preceded it and
>was rejected at the top, stopped short of calling them ET.

>This was followed on 25 Sept 1950 by an official request for
>destruction. "It is requested that action be taken to destroy
>all copies of Top Secret Air Intelligence Report Number
>100-203-79 ....">

>Then this was followed on 6 Dec 1951 by the following memo: "
>All extra copes of this document were ordered to be destroyed.
>Copy being kept for record purposes only. Not to be disseminated
>without permission of AFOIN-A.">

>So first the document was "downgraded," then all copies were
>ordered destroyed. Yet a year later, it was noted that one copy
>was being kept for historical records, but even this downgraded
>copy could not be disseminated. (The Air Force still didn't want
>the public to know even after it had been downgraded.) And
>oddly, even after being supposedly "downgraded" in 1950, this
>document was still stamped "Top Secret" when it was finally
>fully declassified and made public in 1985 under FOIA. In short,
>it sounds exactly like Ruppelt's description of the fate of the
>Estimate, except nobody knows if the Estimate still exists.>

<snip>

>>I feel once a document had been down graded to none
>>status(declassified) then any one,regardless of any
>>Official/National Secrets Act would have been free to
>>discuss/publish any information that it contained.

>Ruppelt did discuss the contents publicly in his 1956 book.
>Others, such as Dewey Fournet, have also publicly stated that
>they read the document while they were affiliated with Blue
>Book, and further that it came to an ET conclusion..

>>I find it very hard to believe that anyone would admit to
>>having a copy of this particular document and not be prepared
>>to show it.

>Ruppelt and others didn't admit to having a copy in their
>personal possession. They said they read a surviving copy. This
>>"Analysis" which was kept in an intelligence archive, but which
>could "not be disseminated without permission."

>>After all unauthorized possession of a classified document is
>>an 'Offence against the State' to admit to owning one is an
>>admission of guilt. In this particular case of course the
>>document is allegedly 'Unclassified' so one would be free from
>>any form prosecution,so why not come clean?What is there to
>> lose?Publish and be damned as some one famous once said.

>I think you misunderstand. Insiders like Ruppelt and Dewey
>Fournet did publicly state that the conclusion of Project Sign's
>Estimate was that the saucers were extraterrestrial. Ruppelt
>went into some detail. But nobody every claimed to "owning" a
>copy.

>>I cannot help but feel that either this document never existed
>>or,my personal choice,it was totally destroyed.

>>I hope I am wrong on both counts.

>If the fate of the Top Secret "Analysis" is any guide, there may
>yet be a surviving copy of the "Estimate." Correct me if I am
>wrong, but isn't it common for one copy to be retained for the
>historical record, as was the case for the "Analysis?">

About 14 years ago I held in my hot sweaty little grubby
fingers a legal sized (8.5 by 14 inch) document,  typed,
double-spaced, original , with a TOP SECRET stamp across the to
and bottom which was enclosed in a black, stiff cover. According
to Ruppelt the Estimate....

   ".... was a rather thick document with a black cover and it
was printed on legal sized paper. Stamped across the front were
the words TOP SECRET."

There have been few people who have held this document in their
hands.  It is only available in the National Archives.....and
this was back in the days when they actually let a researcher
have access to the originals!

Was I holding the .................(gulp) ESTIMATE?

Lest your eyes pop out and you heart skip 17 beats, let me rush
to advise, sadly, NO!

At best it was the "Ghost of the Estimate"...... the watered
down version described by Rudiak and others on this list. This
was the original Study #203 with TOP SECRET CONTROL #  2 6167.
The discribution list showed copies 1 and 3  for Air
Intelligence Requirements Division, copy 4 fr the Air Estimates
Branch of AF intel at the Pentagon(?), and copy 5 for Air Intel
Division. copy 2 for ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence).

The date on the document is 10 DEC 1948.

There also is a green, soft paper cover copy which was the
published version. According to that, 103 copies were published.
Copy 102 was in the archives collection. Inside the black folder
version is a memo slip of paper which says "All extra copies of
this document were ordered to be destroyed. Copy being kept for
record purposes only.  Not to be disseminated without permission
of AFOIN-A.  See 2-7341.  Mandolfi, 6DEC51.

Along with copy 102 was an accession list....names of people who
had accessed the document.  "Register of Personnel Handling Top
Secret Material" dated, 5 DEC 1950 (oddly enough only 3 days
before the Counter Intelligence Corps went on "immediately high
alert" for all information related to flying saucers, according
to a document found in the FBI file.  It is a historical fact
that the US military went on high alert for an hour or so
December 6, 1950  as a result of a "radar scare" that has still
not been explained. See my manuscript, THE FBI/UFO CONNECTION.)
There are 10 names listed.  8 handled it for recording purposes
only.  Two actually read it! One was a man named Ralph R.
Gnaucher or Grarcher or something like that (tough to read). who
accessed the document on 5 DEC 50. Never heard of him. The other
is a familiar name....... (no, not Ruppelt)

Dewey Fournet accessed the document on 6JUNE 1952, just the 1952
flap was getting into full swing!!!  There is no indication that
anyone handled the document after 24 JUN 1952 (;last time it was
catalogued or recorded).

With the two copies of Study 203 there is also a letter from
Fournet responding to a Colonel W.A. Adams. Apparently Adams
AFOIN-2B had recommended declassifying Intelligence Study
#100-203-79. Fournet wrote on 6June1952 that he had searched
Director of Intelligence files for a study by that name and had
found a draft and copy  a report entitled "D/I -ONI Study No.
203."  He assumed this was the study in question.  Fournet
wrote" It is not considered advisable to declassify Study 203
inasmuch as it contains much speculation on the possible origin
of unidentified flying objects, information on Soviet AOB and
atomic energy installations and some information on U.S research
and development activitiy. In addition it contains a treatise on
Soviet intentions in utilizing controlled aerial missiles over
the US."

Apparently the AF took Fournet's suggestion not to declassify.
This document was not declassified until 5 MAR 1985.

This "Ghost Of The Estimate" confirms one thing about Ruppelt's
description of The Estimate:  his claim of the format of
presentation was "right on"  (black stiff folder, legal size
paper). Unfortunately it does not confirm th key contents.

I noticed an interesting thing about this document, however
(aside from having excellent prints, likely  made from the
original negatives of the Phoenix "Rhodes" photos as part of the
evidence contained therein). The map of sightings vs location
started ended was dated "sightings as of Aug. 1, 1948."  Yet the
report itself includes reports as late as 18 Nov. 1948.
According to the statistics in Project Blue Book Special REport
#14, there were about 70 reports between 1 AUG and 18 Nov.  So
why not include them? SPECULATION: the map was prepared for an
earlier report which was never published... perhaps for use in
The Estimate?..... and was then incorporated into the GHOST with
ou any modifcations.

Anyway, this Air Intel Study says in so many ways.... flying
saucers are real.... and then suggests, rather weakly I would
say, that perhaps they are Soviet developmental A/C flyijng over
the US. (Note: from the AF intelligence files we know that the
Air FOrce REJECTED the idea that the Soviets would fly
experimental A/C over the USA, just as we would not sdo such a
stupid thing over the Soviet Union. Hence you may imagine the
writers of the Study 203 finding thei own explanation difficult





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                             Re: Phoenix Lights

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:26:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:12:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Phoenix Lights


>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:24:25 -0500


>>Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:57:33 -0400
>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Lights
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


<snip>

>>From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com>

>In further supporting my point... Rather than waxing
>polemically over the readily explained later sightings,
>distracting Bruce in relentless replies pointing to well
>annotated web pages, would we not find more promise in
>discussing the earlier sighting, where people for over a hundred
>miles and many people throughout Phoenix looked up, at often
>very high elevation angles, to witness a collection of lights
>perhaps enclosing a misty object?

>Does any one of us have any unreported information about the
>early sighting that could be passed on to Bruce that would add
t>o his investigation? Each new report with approximate time,
>azimuth, elevation, apparent angular size and duration would add
>to the data that Bruce has to work with. His conclusions might
>be esoteric or they might be mundane. Yet any possible
>conclusion would bring light to an obscure and widespread
>event...>


Other people are working on the 8=9 PM Phoenix lights sightings.
I am not. I'm doing other things (video from New York, analysis
of radar cases from Europe and even going "way" back 20 years to
New Zealand radar sighting). I am working on a single Phoenix
case not directly related to the "lights" (precedes them).
However, I'm sure the investigators of note would he happy to
receive any inforation.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:37:34 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:16:32 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:05:30 +0100
>Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The World'

>>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
>>alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
>>that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
>>which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
>>'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

>>Best regards and happy halloween!

>>Stig Agermose

>>Forwarded from the SETI

><snip>

>Stig and List,

>Please note that the Orson Welles radio show was broadcast
>in the USA on 30 October 1938 - 60 years ago; check here:

>http://www.bway.net/~nipper/page4.html

>By the way, has halloween _really_ anything to do with
>space and ETs?

>This is the explanation of halloween from Encylopedia.COM:

>* All Saints' Day Nov. 1, feast of the Roman Catholic and
>Anglican churches, the day God is glorified for all his saints,
>known and unknown. Roman Catholics are obliged to hear Mass on
>this day. In medieval England it was called All Hallows; hence
>the name Halloween (Hallows' eve)
>for the preceding day (Oct. 31).

>I _do hope_ all this info. will contribute to the possibility
>of EQ Pegasi/1450 MHz _not_ being a hoax!

>Regards,

>AW


The hope of many Asgeir.  But you know, whether true or not,
there is so much noise by the bashers and debunkers that it is
almost _always_ impossible to get to the truth.

Which is why I get get a little crazy sometimes over the
debunkers. The harm done by them extends so far beyond that
which they debunk that it is all too often impossible to know
the truth.  They are the destroyers of our work.

And BTW, were it not for the caliber of these dingalings'
writings, were it not for the manner in which they comport
themselves, one could seriously suspect they wewre part of a
conspiracy.

Nah!

They are just too transparent for that.... I think...





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                   North Carolina UFO Hot Spot On TV News

From: Stefan Duncan <swduncan@foto.infi.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:40:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:18:58 -0500
Subject: North Carolina UFO Hot Spot On TV News


Last night, WNCN 17 of NBC from Raleigh, N.C. with reporter Jim
Grimes, ran a special story about UFO sightings in N.C. They
interviewed me and several others. The report is serious.

A part II will be shown tonight at 11 p.m. They will talk to
several UFO sighters, a alleged abductee, and an interview with
me and AUFON/XPI.



Stefan Duncan
Director of XPI
Editor of AUFON
5396 Sumac Circle
Fayetteville, N.C. 28304
swduncan@foto.infi.net
http://www.aufon.com
ICQ 11878618
(910-425-2976)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:26:44 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:04:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:14:26 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>From: Keith Stevens <keith.stevens@virgin.net>
>>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:42:29 +0000
>>Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:28:15 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

Keith Stevens said:

>>As some one who has had 'hands on experience'of Classified
>>Document Security and their destruction,I find it hard to
>>believe that a document of this magnitude would have been down
>>graded prior to destruction.With this in mind I do not believe
>>that once the decision had been taken to destroy the document
>>that-any-copies would have escaped destruction.Classified
>>documents are counted and rigorously controlled.Contrary to what
>>one might believe it realistically is virtually impossible to
>>steal one!(Which is why most spies photograph/copy them)

>>From my experience once the decision had been taken to destroy a
>>particular document it was destroyed. Its destruction was always
>>by fire and witnessed by two Officers who signed acknowledging
>>the deed accordingly.

The above is also supported by the actual procedural regulations
which have the power of law.

Dave Rudiak said:

>There was a another Top Secret UFO document very similar to the
>Estimate and written just a few months afterwards that suffered
>exactly the same fate described by Ruppelt.

The above is simply not true. See the full explanation below.

>We know this because
>the declassification order, destruct order, and a copy of the
>document have survived, were "declassified" in 1985, and can be
>seen in Clifford Stone's book "UFOs Are Real." This was "Air
>Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79," or "Analysis of Flying
>Object Incidents in the U.S.", dated 10 Dec 1948, henceforth to
>be called the "Analysis."

Much more has survived than the incomplete reproductions in
Clifford Stone's book.

The complete and accurate documents were first surfaced by the
efforts of Robert Todd. What Clifford Stone has in his book was
not gotten from the archives, but probably gotten from someone
that Robert Todd provided copies to in the first place. Both the
11 Aug 1950 and 25 Sept 1950 documents as reproduced in Stone's
book are cross-references the Air Force typed up for insertion
into files cross-referenced between one another. It was
apparently the Air Force's practice of quoting a small portion
of the text of the document they were cross-referencing, which
would have allowed Air Force personnel to find the actual
documents in the main files where each document was filed.
Neither document in Stone's book is the full document.

What Dave Rudiak, apparently not knowing better, misrepresents
as a declassification order, is not a declassification order at
all. It is a destruction order. The full text of the 11 Aug 1950
letter follows:

        1. Subject document, for which your Command requests
downgrading action, contains information and speculation on the
'flying saucer' situation which have never been released or
intimatied publicly by the Air Force.  The assumptions, upon
which this study was made, are no longer considered realistic
but this fact does not alter the classification of certain
material and sources in Report No. 100-203-79. This material
rightfully had no connection with the 'flying saucer' situation
but was forced into consideration at a time when the true nature
of 'flying saucers' was not apparent.

        2. Action is being taken to direct destruction of all
copies distributed to commands other than Headquarters, United
States Air Force. Action may be taken forthwith by your
Headquarters to destsroy copy, or copies, in your command.

        BY THE COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:

                                John M. Schweizer, Jr.
                                Colonel, USAF
                                Executive
                                Directorate of Intelligence

>The initial document relating to declassification and
>destruction was dated 11 Aug 1950, and interestingly, the
>original request seems to have come from the Commanding General
>of Alaskan Air Command, namely Gen. Nathan Twining.  (I leave it
>to the skeptics to explain why Twining would be involved with
>this at all, since it is the claim of some that being CG of
>Alaskan Command would have totally taken him out of any UFO high
>secrecy loop.) The documents states, "Subject document, for
>which your Command requests downgrading action, contains info
>and speculation on the 'flying saucer' situation which have
>never been released or intimated publicly by the Air Force."

The above by Rudiak is totally misleading. The original
downgrading request  was dated 26 Apr 1950 and the contents are
typed below:

        To: Director of Intelligence
            Headquarters United States Air Force
            Washington 25, D.C.

                1. In view of certain public releases made by
Headquarters United States Air Force concerning so-called
'Flying Saucers' it is requested that permission be granted this
headquarters to downgrade subject publication.

                2. Current classification of this document is
TOP SECRET, which is believed to be unrealistic considering the
wide dissemination given this subject.

                FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:

                                /S/
                                Farley A. Latta
                                Capt. USAF
                                Asst Adj Gen

It is apparent that during a regular review of top secret
documents, a procedure required by regulation to be conducted
every ten months or so, it was determined to be appropriate to
declassify this particular document by the reviewing officer and
the request was routinely sent up the chain of command for which
the 11 AUG 1950 letter was the response, don't declassify it -
destroy your copy/copies.

>In Plainspeak, the Air Force didn't want the public to know
>about this. The Analysis came to the conclusion that UFOs were
>real machines, but unlike the Estimate that just preceded it
and >was rejected at the top, stopped short of calling them ET.

The above is ufological wisdom and has nothing to do with the
actual reasons. We know what the actual reasons are because
Robert Todd followed up on the original release years ago and
uncovered many ancillary documents related to the 100-203-79
report that links/traces its destruction from beginning to end.
One of the many available and released coordinating documents
has this to say:

        1. It is the belief of AFOIV-TG that AFOIC-CG has
erroneously associated the action recommended by this Branch
with recent decision of General Cabell.

2. It was not intended that the destruction of Study 100-203-79
should indicate reduced interest in the intelligence aspects of
'flying object' reports.  Such reports will continue to be
treated as items of normal intelligence interest as outlined in
Memo for Division Chiefs, dated 1 July 1950, subject
'Unidentified Obejects' from Assistant for Production.

3. The conclusions reached in 100-203-79 have been superseded by
the findings of Project Grudge (Restricted). Therefore, as the
office of origin, AFOIV-TG assumes the responsibility for
initiating action to eliminate from files a classified document
which is no longer pertinent.

4. It is recommended that the 1st Indorsement to Hq. Alaskan Air
Command letter be approved as written and action be taken to
authorize destruction of all outstanding copies of 100-203-79.

                        /signature/
                        L.S. Harris
                        Colonel, USAF - Ext. 52466


>This was followed on 25 Sept 1950 by an official request for
>destruction. "It is requested that action be taken to destroy
>all copies of Top Secret Air Intelligence Report Number
>100-203-79 ...."

Actually, the official request for destruction also included the
following:

        "Subjet report was assigned Headquarters USAF Top Secret
Control Number 2-7341" as called by regulation and the following
paragraph:

        2. Records of this headquarters indicate that your
office was distributed copy number _______ of referenced report
on approximately 1 February 1949.

                        /signature/
                        J.E. Mallory
                        Colonel, U.S.A.F.
                        Chief, Documents & Dissemination Br.
                        Collections Division
                        Directorate of Intelligence

The distribution list consisted of 22 AF major commands and
separate agencies outside of the Air Force. It seems that
everybody had at least one copy of report 100-203-79 at one
time.

>So first the document was "downgraded," then all copies were
>ordered destroyed. Yet a year later, it was noted that one copy
>was being kept for historical records, but even this downgraded
>copy could not be disseminated. (The Air Force still didn't
want >the public to know even after it had been downgraded.) And
>oddly, even after being supposedly "downgraded" in 1950, this
>document was still stamped "Top Secret" when it was finally
>fully declassified and made public in 1985 under FOIA. In
short, >it sounds exactly like Ruppelt's description of the fate
of the >Estimate, except nobody knows if the Estimate still
exists.

Ufological wisdom at its best since the above Rudiak imagining
is not based on a full deck of cards.  Full documentation that
shows the report was never declassified and outlines the exact
co-ordinated reasons for its destruction orders are fully
documented in the complete releases that Robert Todd was able to
uncover over a period of years, copies of which are in the hands
of many researchers that I am aware of - but obviously not in
the possession of David Rudiak.

There is no legitimate comparision between what we know happened
to report 100-203-79 and Ruppelt's rendition of what allegedly
happened to the 'Estimate'.

As Keith Steven's pointed out and based on his personel
experience, and I will add my own, Ruppelt's rendition simply
flaunts in the face of security regulations and procedures
making it difficult to accept his anecdotal account of the
alleged 'Estimate' without supporting documentation.

>>I cannot help but feel that either this document never existed
>>or,my personal choice,it was totally destroyed.
>>I hope I am wrong on both counts.

I tend to agree with the above accessment.

>If the fate of the Top Secret "Analysis" is any guide,

It isn't. I suggest, instead of relying on what Clifford Stone
dissiminates, you search the decimal correspondence files of the
Air Force Director Of Intelligence yourself for accurate and
reliable historical documentation.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                  Re: Propasals for M.E /Abduction Scenario

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:22:15 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:08:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Propasals for M.E /Abduction Scenario


You may have read my earlier post regarding the above subject
matter? I have now put some thoughts and ideas together,
regarding the full investigation I am soon to start

It has come to light through my own research into the subject of
UFO's and alien abduction, it would appear at first glance that
there may well be a link with "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"
(Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) and the Alien Abduction scenario.

I have been during the course of my work, over the last two
years been I will not use the word working, perhaps being a
friendly ear to an abducte a 32yr old female from the UK. who as
well as having a long history of medical problems has been
diagnosed with M.E.

Even more interesting is that she is a member of an abducte
group who meet once a month, in London, this group has 20
members who attend regular, these people are a fare cross
section of the populous, who travel from all over the country to
the meetings.

Although I am good friends with the woman mentioned above I also
know other members of this group. and the other day I was
interested to learn that out of the 20 members of the group.14
members of the group have all been medicaly diagnosed with
"Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"

After doing some cursory investigation work, I have it confirmed
from B.R.A.M.E. group who are the World wide network for this
illness. with groups in 18 countries.

I have discovered that,

The ME/CFS Charities Alliance: CONSIDERS that the report's
estimate of 500,000 - 1 million sufferers in the UK (1-2% of the
population, ) is a vast overestimate of the true situation. The
data used include studies of patients with chronic fatigue
rather than chronic fatigue syndrome. Out of the total figure
about 25% of sufferers are house bound.

The 14 people who are involved in this group, diagnosed with
M.E. actually represents 70% of the group, as this 70% figure is
extremely high, this must warrant further study, to try to
examine all possible causes of this anomalous figure,

If any good is to come from the gathering of this potential data
linking the alien abduction scenario and "Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis" then of course it will be required that my
investigation is meticulous in the way in which I gather the
data,for the analysis of the data, I  will endeavour to employ
the help of proffessional people from various back grounds of
the hallowed halls of acadeam, which are applicable to the
illness and all possible variables. I have made a short list,
and will be approaching these people direct shortly.

Some idea's I have regarding how we could put this study in
operation would be to first through the utilising of a person or
persons in the US who have hands on knowledge of alien
abduction, would be to contact a number of abducte support
groups, the number of which to be determined, to ask some
questions.

1. To ask how many members each group has on it register?

2. To ask if any of the members of the group have been diagnosed
with "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"

3. To ask each support group leader, if the members of the group
would be willing to supply confrimation that they have been
diagnosed with M.E

4. To ask if these people would be willing to in no more than
500 words 1 side of a piece of A4 paper, describe briefly when
the realised they were being abducted, how this was brought to
there attention.

5.To also give a brief case history of when in relation to the
discovery that they were being abducted did they get diagnosed
with M.E.

6. To issue all abducte's taking part in the study, with a
reference number so as to protect the privacy of the individual.

Obviously the above questions are not final yet, and are open to
suggestion's and alterations untill I am happy that, the people
involved in for what ever reason's, in the dis-crediting and
disection of other types of research connected to the subject of
ufology, that these face less spOOks, must find no door
available for them to enter and start the trashing of this
project., as I will only have one chance at this, I believe thay
the information would then be tainted,

To also carry out a similar procedure in all English speaking
countries, from  the 18 countries that are involved with
B.R.A.M.E.. To see if there is a World wide pattern to the
increased, pecentage of the illness among abducte's?.

Part two would be to put together a sort of questionaire, for
the members of all English speaking members of: B.R.A.M.E.:::The
Blue Ribbon for the Awareness of M.E...

The questionaire would be, laid out in question firmat similar
to a polygraph with control question for example.

Q1. How long have you had M.E?

Q2. What is, in your case the worst aspect or sympton of this
illness?

Q3. When you were younger did you believe in Santa Claus?

Q4. Do you feel that there is other intelligent life in the
universe?

Followed by more questions, obviously the questions set would
need to be very carefully chosen and positioned so as to not
prompt the cries of leading the participants, At the end of the
questionaire there should be a small statement that if they wish
to discuss any of the questions that they have answered then
supply some form of medium for them to come forward if they felt
that they had something to say about about the survey they have
taken, the collection of this data.

There may or may not be a number of people who have been and
still are being taken against there will by these mostly
nightime visitors and as in all walks of life there are lots of
people who have not spoke about this scenario, either because
thay did not know who to speak to or they feared ridicule if
they spoke out, although I am sure you are now aware of my
stance on the situation, if this hypoth is a correct, then it is
imperitive that I do the research and back up what really is at
the moment a thought based on some cursory information if the
data represents the connection, then this could well be a back
door, to pandora's box. and of coarse the oposite is also true
that the data may reveal something completely different..

I am open to suggestions if you feel that there are some
questions, that could be used in the questionaire which would be
of benifit to the investigation, and all help and assistance is
greatly appreciated in this matter.

Although the data with regard to the anomalous substancial
increase in the percentage of the population of Earth who have:
"Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) is 1 to
2%.

Against this 70% figure which has surfaced with regard to the 20
abducte's in the group that I have looked at.

I feel that a figure of 500 or a 1000 abducte;s gloabaly would
have to submit data to gauge an acurate study as to whether
there is without doubt a connection between "Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) and alien
abduction.

I am asking for the for the assistance of abducte support groups
around the planet if you are reading this post to contact myself
direct.

What this possible connection is could be a number of things,
for example.

In the interests of not jumping to conclusions. It could be
that:

1. The abductiuon scenario is a direct sympton and brain
disorder and part of the many parts of "Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) and that all
people who are claiming abduction have this illness, but the
symptons in some abducte's are minute compared to others and
that they do not know that they have the illness.

However if that were the case it would open up the question?

Why do sufferers of "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome) all claim  to have been abducted by Aliens?

That Alien abduction is yet another sympton to this illness, a
sympton which can manifest its self in the human brain as a
memory, the same memory, This in its self if true, would for me
anyway, be quite an astounding discovery

Or perhaps that "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome) Is a direct result of the alleged alien implants, whch
it has been claimed by a large number of abducte's to have been
placed in side of there heads, and in some way be causing the
ilness becuase of the implants interupton by proximity to
certain areas of the brain, causing the brain to send out
incorrect signals to the body and the causem effect of this is
the human body recieving the incorrect information to function
normally, causing the multi faceted symptons of "Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome).

There is even a hypothersis that these aliens are in some way
feeding off the human life force draining energy from the
alleged victim of these abduction's, and the symptons after
these alleged incidents, do bear a striking resembelence to the
symptons of "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome).

Or that the abductions scenario is all in the minds of the
abducte's and that "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome) in the cases where abduction is also being claimed, is
a direct result of the depression being caused by believing that
they are being abducted by aliens.

Or perhaps it is something all together different from the from
above? We will have to wait and see what information if any the
investigation reveals.

With the data collated afer the cursory investgation with the
twenty abducte's who are members of the same group. Which has
shown  that in this group at the percentage  of people  people
diagnosed with. "Myalgic Encephalomyelitis"  (Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome) Is 68% above the national average.It has to warrant
further investigation, I will be contacting relervant party's
who can offer correct medical and psycological comment on the
data when I have collated it.

I am sure that we all have our own opininons on this topic
however There will be plenty of time for what I think? You
think? When and if the data supports such further comments and
investigation.

I believe that if the cursory evidence gathred from this global
investigation returns the same high anomalous figure of or
around 70 %, this may well lead to the opening or at least
unlocking of pandora's box.

Comments and all help in this investigation greatly appreciated.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:59:41 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:10:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking


>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:54:40 -0400

>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:59:09 -0800
>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Failure Of The 'Science' Of Obergian Debunking

>>I would of thought you would have removed MJ-12 hoax from your
>>lecture material after the online debate we had on this mailing
>>list towards the end of 1996.

>I have certainly not accepted the strange notion that the main
>MJ-12 documents are a hoax for reasons I have noted in several
>papers and in 'TOP SECRET/MAJIC', despite Ed's strange claim,
>among others, that they must be because they had no TS Control
>numbers. A position he maintained even after I pointed out that
>my 108 page 'Final Report on Operation Majestic 12' included
>five previously TS documents without control numbers and that
>the Archivist at the Eisenhower Library pointed out that control
>numbers were not used all the time.

My claims were independently supportable and verifiable over the
entire spectrum of the MJ-12 saga. As I was able to show, most
of the MJ-12 hoax has now been a matter of record for almost a
decade and uncovered by the research of members in the UFO
community. We can relive the entire argument if so desire. It is
mostly still archived on this mailing list, at least the
portions of the threads after Dec 11, 1996 "MJ-12 and Area 51".
It involved quite a few people including Kevin Randle, Peter
Brookesmith, Dennis Stacy, Jan Aldrich, yourself and me, plus
many others. It started before the list began archiving messages
and went to the point where you had enough and left. We covered
every major claim of yours that you postulated in TOP
SECRET/MAJIC and showed your arguments to be either flawed or
downright false. We also showed the pitifull flaws in the SOM
Manual. You in turn did not and could not provide any evidence
that supported your contentions.

If I recall, you called both Kevin Randle and myself paid agents
to disinform on the MJ-12 'evidence' you allegedly had and later
even went to far as to suggest that I must be a MJ-12 operative
of the new order to hound you. Great stuff! If I am a member of
the 'new MJ-12', why don't you at least want to interview me?

>'Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up' is a good
>motto for Ed.

Stanton Friedman, you do realize that the thread is still mostly
archived and available for download for new readers that weren't
here in Dec 1996? And that the majority of readers that are
still here are fully aware of your consistant inability to
support a single vestige of your MJ-12 claims? Except to pull
something similar to the above and attack the messanger instead
of presenting supportable documentation that can be
independently verified?

>In case anybody is wondering, I am not going to replace Jerry
>as Ed's primary combatant.

Why not? On your Australian tour you said you wouldn't take time
to debate skeptics until you went off tour. Now that you are off
tour, you're saying you don't want to debate on an open forum?
That is what you said last time after you were placed against
the wall on MJ-12. You had a tour to take care of and would be
gone for awhile!

Will the real Stanton Friedman please stand up? Your fans are
demanding that you prove me wrong. They are counting on you!

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
   Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                          Re: Sighting In Virginia?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:09:04 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:15:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting In Virginia?


On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, michael Hodges wrote:

>Hi Nick,
>Yes I would appreciate it if you would check it out for me, I
>have considered a satellite. It was 6am, Oct, 29, I live south
>of Roanoke Va. about 20 mile and it
>appeared to be north of me and If I had to guess I would say it
>passed over between
>myself and Roanoke, but I am sure that can be deceiving. It was
>moving from west
>to east. The speed at which it was moving is what has me
>baffled, but you may be correct, at least it would be nice to
>know. Thanks Nick

<snip>

Hi Michael,

At 6:00:39 a.m. on October 29 the MIR space station reached
about two-thirds up above the NW horizon and had a brightness of
-0.7 magnitude (about as bright as the brightest star in the
entire sky).  It was moving very slowly from the SW to the NE.
Since this agrees very closely with your UFO report, I think we
can safely say your sighting was of a spacecraft, but one of
Earthly origins.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                            Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:19:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:19:24 -0500
Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz


>From: Asgeir Waehre Skavhaug <KONAWS@statoil.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:05:30 +0100
>Subject: Re: EQ Pegasi/1450mhz

>>From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:54:42 +0200
>>Subject: SETI Hoaxster Celebrating 50th Anniversary Of 'War Of The
>World'

>>The forwarded email should solve the mystery surrounding the
>>alleged signals from EQ Pegasi. It surely can be no coincidence
>>that the guy pulled off the hoax a few days before October 31,
>>which is Halloween and the 50th anniversary of Orson Welles'
>>'War Of The Worlds' broadcast.

>>Best regards and happy halloween!

>>Stig Agermose

>>Forwarded from the SETI

><snip>

>Stig and List,

>Please note that the Orson Welles radio show was broadcast
>in the USA on 30 October 1938 - 60 years ago; check here:

>http://www.bway.net/~nipper/page4.html


>By the way, has halloween _really_ anything to do with
>space and ETs?

>This is the explanation of halloween from Encylopedia.COM:

>* All Saints' Day Nov. 1, feast of the Roman Catholic and
>Anglican churches, the day God is glorified for all his saints,
>known and unknown. Roman Catholics are obliged to hear Mass on
>this day. In medieval England it was called All Hallows; hence
>the name Halloween (Hallows' eve)
>for the preceding day (Oct. 31).

>I _do hope_ all this info. will contribute to the possibility
>of EQ Pegasi/1450 MHz _not_ being a hoax!


>Regards,

>AWS

I knew the correct date when I wrote the letter, but made the
mistake due to fatigue and too much pressure of work - I was
drowning in e-mails - and I already have sent a correction to
the list.

The Orson Welles-Halloween connection has nothing to do with
space, but the masks and hoaxes associated with the celebration,
so Welles' choice of date is no coincidence, and in my opinion
neither the recent hoaxster's.

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 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                              Universal Quotes

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@freeside.fc.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:32:30 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:27:15 -0500
Subject: Universal Quotes


A few relevant quotes, which those of us in ufology might
do well to ponder ...


QUOTES ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE

Douglas Adams: "There is a theory which states that if ever
anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is
here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something
even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory
which states that this has already happened."

Edward P. Tryon: "In answer to the question of why it happened,
I offer the modest proposal that our Universe is simply one of
those things which happen from time to time."

Albert Einstein: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and
human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

John Andrew Holmes: "It is well to remember that the entire
universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others."

Max Frisch: "Technology is a way of organizing the universe so
that man doesn't have to experience it."

Kilgore Trout: "The universe is a big place, perhaps the
biggest."

Woody Allen: "I'm astounded by people who want to 'know' the
universe when it's hard enough to find your way around
Chinatown."

Douglas Adams: "In the beginning the Universe was created. This
has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as
a bad move."

William J. Broad: "The crux... is that the vast majority of the
mass of the universe seems to be missing."

Fred Hoyle: "There is a coherent plan in the universe, though I
don't know what it's a plan for."

Ray Bradbury: "We are an impossibility in an impossible
universe."

Christopher Morley: "My theology, briefly, is that the universe
was dictated but not signed."

Edward Chilton: "I'm worried that the universe will soon need
replacing. It's not holding a charge."

Calvin and Hobbes (Bill Watterson): "The surest sign that
intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has
never tried to contact us."

Carl Zwanzig: "Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side,
a dark side, and it holds the universe together...."

Unknown: "Astronomers say the universe is finite, which is a
comforting thought for those people who can't remember where
they leave things."


"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
research, would it?" -- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)


- --








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                  Roswell UFO Museum Fires Dennis Balthaser

From: John Hayes <jhayes@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:50:59 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:38:56 -0500
Subject: Roswell UFO Museum Fires Dennis Balthaser


Dear Errol,

This message is forwarded with the permission of Dennis Balthaser.
Please note Dennis stated that he has nothing against the museum.


Subj:   FIRED FROM THE MUSEUM
Date:   98-10-29 10:17:31 EST
From:   truthskr@roswell.net (Dennis Balthaser)
Reply-to:       truthskr@roswell.net

This correspondence will serve as a blanket notification that on
October 28, 1998, Glenn Dennis (President of the International
UFO Museum and Research Center) in Roswell, NM, told me to sever
all relationships with the Museum and I was not to be affiliated
with the Museum anymore.

As most of you know I have in the past been on the Board of
Directors, was the Operations Manager and most recently the UFO
Investigator. All three of those positions were very rewarding,
always putting the interest of the Museum, the witnesses and
visitors in the forefront. That meant doing and saying things
that at times were not agreeable to everyone.

I have no regrets for anything I did at the Museum during the
past two years, as I think the results speak for themselves.
Because of the current leadership of the Museum (Glenn Dennis,
Glenda Shafer, certain board members and certain volunteers) the
Museum will probably continue to be a tourist attraction, but
does not appear to have the leadership to develop it into the
potential it should have.

Having a collection of 45,000 items in the library, fills up
bookcases and shelves, but is of no value as long as the people
in charge have no knowledge of ufology and present the attitude
that discourages serious researchers from becoming involved.

I will inform the webmaster to remove all of my information from
the Museum website, since I was told to sever all relationships
with the Museum. Those that remain dedicated to the Museum I
wish well.

In addition to me being fired, Laura Stephey who was hired in
January, 1998 to work in the library, was also fired yesterday.
She had something special in a sincere desire to learn and be
involved not only in the library but the subject of ufology in
research and investigation.

I will continue to do research, investigations and lectures, so
I ask that you keep in touch. The truth is out there if the
right people look for it.

Dennis G. Balthaser
(505)625 8402  email <truthskr@roswell.net>
http://members.aol.com/cellyst/

[End Of Message]


John Hayes

jhayes@cableinet.co.uk
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com
UFO Roundup:- http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/
Filer's Files:- http://ufoinfo.com/filer/
UFOICQ Australian UFO Reports and Experiences:-
        http://ufoinfo.com/ufoicq/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                              Re: Music & UFOs

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:30:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:59:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Music & UFOs


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Music & UFOs
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:23:27 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:39:06 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>>Subject: Music & UFOs
>>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Hi All,

>>This is purely for self interest.

>>Over the years of meeting other, UFO researchers I have found
>>that a lot of them were also musicians like myself.

>>Just for my interest are there any UFO/Musicians on UpDates?

>For the record, I currently compose (and record, with the help
>of computer and samplers) jazz/rock/classical fusion music under
>the name Tachyon Chamber Orchestra. I was formerly songwriter,
>bassist and lead singer for a local progressive rock act (Quartz
>Movement), bassist for an improvisational progressive rock group
>(The Throbulators), and bassist for an unpublicized fusion
>recording group (Window).

>Musicians are also suspected to form a large percentage of the
>software development profession, but it is hard to tell if that
>is due to some commonality between the disciplines (which does
>probably exist) or simply the ubiquity of musicians (which
>explains why it is almost impossible to make a living as one).
>
>Mark Cashman

Hi Mark,

You got that right. The music business is high on emotional
satifaction (and frustration), and pure fun. But as for money,
forget about it. Wives hate it,that's for sure.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                           Re: Virginia Sighting?

From: Michael Hodges <mwhod@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:17:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:00:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Virginia Sighting?

>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:42:35 -0500
>From: Michael Hodges <mwhod@roanoke.infi.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>Subject: Sighting In Virginia?

I just wanted to let everyone know that the object that I had
questions about was the space station Mir.

Nick Balaskas did the checking for me and determined the size,
and brightness, and time, which was what I saw.

I was a little off on the position, and after thinking about it,
at the point in which I saw it, I see how it could easily have
risen in the SW and at my point of contact with it thought it
was the west.

Guess I'll have to do better on the directions next time.

Thanks again to Nick for the help.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax

From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 21:09:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:05:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax


>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Subject: Re: Top SETI Scientist Denounces Alien Signal Hoax
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:05:02 -0500

>>Scientist Denounces Elaborate Alien Signal Hoax

><snip>

>Well well, a scientific hoax! Who would have guessed? Time for
>the old debunker steamroller stamp.

>This hoax surely implies that the whole SETI project is a hoax,
>that Sagan et al. knew from the beginning, and are thus fraud,
>that any data SETI ever gets will be either hallucination or
>wishful thinking. Anything else? Sure. Any pro-SETI scientist is
>no scientist anymore when he/she even thinks SETI, only some
>poor gullible SOB.

>There. This had to be said for the sake of Science.

>I feel better.


Serge, List, et al.,

I was shocked by the hubris of SETI's spokesfolks in their
certainty as to 'hoax'. These guys' anthropomorphic approach to
"alien" communication techniques makes loose shoes ufologists
look conservative  by comparison.

Jeez.

Best of ......

John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                   MUFON New Hampshire Lecture - A Review

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:27:43 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:11:08 -0500
Subject: MUFON New Hampshire Lecture - A Review


Dear Listers,

I attended a public lecture this evening (29th) given by MUFON's
State Director for New Hampshire, Peter Geremia. It was held in
a high school auditorium in Manchester.

The content of the lecture was rather routine, but several
things about it stood out.

First, the admission fee was $10, and all proceeds were going to
a local animal shelter. That was a bit of a surprise, as I
thought MUFON's members needed all the money they could get for
investigative purposes.

The other oddity, which was in stark contrast to previous such
meetings I've attended, was the turnout. Somewhere between 100
and 150 chairs had been optimistically set up, and sadly only
about 25 people came. Manchester is a big city, New Hampshire's
largest, and I'd conservatively guess the population to be about
500,000. I felt badly not only for Peter, but for the animal
shelter representative as well, both of whom were clearly hoping
for a better attendance. I hope this isn't a sign of declining
interest.

Pete always gives a great presentation, with lots of local
sighting information. It's interesting to walk into one of these
things, because it seems I can always spot the people who are
going to get new agey or downright weird during the Q&A session
before they even open their mouths.

For example, one lady repeatedly asked Pete about the motives of
the aliens, and whether or not we should be alarmed at their
presence, or other questions pertaining to higher conciousness.
(To anyone on the list for whom these are serious questions,
please understand that I am not being condescending, but rather
pointing out that the purpose of such meetings is lost on SOME
people, who seem to believe just about anything, no matter how
unsubstantiated). Somehow Mr. Geremia graciously dealt with her
questions without offending her, while reaffirming his own "nuts
and bolts" position on the subject. Kudos to him.

The main body of the lecture entailed an assortment of well
documented, CE level sightings by credible witnesses, including
a police officer. I was not able to stay for the crop circle
presentation due to time constraints. If anyone wants details on
the sighting reports given, drop me an "E".







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

              The Estimate of the Situation - As A Ticking Bomb

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:54:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:20:01 -0500
Subject: The Estimate of the Situation - As A Ticking Bomb


Who knew indexing could be so much fun!

Copyright (C) 1998 Gary Alevy

The Estimate of the Situation - As Ticking Bomb

It is obvious from The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects
(The Report) that there were numerous parallel investigations of
the UFO in progress in the late 1940s.  Some of them were, as
Ruppelt says, undertaken by local scientists with their own
budgets.  Others were initiated by local commanders around the
country and the world.  And others, without doubt, were begun in
deepest secrecy and staffed by the scientists at the very top of
the flat-hat pyramid, the very top. How could it have been
otherwise?  This is particularly evident if one analyzes the
nature of the locations and installations where early UFO
sightings occurred, the Eureka! experience one undergoes,
startles one with the recognition of a reconnaissance operation
and not flying objects touring around randomly.

Ruppelt plainly says, to readers who are truly paying attention,
that from the top of the pyramid, a stop was put to _all_ "above
ground" investigations at the time that PROJECT SIGN became
PROJECT GRUDGE. Everyone was reined-in and even the Air Force
and ATIC were taken off the case but secret investigations went
on.

There was a problem with the Estimate of the Situation written
by PROJECT SIGN, a problem that may not be at all apparent to
civilians, patriotic minded individuals and even those with
military experience; the Estimate was an "ordinary" TOP SECRET
document. How can a TOP SECRET document be "ordinary"?  The
answer lies in understanding that military considerations and
documents are not really the utmost consideration of those at
the top of the pyramid, they are but a means to an end.  Even
what becomes a military consideration is often defined by others
outside the military chain of command.  This is not to belittle
the role of the military rather it is a realistic recognition
the role the military plays in the republican form of government
in these United States.  Moreover, these kinds of documents are
subject to leak and counter-leak within the military itself or
confiscation by means of espionage.  The creators of the
Estimate document took their job seriously, without any baggage
due to "outside considerations" of the kind that Alphabet
Agencies (intelligence agencies, e.g. CIA, FBI) and others
(politicians, world leaders, religious leaders, etc.) typically
are concerned with.  That is, ATIC was concerned only with
military security, in the here and _now_, and was not creating
or "spinning" their document for a boss really near or at the
top of the pyramid outside the military, or worried about
higher-order political, social, international or even  worldwide
problems that UFO revelations might present to the government,
society or humanity as a whole.  The Estimate spoke plain
English, a fatal flaw, and "proved" that UFOs were the real
deal, of some kind, whether or not they were "interplanetary".

The military, by its nature, wants to do something NOW about a
problem, and there _was_ a problem.  There is no doubt, even as
early as the time of the Estimate that the UFO problem had
become so important that the regular military was not going to
be allowed to deal with it anymore.  Only the very secretest,
personnel and organizations were going to be allowed to do that.

"Tippy-top" scientists (scientists of high order with
backgrounds in intelligence) like Howard Robertson who had
served as General Eisenhower's science advisor at SHAEF, well,
they may have been aware of other information and playing
another game, along with their tippy-top secret bosses in the
Alphabet Agencies and elsewhere.  What else can explain what
happened in 1953, when a panel (the Robertson Panel, Ruppelt's
panel of experts) consisting of the best secret scientists in
the inventory (with intelligence and military backgrounds, e.g.
Howard Robertson, Louis Alvarez, Samuel Goudsmit, etc.) blew the
UFO out of the water and denied it respectability with everyone,
the regular military being only one of many.  How could the
Robertson panel have done this when ostensibly no scientific
investigation had been completed?  Well it is obvious -- the
REAL investigation was by then complete, or nearly so, and no
help was required from anyone (including the military) who was
not a part of the empire served by the then secret Alphabet
Agencies.

Now we can see why the Estimate was not made public after its
declassification; to do so would have been ruinous to anyone
contemplating a career anywhere in the vast caverns of
government employment or the outside military, industrial and
consultancy organizations that work hand-in-hand with
government.  One would have to be brain dead not to realize that
a "declassify-then-burn" order had to have been applied to a
very dangerous document indeed.  Indeed, it is fascinating that
Ruppelt even mentioned it, even in the diluted way that he did.
It makes one wonder who might have been steered onto the
Estimate as a result of The Report and whether such "steerage"
was one of the effects Ruppelt intended.  Remember, Ruppelt
later repudiated in 1959, under duress many said, nearly
everything he wrote in the original edition of his book which
was published in 1956.  Then he had a heart attack in 1960, an
event that many might have contemplated to their benefit as the
years of the Arnold Age unrolled and passed into the history
books.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Oct > Oct 31

               Copyright [was: Concern re General Ramey's... ]

From: Alex Franz <alfafox@pue1.telmex.net.mx>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:13:51 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:57:25 -0500
Subject: Copyright [was: Concern re General Ramey's... ]


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:10:02 EST
>Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message
>To updates@globalserve.net

>>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:35:16 EST
>>To: Updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Concern re General Ramey's Roswell Crash Message

>>A response has just been received from the UTA Library re my
>>orders for enlargements of the Ramey Message (in connection with
>>the Roswell Event).

>>They now promise to process my order for enlargements of the
>>Ramey Message for research only use by RPIT. UTA cites copyright
>>concerns for not providing duplicate negatives.

>>Just a passing thought: Can there be any copyright protection
>>after 51 years? And does copyright protection extend to the web?

Hi,

I hope this'll help.

Source:

http://www.businessweek.com/enterprise/news/en71130.htm

November 30, 1997

    THREE LEGAL
     TERMS YOU
  REALLY NEED TO
       KNOW

Edited by Dennis Berman

Copyright: Among the most important concepts in Internet
business transactions, since almost everything carried over the
Net is protected in some way by copyright. Copyright is the
legal protection granted to an author or artist for a literary
or artistic work. Congress expressly added computer programs to
the definition of "literary works" some years ago. Copyright
allows the creator of a work to prohibit or control not only
copying but also the work's public performance, retransmission,
and adaptation. Copyright does not, however, protect book titles
or company and product names (see the discussion below on
trademarks).

How long do these copyrights last? As outlined by the U.S.
Copyright Office, "A work that is created on or after January 1,
1978, is automatically protected from the moment of its creation
and is ordinarily given a term enduring for the author's life,
plus an additional 50 years. For certain joint works, the term
lasts for 50 years after the last surviving author's death. For
works made for hire, and for anonymous and pseudonymous works
(unless the author's identity is revealed in Copyright Office
records), the duration of copyright will be 75 years from
publication or 100 years from creation, whichever is shorter."


Regards,

Alex Franz