The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug UFO UpDates Mailing List Aug 2000 Aug 1: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [34] UpDate: Filer's Files #30 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [458] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [106] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [49] UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Brigham - Tim D. Brigham [42] UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [90] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [244] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Velez - John Velez [55] UpDate: P-47: Bulletin of Anomolous Experiences (BAE) - Ed Stewart [56] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [34] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Brigham - Tim D. Brigham [46] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Strickland - Sue Strickland [97] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch - Larry Hatch [42] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch - Larry Hatch [23] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 - Hatch - Larry Hatch [72] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Rivera - Jean-Luc Rivera [39] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Sandow - Greg Sandow [15] UpDate: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - AGETI_Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc [68] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [42] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Rutkowski - Chris Rutkowski [61] UpDate: Oz Security Of Health Records - John W. Auchettl [88] UpDate: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - Serge Salvaille [23] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith - Jenny Randles [169] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [184] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver - Mike Beaver [126] UpDate: Monumental UFO Work On-Line - Jan Aldrich [53] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Rimmer - John Rimmer [34] Aug 2: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart - Gary Hart [40] UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Hart - Gary Hart [14] UpDate: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Gary Hart [54] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [15] UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Lemire - Todd Lemire [46] UpDate: 1970's UK Sightings? - Diane Harrison Director AUFORN [45] UpDate: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - Velez - John Velez [120] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch - Larry Hatch [129] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman - Stan Friedman [73] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Young - Bob Young [34] UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Kean - Victor J. Kean [22] Aug 3: UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [984] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Velez - John Velez [88] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Roy J Hale [24] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [41] UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Laajala - Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland [396] UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Corrales - Scott Corrales [33] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Bassett - Steve Bassett [26] UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Sanchez-Ocejo - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [36] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [92] UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Polanik - Joseph Polanik [54] UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Polanik - Joseph Polanik [46] UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles - Jenny Randles [43] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [69] UpDate: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? - Jan Aldrich [93] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver - Mike Beaver [104] UpDate: For The Record - Steve Bassett [19] UpDate: Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life - ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto [81] UpDate: Searching For IFO Pictures - Werner Walter [16] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Bowden - Dave Bowden [30] UpDate: Re: Monumental UFO Work On-Line - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [11] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [48] UpDate: Paul Allen and SETI - Steve Bassett [22] UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [76] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch - Larry Hatch [59] Aug 4: UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Kean - Victor J. Kean [18] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch - Larry Hatch [116] UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Randles - Jenny Randles [85] UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman - Stan Friedman [32] UpDate: Re: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? - Stan Friedman [24] UpDate: Re: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Friedman - Stan Friedman [40] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale - Roy J Hale [15] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Botsford - Diana Botsford [15] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young - Bob Young [32] UpDate: Re: UFO Sightings OZ File 03.08.2000 - Diane Harrison - Director AUFORN [251] UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 31 - John Hayes [587] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [68] UpDate: Re: bductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith - The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith [49] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? - - Jan Aldrich [78] UpDate: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - John Velez [26] UpDate: Bush/CNN/UFOs - "Unidentified Citizen" - Jan Aldrich [5] UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [42] UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [54] UpDate: First UFO Sighting in North America - Chris Pittman [105] UpDate: The Chupacabra Song Contest - The Winner - Josh Goldstein [41] UpDate: Re: Paul Allen and SETI - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [20] UpDate: Leah Haley Response To Carpenter/Bigelow Matter - Katharina Wilson [6] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart - Gary Hart [45] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart - Gary Hart [13] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart - Gary Hart [26] UpDate: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - GT McCoy [8] UpDate: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [77] UpDate: Waiting for John Carpenter's Progress Report - Ann Mulvey [97] UpDate: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region - Scott Corrales [135] UpDate: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 - James Easton [336] UpDate: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - James Easton [33] Aug 5: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [64] UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [38] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [35] UpDate: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium - Beverly Trout [284] UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [43] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [34] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [72] UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [96] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [28] UpDate: Re: La Chupacabra! - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [44] UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [53] UpDate: Hart To Carpenter - Gary Hart [23] UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - Jim Deardorff [41] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [39] UpDate: Re: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 - Felder - Bobbie Felder [56] UpDate: Scientists Strengthen Prospects For Life On Mars - Lan Fleming [218] UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - McCoy - GT McCoy [30] UpDate: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth - Stig Agermose [73] UpDate: UFO Report: Jasonville, Indiana - 7/24/00 - Kenny Young [54] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Carpenter - John Carpenter [6] UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [18] UpDate: ABC's Nightline on Bush UFO Word (Sure) - Joe Murgia [18] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Carpenter - John Carpenter [53] UpDate: Ralph Nader & John Hagelin on UFOs - Joe Murgia [91] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [47] UpDate: UFOs Photographed in South Carolina 3/9/00 - Chris Pttman [272] UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Hatch - Larry Hatch [18] UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - Hatch - Larry Hatch [14] UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Hatch - Larry Hatch [73] UpDate: Sudden Impacts, The Comic Book's Future & Bush's UFOs - Diana Botsford [70] UpDate: 300 Top US UFO Hotspots - Jim Klotz [12] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman - Stan Friedman [94] UpDate: Military Disputes Strangeness of Maryland Silver Balls - Kenny Young [126] UpDate: Carpenter/Bigelow & Abductee Tapes - Marc Davenport [23] UpDate: Re: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region - - Josh Goldstein [84] UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-05-00 - Rense E-News [344] Aug 6: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [22] UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - Roy J Hale [13] UpDate: Re: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [17] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [29] UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [38] UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - McCoy - GT McCoy [21] UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.Com - Felder - Bobbie Felder [23] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [62] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hart - Gary Hart [13] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez - John Velez [169] UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Pittman - Chris Pittman [28] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez - John Velez [65] UpDate: American UFO Researchers In Darwin Oz - John W Auchettl [61] UpDate: Pennsylvania UFO Information Week Display - Aug 12, - Stan Gordon [22] UpDate: Crop Circle Hoaxing - Mark Haywood [13] UpDate: Latinesque Puzzle - Wendy Christensen [17] UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [112] UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [60] UpDate: Re: Latinesque Puzzle - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [37] UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium - Beverly Trout [12] UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones - Sean Jones [34] Aug 7: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [16] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [22] UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Robert Gates [40] UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Gates - Robert Gates [22] UpDate: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Jim Mortellaro [40] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Gates - Robert Gates [66] UpDate: Abductee Files And MUFON - Robert Gates [28] UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Mike Farrell [174] UpDate: Little Green Men On Film - Stig Agermose [98] UpDate: Ten More Planets Discovered - Stig Agermose [61] UpDate: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will Do - Stig Agermose [58] UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Clark - Jerome Clark [20] UpDate: Re: Former Airliner Pilot Admits to UFO Sighting - - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [111] UpDate: TMP News: Weekly Briefing - 8.7.00 - Paul Anderson [120] UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman - Stan Friedman [68] Aug 8: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young - Bob Young [23] UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will - Joe Murgia [147] UpDate: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - Ron Cecchini [93] UpDate: Filer's Files #31 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [483] UpDate: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mike Farrell [148] UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [25] UpDate: Nick Pope's Weird World - August 2000 - Georgina Bruni [127] UpDate: "Boycott" John Carpenter? - John Velez [70] UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks - Mike Farrell [138] UpDate: MUFON At The Crossroads - Mike Farrell [58] UpDate: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight - Tim Matthews [116] UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Hale - Roy J Hale [27] UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [78] UpDate: Help For Loren Coleman - Kelly Peterborough [11] UpDate: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [54] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Brigham - Tim D. Brigham [28] UpDate: Re: "Boycott" John Carpenter? - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [41] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [66] UpDate: A Question Of Definition? - Karoline Louise [24] UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones - Sean Jones [44] UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [113] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher - Colm Kelleher [83] UpDate: Re: Alleged Alien Symbols, Writing And Emblems - - James Bond Johnson [32] UpDate: Research Enquiry - Andy Roberts [23] UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Kelleher - Colm Kelleher [18] UpDate: MUFON UFO Museum To Open In Denver - UFO UpDates - Toronto [129] UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [39] UpDate: Phobos II - Joachim Koch [167] UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles - Jenny Randles [114] UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Clark - Jerome Clark [37] UpDate: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] - Dennis Stacy [29] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] - Brookesmith - The Duke Peter of Mendoza [30] UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Farrell - Mike Farrell [73] UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will - Jim Mortellaro [24] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [48] Aug 9: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart - Gary Hart [39] UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Peterborough - Kelly Peterborough [68] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez - John Velez [113] UpDate: UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents On Web - Stig Agermose [42] UpDate: More CAUS Stuff... - Royce J. Myers III [14] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell - Mike Farrell [99] UpDate: Re: - Stig Agermose [40] UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Farrell - Mike Farrell [48] UpDate: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Stig Agermose [152] UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch - Larry Hatch [58] UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Hatch - Larry Hatch [35] UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - - Larry Hatch [30] UpDate: Quantum Leaps In Planet Search - Stig Agermose [175] UpDate: Tunguska 2001 Conference - Patricia Mason [19] UpDate: Re: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? - Roy J Hale [38] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [62] UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [42] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [70] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark - Jerome Clark [32] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark - Jerome Clark [36] UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - - Bob Young [39] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher - Colm Kelleher [114] UpDate: Re: NIDS Forum Back On-Line - Terry Blanton [4] UpDate: Re: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight - - Andy Roberts [168] UpDate: Magnetic 'Solution' To Crop Circle Puzzle - UFO UpDates - Toronto [43] Aug 10: UpDate: Water Geyser Imaged On Mars In 1978? - Brian Straight [7] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell - Jim Mortellaro [192] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [44] Aug 9: UpDate: BBC - Q&A: Crop Circles - UFO UpDates - Toronto [65] Aug 10: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart - Gary Hart [51] UpDate: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident - GT McCoy [12] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [237] UpDate: CPR-Canada News: Crop Circle Quest, International - Paul Anderson [60] UpDate: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - John Velez [114] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [66] UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 32 - John Hayes [449] UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Louise - Karoline Louise [25] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark - Jerome Clark [29] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez - John Velez [79] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Katherine Hubbell [108] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [53] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Jim Mortellaro [196] UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles - Jenny Randles [84] Aug 11: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [93] UpDate: Re: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident - - Sean Jones [26] UpDate: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Rebecca Keith [233] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones - Sean Jones [16] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones - Sean Jones [46] UpDate: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Jenny Randles [128] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Jones - Sean Jones [22] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Will Bueche [27] UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - - Ron Cecchini [21] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Josh Goldstein [53] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [168] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Ron Cecchini [22] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Liz Hammond [10] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Katherine Hubbell [47] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [62] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [62] UpDate: NSA's Plan Backfires - Blair Cummins [34] Aug 12: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale - Roy J Hale [20] UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [80] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez - John Velez [153] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [105] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez - John Velez [70] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez - John Velez [36] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Jim Mortellaro [75] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Henry - Joel Henry [58] UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - - Larry Hatch [22] UpDate: Odors from UFOs - Colm Kelleher - NIDS [10] UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles - Jenny Randles [113] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [190] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Ann Mulvey [40] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [114] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Meiners - Jean Meiners [41] UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [45] UpDate: Re: NSA's Plan Backfires - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [28] UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark - Jerome Clark [48] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch - Joachim Koch [98] UpDate: Another MJ-12 Source - Bob Huff [43] UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - De La Vega - Egio Hernan De La Vega Buonanno [78] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Keith - Rebecca Keith [32] UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Russo - Edoardo Russo [34] UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Gates - Robert Gates [46] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates - Robert Gates [29] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Brian Cuthbertson [26] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Gates - Robert Gates [72] UpDate: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - xxx xxxx [45] Aug 14: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [72] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [21] UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Randles - Jenny Randles [52] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles - Jenny Randles [40] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [29] UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-12-00 - Rense E-News [281] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Josh Goldstein [179] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Katherine Hubbell [35] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [29] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Keith - Rebecca Keith [19] UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Hart - Gary Hart [20] UpDate: Crop Circles Puzzle Farmer - Stig Agermose [33] UpDate: Think You Saw a UFO? Think Again - Stig Agermose [100] UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton - James Easton [90] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates - Robert Gates [16] UpDate: Interesting Sightings In Hessdalen - Stig Agermose [46] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Young - Robert Gates [31] UpDate: Re: Another MJ-12 Source - Gates - Robert Gates [18] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - Gates - Robert Gates [24] UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [102] UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - - Todd Lemire [52] UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - - Todd Lemire [24] UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch - Larry Hatch [61] UpDate: Open Request to Researchers - Ann Mulvey [40] UpDate: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact - Wendy Christensen [119] UpDate: Crop Formations - Some Informed Opinions - Tim Matthews [146] UpDate: Better BUFOSC UFO Footage Being Kept? - Terry Rhodes [23] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton - James Easton [36] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - Jim Mortellaro [58] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [24] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [31] UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [29] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy/Damage Done - Hart - Gary Hart [57] UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [32] UpDate: Bryant Asks The Board Of MUFON To Resign - Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com [6] UpDate: Carpenter Speaks Out... - Jim Mortellaro [278] UpDate: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign - Jim Mortellaro [25] UpDate: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light - Lan Fleming [33] UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [106] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [90] UpDate: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Royce J. Myers III [29] UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Gildas Bourdais [105] UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Velez - John Velez [45] Aug 15: UpDate: Carpenter's LCSW License - Katherine Hubbell [7] UpDate: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Sean Jones [28] UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Hatch - Larry Hatch [76] UpDate: Colin Andrews - Research Flawed? - Mark Haywood [26] UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Keith - Rebecca Keith [44] UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Young - Bob Young [48] UpDate: Re: Carpenter Speaks Out... - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [26] UpDate: Re: Open Request To Researchers - Keith - Rebecca Keith [48] UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Bob Young [21] UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [48] UpDate: Re: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [69] UpDate: Filer's Files #32 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [482] UpDate: CPR-Canada News: New Crop Circles in Ontario - Paul Anderson [79] UpDate: Re: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign - Robert Gates [46] Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - Ron Cecchini [9] TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.14.00 - Paul Anderson [82] CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New - Paul Anderson [74] Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hart - Gary Hart [48] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch - Joachim Koch [27] UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Roy J Hale [9] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale - Roy J Hale [28] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale - Roy J Hale [11] Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Young - Bob Young [32] Aug 16: Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [71] Hemo Predator (Chupacabras) - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [20] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [39] Carpenter-Gate - Bobbie Felder [119] Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [44] Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - - Gildas Bourdais [20] Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New - James Easton [27] Re: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light - Easton - James Easton [6] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Jenny Randles [218] Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - - John Velez [100] Re: olin Andrews - Research Flawed? - Poulet - Jacques Poulet [33] Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [69] as Neanderthal the Nephilim? - Terry Blanton [16] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [71] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton - James Easton [28] Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [133] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles - Jenny Randles [184] Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - - Dwight Connelly [17] 'Expert' - UFO-Finland [19] Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - Mike Kemp [290] Re: Odors from UFOs - Pressley - Loy Pressley [20] Antonio Rullan's Levelland Paper at The Temporal - Mark Cashman [20] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Wendy Christensen [48] Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Ron Cecchini [24] Aug 17: Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Rhodes - Terry Rhodes [13] Re: 'Expert' - Bauer - Dave Bauer [33] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Koch - Joachim Koch [39] Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [33] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - James Easton [135] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Murgia - Joe Murgia [66] CPR-Canada News: 'Radial' Crop Circle - - Paul Anderson [63] Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [33] Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Velez - John Velez [78] Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [84] Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Stan Friedman [40] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Bowden - Dave Bowden [89] UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 33 - John Hayes [613] Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart"... - - Paul Anderson [26] Of Memory and JFK - Sean Jones [86] Research Enquiry - Gar Anthony [16] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale - Roy J Hale [14] Aug 18: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [100] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [117] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton - James Easton [28] Re: 'Expert' - Hart - Gary Hart [15] Mortellaro - For the Record - Jim Mortellaro [68] The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Jim Mortellaro [139] Cydonian Imperative: Update 8-18-00 - Mac Tonnies [18] Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch - Larry Hatch [62] Scientific UFO Research [SUFOR) Webring - James Easton [21] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Hatch - Larry Hatch [105] Re: Carpenter-Gate - Felder - Bobbie Felder [157] CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Ontario Crop Circles - Paul Anderson [106] The PK Man - Jeffrey Mishlove [22] Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Velez - John Velez [63] Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Hale - Roy J Hale [11] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale - Roy J Hale [11] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [51] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [39] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder - Bobbie Felder [35] Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Felder - Bobbie Felder [54] Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - - Jim Mortellaro [56] Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder - Bobbie Felder [55] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso -0 - Ed Gehrman [27] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [188] Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Hubbell - Katherine Hubbell [51] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [38] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [66] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Greg Sandow [34] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [59] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [64] Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [166] Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [17] Aug 19: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [135] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [57] Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Mulvey - Ann Mulvey [8] On TV This Weekend - Ron Cecchini [8] Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [101] Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [13] Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder - Bobbie Felder [45] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Mike Kemp [73] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder - Bobbie Felder [39] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder - Jenny Randles [53] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [79] Antarctic Rover Paves The Way - Stig Agermose [53] Firmage Sheds E.T. Aura For Science Site - Stig Agermose [120] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Stan Friedman [54] Hale's 'Lost Haven' - New Site - Roy J Hale [14] Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [98] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [51] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [44] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [37] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Fleming - Lan Fleming [65] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [60] [canufo] Re: Yukon UFO Report - Martin Jasek [62] CPR-Canada News: Statement By Colin Andrews - Paul Anderson [191] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [132] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [77] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [61] Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-19-00 - Rense E-News [293] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [61] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [143] Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles - Jenny Randles [156] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Mike Kemp [75] Aug 20: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch - Larry Hatch [66] Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [77] 'Lost Haven' Updates... - Roy J Hale [15] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale - Roy J Hale [13] Re: Hall & Maccabee In Fairfax, Virginia - Steve W. Kaeser [40] Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [25] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [165] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Stan Friedman [101] Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [84] Re: Carpenter-Gate - Hart - Gary Hart geehart@frontiernet.net [38] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - McCoy - GT McCoy [137] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Ed Gehrman [50] Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - Hart - Gary Hart [40] Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles - Jenny Randles [260] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [39] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [38] Re: Request for Information - And Help - Jim Mortellaro [78] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [36] Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - - Jim Mortellaro [62] Aug 22: X-PPAC Update - August 20, 2000 - Stephen G. Bassett [90] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Dennis Stacy [49] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [357] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [93] Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [50] UFO Sightings OZ Files 21.08.2000 - Diane Harrison - Director AUFORN [322] The Chronicle - NSW, OZ: UFOs Unlikely But Possible - Diane Harrison [66] Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young - Bob Young [55] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale - Roy J Hale [15] Re: Request for Information - And Help - - Brian Cuthbertson [49] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [89] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean - Victor J.Kean [30] The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Jerome Clark [190] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [250] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Greg Sandow [15] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [54] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [26] Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Ron Cecchin [10] Mystery 'Missiles' Over Baluchistan (Pakistan) - Stig Agermose [65] Filer's Files #33 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [511] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [38] TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.22.00 - Paul Anderson [89] Nancy Talbott on Dreamland Sunday 8-27-00 - Beverly Trout [5] Coloradans Believe Truth Is Out There, Poll Shows - Stig Agermose [124] Aug 23: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [62] Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [68] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [108] Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles - Jenny Randles [147] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [193] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [48] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles - Jenny Randles [69] Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles - Jenny Randles [33] ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Roy J Hale [18] Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Harrison - Diane Harrison [37] INEXPLICATA #7 (Fall 2000) On-Line - Scott Corrales [19] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [216] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Ed Gehrman [71] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [21] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Greg Sandow [48] Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [83] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [30] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [329] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [94] Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Jones - Sean Jones [23] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman - Mark Cashman [80] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza [114] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman - Mark Cashman [70] Aug 24: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young - Bob Young [49] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman - Mark Cashman [180] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [56] Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [8] Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles - Jenny Randles [109] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [103] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Jenny Randles [149] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [91] Recent London Footage - Dave Bowden [29] Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Clark - Jerome Clark [84] UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 34 - John Hayes [595] Cheshire UFO & Crop Circles @ Fortean Times - Mark Pilkington [17] Montreal 'UFO Expert' Sentenced - Todd Lemire [81] Possible Explanation For Balochistan UFOs - Todd Lemire [8] Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts - Andy Roberts [54] Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Velez - John Velez [49] Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [20] Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Terry Rhodes [16] 'RM'- Maccabee's Definition - Bruce Maccabee [117] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [105] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [16] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [19] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [38] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [35] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [20] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [51] Aug 25: Housekeeping: Filter Problems - UFO UpDates - Toronto [10] Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - - Serge Salvaille [32] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [83] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [25] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [54] Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [15] Frghtening Technology - Serge Salvaille [5] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [59] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [28] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [93] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [27] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [118] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [86] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [53] Cydonian Imperative Update - 8-25-00 - Mac Tonnies [10] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [33] Former Security Officer: Bush To Reveal UFO Secrets - Stig Agermose [25] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [43] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [44] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Henry - Joel Henry [29] Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Tim Matthews [191] Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - - John Velez [66] Aug 26: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [257] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez - John Velez [125] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [119] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [28] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Rudiak - David Rudiak [57] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [28] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [71] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes - Terry Rhodes [44] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Terry Rhodes [21] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman - Mark Cashman [110] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman - Mark Cashman [11] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [41] Re: Frightening Technology - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [48] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith - Rick Goldsmith [60] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [83] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale - Roy J Hale [14] CNN.Com On New Randle & Estes Book - Stig Agermose [102] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [43] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [45] 'The Edwards Air Force Base Encounter'? - Ron Cecchini [32] Re: Frghtening Technology - Hatch - Larry Hatch [36] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [84] Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Anthony - Gar Anthony [61] Pulsar Communications - Terry Blanton [21] Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Lushman - Rory Lushman [180] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [20] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle - Kevin Randle [24] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [73] CPR-Canada News: Saskatchewan Large Circle - Paul Anderson [76] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [51] Re: Frightening Technology - Salvaille - Serges Salvaille [63] LUFOS Lecture - London, England - John Hayes [23] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Ed Gehrman [35] UK Ch. 5 Probes Alien Enigma This Weekend - Stig Agermose [39] Aug 27: Ufology Loses A Treasure - Jeff Rense [18] Cynthia Hind - Bill Oliver [10] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [51] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [98] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [28] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [50] Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Rimmer - John Rimmer [25] Injury/Death/Healing Database - Geoff Dittman [13] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [142] MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Jim Mortellaro [140] Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-26-00 - Rense E-News [297] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza [112] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza [39] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter The Duke of Mendoza [112] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter The Duke of Mendoza [55] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter The Duke of Mendoza [45] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [38] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [89] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [18] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [199] 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Stig Agermose [111] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [11] Cydonian Imperative Update 8-27-00 - Mac Tonnies [4] Jacques Vallee? - David Hancock [7] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [49] Re: Cynthia Hind - Hatch - Larry Hatch [23] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [154] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean - Victor J. Kean [58] Cynthia Hind - Jenny Randles [18] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hart - Gary Hart [43] Alternative 3 - Redux - Georgina Bruni [21] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [75] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith - Bruce Maccabee [44] John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and - Debra Carpenter [9] Death of Cynthia Hind - John Hayes [27] Cynthia Hind - Gar Anthony [9] Cynthia Hind - Roy J Hale [25] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman - Mark Cashman [104] Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez - John Velez [233] Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez - John Velez [233] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Hale - Roy J Hale [15] Hale's Web Update - Roy J Hale [7] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [50] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle - Kevin Randle [27] Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming - Lan Fleming [61] Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [11] Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness - Jerome Clark [113] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Rudiak - David Rudiak [64] CPR-Canada News: Updates - Special Research - Paul Anderson [50] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles - Jenny Randles [76] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [148] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [273] Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and - Fran Walton [52] Aug 28: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [116] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [9] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [35] Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and - Steve W. Kaeser [14] Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming - Lan Fleming [15] Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [24] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [38] Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - - Greg Sandow [23] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [85] Aug 29: Re: Alternative 3 - Redux - UFO UpDates - Toronto [625] New Items on the PJ-47 and Sign Historical Group - Jan Aldrich [63] TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.28.00 - Paul Anderson [70] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes - Terry Rhodes [21] CPR-Canada News: Update #3 - Oro-Medonte Township, - Paul Anderson [153] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [31] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean - Victor J. Kean [19] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean - Victor J. Kean [46] Re: Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [73] Re: Jacques Vallee? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [35] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith [34] Filer's Files #34 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [431] Footprint On Mars? - Diane Harrison [29] 'UFO' Wreckage Said Recovered By Pakistan Air Force - Kenny Young [34] Another UFO Sighted Over Pakistan - Stig Agermose [24] 'UFO Ireland' Asks Farmers To Report Crop Circles - Stig Agermose [32] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [12] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [17] Pakistan: UFO 'Wreckage' Removed By 'Sensitive - Stig Agermose [35] Richard Hall's Site - Steve W. Kaeser [9] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [40] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [64] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [14] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones - Sean Jones [42] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Jenny Randles [30] Re: Footprint On Mars? - Fleming - Lan Fleming [15] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza [31] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza [44] Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & - Serge Salvaille [52] 13 Year Russian UFO Study - Sean Jones [14] Scientists Claim Light Speed Barrier Broken - Sean Jones [44] National UFO Reports Line - Tim Matthews [49] Neil Morris' Phone Number? - Philip Mantle [13] Colm Kelleher on Coast to Coast AM Tonight - Colm Kelleher - NIDS [8] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [38] Aug 30: Re: Footprint On Mars? - Cornet - Bruce Cornet [38] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [44] CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Moosomin, - Paul Anderson [64] Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith - Pter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza [12] Re: Footprint On Mars? - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [21] Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates - Robert Gates [18] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [18] Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Gates - Robert Gates [19] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [141] Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [65] Flying saucers or Pakistan Gauri Missiles? - Stig Agermose [38] SETI: ET Quest And Tech Billionaires - Stig Agermose [215] COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997 - Stig Agermose [122] Pakistan: Official Mum Over 'UFO' Wreckage - Stig Agermose [20] Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [12] Re: 1970's UK Sightings - kEAN - Victor J.Kean [34] Re: Jacques Vallee? - Lovett - Diane Lovett [42]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:54:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:27:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:50:57 +0100 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >For those of you who may not have seen the NOVA program Budd >Hopkins pretty much established the above all on his own. >Budd Hopkins had invited the cameras to witness one of his >investigations. >This was the first time he'd met these people. >After speaking to the parents he showed a set of picture cards >to their child and asked which ones he recognized. >When shown the picture of the alien the child quite clearly said >he didn't know that one. >So Budd tries it again, this time he asks which one is good and >which one is bad. >Only two choices, should have been three 'good, bad or don't >know'. >When they again get to the alien card the child says "bad", he >could just have easily said 'good', makes no difference. >Budd then focuses the child's attention on the alien card asking >him why he says that ones bad. >The child starts to make up a little story as kids of that age >do. >Of course by now the previously unknown alien image is being >fixed in the youngsters mind. >We finally see Budd leaving the house convinced that the whole >family are being abducted by space aliens. >I thought it was an appalling thing to do, especially to a >little kid. This may be what NOVA showed. Is it a complete account of what happened? Budd emphatically says no. Unfortunately, since I'm leaving for two weeks of business trip combined with vacation, I can't find out more until I'm back. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Filer's Files #30 -- 2000 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:57:07 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:30:52 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Filer's Files #30 -- 2000 Filer's Files #30 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern July 31, 2000, Majorstar@aol.com, Sponsored by Electronic Arts Web Site at: http://www.filersfiles.com.-Chuck Warren Webmaster. WARNING INCREASED ALERT I've followed the UFO situation for more than twenty years and its hard to explain but, I have a feeling something is very wrong, but it is not much more than a hunch. Consequently, I need help from anyone reading this report to use your resources to collect data about this new turn in events. My strong premonition is based on some reliable information that started a couple years back when Chuck Warren, told me he was photographing low level contrails made by large four engine white jet aircraft flying over the Philadelphia area. I have some 5,000 flying hours and have often seen contrails being formed by our aircraft, but never at these lower levels. We generally flew at 30,000 feet or higher in our C-141 Starlifter and often I observed four contrails developing well behind the engines, these would combine into on long contrail that would soon dissipate. Jet aircraft engines emit tiny particles that serve as condensation nuclei. At high altitudes water vapor collects on these particles and crystallizes, and in turn creating streaks of frozen water vapor otherwise known as contrails. Chuck and his friends assured me these were not normal contrails, that the aircraft were flying much too low to form the standard contrails. He showed me some film of what appeared to be a white 707 or KC-135 aircraft flying at a few thousand feet leaving two contrails. The spray was coming from the tail area and not from the engines. According to hundreds of reports this spray called chemtrails falls to the ground and often makes some people sick with flu like symptoms and skin rashes. The planes are often seen flying in a crisscross checkerboard pattern and soon the whole sky is clouded over. Weather satellite photos also show the operation from space. These photos can be seen at several websites such as www.contrail connection.com. I first thought the government was spraying perhaps due to the Nile Fever scare. I checked with some old tanker Air Force and National Guard people all of whom denied any knowledge of the spraying. Samples of the chemtrails have been collected and are alleged to contain various toxins and reportedly red and white blood cells, and other unidentified cell types. Using a sub micron fiber sample these appear to be cells of a desiccated freeze dried nature. These samples were sent to the EPA who thus far have given unsatisfactory answers. Their response has been that aircraft normally form contrails and spread toxins similar to cars exhaust. There is nothing to worry about. On July 9, 2000, I was at Long Beach Island, New Jersey over looking at the Atlantic Ocean when I noticed a white four engine jet making a long contrail. It was a very thick heavy contrail in a beautiful blue sky. I looked left towards New York and the contrail was at least fifty miles long. Within a few seconds I looked back to the front of the contrail to get a closer look at the aircraft and it had disappeared. I searched the sky with binoculars, but it was gone. The contrail had suddenly stopped where I last saw the aircraft. I thought that was very strange, but perhaps I just lost it in the clear blue sky? At the recent MUFON Conference Louisiana State Director Greg Avery explained his video camera was picking up UFOs inside the chemtrails and showed us some videos to that effect. Greg is a private trail lawyer whose philosophy concerning UFOs is: "that more often than not the evidence of the existence of flying saucers would have been judged a "proven fact" a long time ago if the question and the evidence had been put before an American jury using the same standards of proof used in civil trials for more than two hundred years." Driving home from the MUFON conference the Georgia State MUFON director who is a retired Chief of Police and others saw aircraft spraying. All those in the car noticed the contrails. While they were watching the spaying from the aircraft it disappeared. These are high quality witnesses, they are not mistaken. I've learned from other contrail experts this has happened before. To my knowledge humans do not possess aircraft that can disappear. The spraying is real, therefore I suspect that UFOs are involved. I want to know what they are spraying and why. The UFO and the chemtrial phenomena may have moved to a new level of seriousness. My inquiries lead me to believe no one in government is noticing or analyzing the data? If anyone happens to see an aircraft at low level making contrails I urge you to videotape and get other witnesses watching. The more important the witness you can notify the better. Attempt to collect the spray. For example, large plates, plastic or your car's hubcaps could be used to collect the liquid. Once the spray lands use Q tips to collect the spray and put into clean glass or plastic containers. Keep a record of what's happening. Let me know and I will give you an address to send the samples and videotapes. There is an urgent need for airborne sample collection flying behind the airborne chemtrails. This could be dangerous, but airborne samples would be much more valuable if properly collected and recorded. I also suggest you put your name and address on this letter and send it to the most powerful person you know. We are attempting to get the news media and politicians aware of this potential problem. I will be on the Jeff Rense show Tuesday night to talk more about it. The EPA wrote David Peterson at the Chemtrail Research Fund on February 22, 2000. "We are not aware of any program to disperse fibrous material on the US population. My experience is that the government authorities are not engaged in quiet research to determine the problem, but tend to scoff at our efforts. I wish to caution the reader that our data is not proven, the results of this spraying could be either helpful or hurtful to mankind. We are attempting to collect data and sort this out. We have obtained reports from almost every state in the US and numerous foreign countries such as Australia, England, France, Holland, Italy, New Zealand, Scotland, and Sweden. The following are Essential Elements of Information that we need collected: Describe the craft and how it seems to disappear? Report location, date, time, speed, angle above the horizon, distance, size, etc. We can estimate altitude of the craft based on the angle and distance. For example, if the aircraft was 800 feet away at 30 degrees above the horizon its altitude would be 762 feet. Caution concerning your reports. High flying aircraft with contrails are a normal situation. Generally an aircraft smaller than your thumb nail at arm's length is at altitudes where normal contrails form. If the aircraft is larger than your thumb at arm's length it is unlikely contrails will naturally form and these should be especially videotaped. Attempt to get an overall wide angle view of the scene before and after zooming in on the object. The obvious possibility is that the chemtrails are being spread by white unidentified flying objects that appear fairly normal until they suddenly disappear. It is much too early to come to conclusions, but it is important to collect data on this phenomenon. I certainly suspect a control system is operating. The phenomenon may be forcing us through a learning curve. The chemtrails and recent reports of threatening UFOs indicate a potentially more serious situation is developing. The following Kentucky report and those from Sweden and Australia help confirm this data. KENTUCKY/TENNESSEE CONTRAIL CRAFT DISAPPEARS On July 17, 2000, Georgia State Director Tom Sheets (this writer), ASD Mark Ausmus and CFI Jim Clifford, all of MUFON of Georgia and ISUR, were returning to the Atlanta area from the MUFON Symposium in St. Louis. We were driving southbound on I-24 in a Chevy van, Sheets driving, Clifford front right, Ausmus in 1st back seat. While passing thru Kentucky and into Tennessee, Clifford had been pointing out an extraordinarily large number of jet contrails in the sky. The weather along this route was some thin haze and some thin almost transparent cirrostratus patches in some areas, with some cirrus, but mostly sunny with temperatures in the 90's, no appreciable wind noticed. At 4:40 PM CDT, approaching the 97 mile marker between Nashville and Chattanooga, about 81 road miles NW of Chattanooga, Clifford pointed up and out his window saying something to the effect of "Look, there's a jet giving off a contrail or chemtrail". Note: At that time the sky to our front, and front right and front left, was the aforementioned thin transparent partial haze, but it abruptly ended to our front and slightly upwards. From that upward point in front, on to the overhead point, and continuing behind us to right and left, was clear blue sky with bright sun. No clouds, no haze. As Clifford remarked on the jet as described above, I glanced up and slightly to the right and saw a contrail through and above the haze, more or less parallel to the roadway (being deployed toward us), but it terminated at the edge of the thin haze. Quickly following this line out into the clear sky, I observed a large bright white jet of the 777 or 757 or similar variety, beginning to again emit more contrail or chemtrail. The aircraft was obvious and substantial and in clear blue sky with bright sunlight. There was no mistaking what it was. The outline of the white fuselage, wings and tail were PLAINLY visible against clear blue. (Mark Ausmus was unable to see the aircraft from his position in the rear seat, but immediately observed the trails in the sky upon dismounting the van). At that point this writer braked hard (light traffic), and began to quickly pull over. Clifford, who was still watching, then stated that.... "it's gone, it just vanished". Within a few moments, we were all out and looking. The jet had indeed vanished. The sky was double checked using binoculars with negative results. We could still plainly see the contrail/chemtrail line through the haze, stopping at the edge, then a short way out into the clear sky the contrail began again, then stopped. The course the jet had been flying was directly into the clear sky. If it had banked/turned or climbed or dove, we should still have been able to see it for several minutes. There were NO other clouds or haze for it to fly into on it's course, which was estimated at being about NWN. This writer estimated the altitude at about 15,000 feet, but it could have been higher. Note: The contrail/chemtrail above the haze, stopping at the edge, then continuing for a brief distance in the clear sky, was similar to this; ------------------------ --------> then the jet vanished, leaving only this; ------------------------ --------- As stated, this all occurred in a very short period of time, from first alert, to the jet vanishing, to our static observation of the sky. We found it difficult to believe that an aircraft that large and obvious could disappear in that manner. It should be noted that all three of us have long experience as observers, myself from 25 years of law enforcement and SWAT type operations, Mark Ausmus from years of organizing and executing MANY skywatches and UFO surveillance operations, but CFI Jim Clifford is probably the most formally trained as an observer for this type of activity. Jim retired after 23 years of naval service with a Top Secret security clearance in communications. He also has experience in the P-3 Orion subhunter aircraft, and was once responsible for visually spotting a Russian submarine that had gotten into one of our Navy's areas of patrol responsibility; the sub had been overlooked by other observers and methods, but Jim spotted it during patrol sweeps by the P-3. He is an alert, objective and close observer. Jim later went on to comment that he had noticed a lot of these events involved the contrail/chemtrails being deployed in or above cloud cover or haze and then terminating near clear sky, as if to conceal the activity. Jim, like the rest of us, thinks the public has a right to know the 'what' and the 'why' of this activity. How will the public go about getting to the truth of the matter? What will it take? While as a group, we at MUFONGA and ISUR are more interested in the greatest enigma of our time.....the UFO phenomena.....but this contrail/chemtrail dilemma is also right in our face. Thanks to Tom Sheets, Copyright 2000, All Rights Reserved. PENNSYLVANIA DISCS SIGHTED BY GUARDS FRANKLIN -- Disc shaped objects were sighted over northwest Pennsylvania on July 12 and 20, 2000. The witness, a security guard reports a coworker called my attention to a bright light in the sky on July 12 at 1:56 AM. At first, all I could see was a bright light with two lights, alternating blue and red. When I changed my position, I could see that the white light was moving from right to left, along a trail of 6 or 8 blue lights. While watching the object, I became dizzy. I then broke my gaze and called everyone else to come and see the object. The object stayed in the same place for about an hour before disappearing from my view. Another coworker said, "He saw it overhead and it's underside." On July 20, a guard reports while patrolling the grounds of my workplace, I saw the same object in the western sky almost over the local County Airport. It was further away, and higher in the sky. I had to use binoculars to see what it was clearly. The white light swept from side to side but would stop every so often, as if searching for something. This is the third or fourth time it has been spotted in the same area in the same time frame. There are other coworkers to validate my claim. Thanks to National Reporting Center www.ufocenter.com. OHIO SECURITY GUARD SEES UFO IRONTON -- Claude Foreman a security guard was on duty on July 8, 2000, at 5:32 AM, caught a glimpse of something in the corner of my eye close to Route 521. Watching it approach from the clear western sky, Foreman initially thought it to be a large bird. He then "walked into the field to get a better look at it." He said, "The UFO, seen clearly in the daylight skies, was shaped like the sole of a shoe." The object appeared to be colored like rusted old iron and looked like a shoebox of old rusted metal or iron that was rounded at both ends. "The rust-colored object made absolutely no noise as it continued overhead at an estimated altitude of 10,000 to 15,000 feet going perfectly straight." From his perspective, the security guard said the object was much longer than a routine (conventional) aircraft seen at the same estimated height. The guard, however, thought "the object was traveling much slower than conventional air traffic and low enough that he should have heard some noise," Foreman said. "It had a yellowish-orange non-blinking light around the exterior of it, like a circle with neon lighting all around it." There were also two additional lights in the back of the object. Thanks to Kenneth Young of UFO Research ILLINOIS DISC SIGHTED NAPERVILLE -- A strange circular oval shaped object with three or four dark areas on bottom flew and moved silently on July 15, 2000, at 8:25 PM. The witness stated, "I initially noticed a momentarily illuminated disk shaped object that was presumably lit up by the sun in western horizon." The disk was at approximately 3000 to 5000 feet moving silently in an east-northeast direction. Although the sky was somewhat hazy, a circular to oval shape or perhaps trapezoidal shape dark areas on the bottom. When I stepped inside for set of binoculars, upon return I got a passing glimpse of it as it banked south and disappeared." An opaque spotty haze/vapor formed around object as it disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC www.ufocenter.com. COLORADO UFO REPORTS SAN LUIS VALLEY -- appears to be experiencing an upsurge of summer reports ranging from classic UFO-type nocturnal lights to unusual military flight activity. VILLA GROVE/HAYDEN PASS -On July 27, 2000 at 9:30 a resident observed a large, silent black jet that flew low over Hayden Pass and headed SW at tree top level over Highway 285. Witness called the craft, "the strangest looking plane I've ever seen." A couple of minutes later, two fighter jets followed the course of the first plane down the Valley. CRESTONE, SAGUACHE COUNTY - On July 12, 2000, 1:00 to 1:45 AM, a witness while skywatching east of town observed eight blinking lights. They alternated green, red and white and were in a spherical formation 15 degrees above the western horizon. The formation of lights hovered over the Valley for 25 minutes. GREAT SAND DUNES NATIONAL MONUMENT -- On June 11, 2000, near Highway 17the witness stated, "We were hiking the sand dunes at 2:45 PM, when we saw several planes leaving short contrails and looked up to see the jet . Higher above the plane was a round shape leaving no contrail. It seemed to be moving west about as fast the jet at that altitude. Looking through binoculars there was no fuselage or wings, just a round shape in a dull metallic color. CRESTONE -- Two individuals camping woke up at 3:00 AM or so by a extremely brief "huge wind" that shook their separate tents. The wind only lasted a few seconds then became quiet. One of the campers; a woman woke up with three triangle arrayed puncture marks; one behind the left ear, one on back of right thigh, and three puncture marks on main vein of right arm, just below crease of elbow. Other experiencer, a teenage boy, aged 13, also experienced wind and felt something strange was happening. (O'Brien) MAXIVILLE -- On May 24, 2000 10:30-10:45 PM near the Rio Grande north of Monti Vista two waitresses watched a brilliant low flying light zig-zagging object near the old Del Norte Airport. Witnesses were sure the silent light array was not a conventional craft. The following day a dead calf was discovered in the area with an unusual hide scrape and small cut along the backbone. CHAMA, RIO ARRIBAS COUNTY, New Mexico on May 25, 2000, Campers found two freshly mutilated cows. One with no head; the other with the tongue missing. Nearby were four elk legs and haunches without head, neck or torso. Thanks to Jim O'Brien. ARIZONA UFO FLAP. PHOENIX - Tom King writes that, "UFOs have appeared five times in July over the city." To capture better video and photos Skynet is creating a rapid on the spot call list. Skynet is giving you a rare opportunity to participate in a UFO flap. The idea is to call a list of people with cameras at various locations whet the UFO called . When a UFO appears, you are to immediately take your videocamera and go outside and tape it. You have to have a video camera to join the list and be willing to share your tape with them. Use a tripod, set focus to manual, restrain from using digital zooms and stay in optical mode at highest setting. Remember where you are taping and shoot a reference shot in wide angle before and right after the sighting is over. Immediately after the sighting call the National UFO Reporting Center 206-722-3000. Then notify Tom King of your sighting. We will use all videos for triangulation and computer research to identify what kind of object were looking at. We have the technology to study UFOs on a massive scale. I want thousands of cameras on this UFO, its appearing for a reason, seize the opportunity. Email Tom King with the following information. Name, telephone number, major cross streets, and video camera gear. Thanks to "Tom King" ufohunter@home.com, http://www.ufovideo.com WASHINGTON LIGHTS TROUT LAKE - James Gilliland sent me a remarkable video-tape of various lights in the sky moving near Mt. Adams and the near by Yakima Indian Reservation. The lights are difficult to explain because they do not flash like strobe lights and move about the sky, maneuver, and appear unlike aircraft lights. They are not close to the ground so they are unlikely to be 'Earthlights' caused by faults and stress under the Earth's surface. Those watching the lights can easily be heard and there is no sound of jet engines only of the Perhaps more than the video of lights in the sky there is the testimony of several Yakima Policeman and other eye witnesses to the phenomenon. Local television news is startingt to cover the story. Biologists looking for evidence may be surprised to see the cottonwood leaves growing twenty times larger than normal leaves. Something perhaps related to the lights are causing phenomenal growth of giant leaves. There has been reports of this phenomenal growth in connection with Crop Circles. James felt this growth was caused by alien contact and electromagnetic energy fields produced by the lights. The key point is that there is something tangible is happening than is being recorded. Photographs seem to record light energy fields and saucers flying through the air. SWEDEN CHEMTRAILS AND WEIRD WEATHER REPORTED ORUSTISLAND ISLAND -- Chemtrails have been seen frequently on off the west coast of Sweden. Ulla-Britt M., a resident of Hensa, a town on Orust, reported, "In November 1998, I was standing on the balcony, third floor of the local government building where I work. I was having a cig (cigarette)with my coffee. Suddenly I heard a whining noise from above, and when I looked up, there were two airplanes racing at high speed, leaving a contrail behind. Suddenly the last (second) one came close to the first, and my heart nearly stopped. I was thinking a catastrophe would happen. Nothing happened, and I was surprised to see them linked, as if the two had become one." In recent weeks, Ulla-Britt added, she has seen them again "and they have a strange sound like whining, and this is how I know they are there even if I cannot see them. I am not afraid of them any more but I amreally worried about what they are spraying the sky with." "Often, specifically now in the summer time, I have problems with running eyes and nose, some coughing and tintinnitis and a sick feeling from the stomach. There is no clear sky any more. The chemtrails stay in the sky, and they move like a coverlet across the sky." On Thursday, June 20, 2000, unusually heavy rains blanketed south-central Sweden. Heavy rains flooded the Ljungan River near Aage, which overflowed its banks and swept away several houses. "Heavy rains have flooded roads and railways, isolating communities and shutting down all northbound train traffic from Stockholm." (See USA Today for July 20,2000, "Rains engulf central Sweden," page 5A) Thanks to UFO Roundup AUSTRALIA CHEMTRAILS APPEAR QUEENSLAND COAST -- Chemtrails were observed over the Gold Coast on July 6, 2000, during a local festival. The Australian UFO Research Network reports low-flying airplanes sprayed chemtrails on the beaches at Brunswick Heads, a port city about 200 kilometers south of Brisbane. Nearly two weeks later, on July 19, 2000, "starting at 7:00 AM several large aircraft flying at low altitude crisscrossed the sky in all directions spraying chemtrails. Within a few minutes, the famous clear blue Australian sky turned cloudy and hazy. Diane Harrison reports, "For the first time in history here, it was almost impossible to see the beautiful mountains to the west." Byron Bay was the target of the spraying and "To our astonishment, the clouds did not disperse, and they were very long, all the way down Australia's Gold Coast." People stopped on the side of the road and got out of their cars to watch the incredible spectacle. I know of a few people who took photographs. The event resembled a war, as airplanes 'attacked' Byron Bay from all directions. The 'contrails' were 'turned' on just before Byron Bay and 'turned off' after the planes passed over us." The sky "resembled a load of match sticks that was dumped on the floor. These 'contrails' did not behave as ordinary contrails. While one side of these contrails remained straight, the other side dispersed, resembling a comb or a feather." Thanks to Diane Harrison, BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT -- All real estate agents are not the same? Some real estate agents or sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced. Others are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities. When you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest investments! Remember, the majority of people do not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems. Picking the right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find out, "What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs. To get a free copy of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com. We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and US. US GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO alert at Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now available for distribution to the public. Sam Sherman's audio documentary tape called EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual voice recordings provided by the Air Force. During this event 12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down low over the runways at Edwards AFB. Tower operator Sgt. Chuck Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command. Sgt. Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment where he verifies the event as it is heard on the archival recordings. The UFOs are described and a decision is made to launch F-106 fighter interceptors. You are there for an important part of UFO history. Hear it for yourself, it's the best UFO tape ever made. Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00 for shipping -- total $16.95 -- (for overseas orders-out of US - add $6.00 shipping cost -- total -- $20.95) you can send either a personal check or money order to: Independent International Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New Jersey 08857. PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO shots available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham Bethune.. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055 MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention I recommended you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2000 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the Files on their Web Sites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item appeared. Send your letters to Majorstar@aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:10:10 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:37:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille >Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:32:34 -0400 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:29:48 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Greg, I consider you an authority, or at least someone with great experience in the field of Alien Abduction. Perhaps you can enlighten my perspective. <snip> >But how much do you know about the case you saw on that NOVA >program? Do you know anything other than what you saw in the >short segment they showed you? Do you know what the child might >have told his parents before Budd came on the scene? Are you >sure you're not judging too quickly? <snip> Let me turn this one around: did you see the NOVA program? Do you know anything other than what you saw in the short segment they showed you? Do you know what the child might have told his parents before Budd came on the scene? Are you sure you're not judging too quickly? I know, this is cut and paste. But since you're asking me all the questions and provide no answers, you either did not see the program or did not ask Budd about this short segment. Can you be more precise? <snip> >>1. A researcher without a degree in medical therapy has no >>freaking right to play with people's mind. His _only_ concern >>should be to put the people in touch with a professional. > >The first assumption here is that researchers play with >abductees' minds. Could we establish the truth of that, before >referring to it as some kind of certainty? <snip> Not really an assumption, a guideline. If you know freaking researchers who play with people's mind, please forward them my post. Perhaps I should clarify some definition of playing with people's mind: _Anytime_ a researcher comes in contact with an _alleged_ _victim_ _of_ _an_ _alien_ _abduction_ he _must_, unless a therapist himself, _seek_ a professional therapist because an _out_ _of_ _this_ _world_ _experience_ is bound to cause an _out_ _of_ _this_ _world_ _human_ _reaction_. This is psychology 101. Otherwise, the researcher obviously does not know what he is doing and is bound to fall into BS 101. <snip> >But exactly what kind of professional help is appropriate for >people who come to abduction investigators? From what I've seen, >from sitting in on Budd's first interviews with people who come >to him, and from reading many of the letters he gets, people >approach him because they feel they're having concrete >experiences. Not abduction experiences; it's rare for him to see >anyone who states outright, "I'm being abducted by aliens." <snip> Ok. Got that: people go to Budd because but don't think they got abducted. <snip> >Instead, people claim to remember, as you or I remember what we >had for breakfast this morning, lights in their rooms, beings by >their beds, periods of missing time, and other concrete >experiences they've never been able to explain. They've also >never been able to talk about these things with anyone. When >they read Budd's books or see him talk on TV, they discover that >somebody else knows about these experiences. That's why they >want to talk to him. <snip> Ok. Got that too: now people go to Budd because they think they got abducted. <snip> >So, Serge, what kind of professional helps people who think >they've had these experiences? Surely it's not a psychotherapist <snip> Of course I'm talking about a psychotherapist. >-- unless you're assuming that anyone who thinks they've had >these experiences is suffering from some sort of >psychopathology. And if you're assuming that, would you cite >some evidence? You might start by refuting the studies that show >it's _not_ true. <snip> Cold, sweat and shivers, Greg. Are you telling me that you do not know the difference between psychotherapy and psychopathology? ??? !!! Allow me. One should have the possibility to live a life with a minimum of dignity and a half-decent chance for happiness. Things happen sometimes that make those goals impossible to even begin to grab, when serenity becomes that one drop of water you will never get in a desert of shattered dreams. You may be a fool then. But you're not crazy. You've just lost yourself. The psychotherapist is, usually, the one dude (or dudess?) who will listen to what you have to say, without compromise, without judging, without leading. What has the abductee lost? Easy: security. If you can't figure out that one, I suggest you paint your car in fluorescent red and drive at Budd's home with a barrel of tar and loads of chicken feather. Your responsibility Greg is to the abductees. It starts and ends there. It's the only way to go. Can't undestrand why I have to tell you. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:39:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:14:54 -0400 >From: Brookesmith Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children >Sender: The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Given the lack of indisputable facts about "abductions", we >might do our children the favor of sticking to the few facts we >do know, and not encouraging them to fantasize unhappily over >possible fictions. Why Greg cannot understand this simple, >protective point, whose importance overrides that of any >"information" gained by doing otherwise, continues to baffle me. My dear friend Peter has missed the point -- abduction investigators (the ones I know, anyway) talk to children to relieve their anxiety, not to pump information from them. Beyond that, Peter's position here reminds me of his very curious view of Occam's Razor some time back. Occam's Razor, he apparently believes, gives him the right to tell others that they must hold his own opinion, in any debate about things we don't know much about. (The debate in our case, his and mine, was about aliens on earth. Peter invoked Occam's Razor to enforce his view that -- since we don't know whether aliens exist at all -- we have no business saying we think they're here. This is like someone who knows nothing about Iceland saying we'd better not believe reports that people there eat rotten shark meat, simply because we don't do that in Britain or the US. (But as it happens, people in Iceland do eat rotten shark meat, and, very rashly, last night I had some that had been shipped to New York. I mean no disrespect to the Icelandic nation when I say this was an experience I won't soon repeat. The stuff smells like pure ammonia; because I'm well-bred, and because we've been talking about childen here, I won't describe the stench in the mouth that passes for its taste, except to say that it lingers on the palate for hours.) >John [Rimmer], incidentally, has spoken to many an abductee. >His book on the subject was a pioneer in the field. I know some >other nice things about him too, but do not wish to draw his >attention to me, lest he encourage others. John has unfortunately trumped Peter's praise, by very constructively responding to my critique of him, thus raising the level of debate and forcing me to acknowledge weaknesses in my own position. If John really knows a lot about abductions, he managed to hide that in the post I responded to. That suggests one further, and very sad, pitfall for skeptics who fight abduction belief with derision, not facts -- they dumb themselves down. As I said in another post, I'm off for two weeks (to Peter's and John's part of the world, more or less). So I'll temporarily drop out of these debates. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Brigham From: Tim D. Brigham <Dellamorte@mad.scientist.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:54:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:43:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Brigham >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:01:36 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Tim, >Are you only accepting the defendant's (John's) opinion or >looking at the facts. Several hundred pages of evidence >represents evidence from many sources and viewpoints. Wake up >and smell the coffee. >Gary Gary, I smell somethin, but it ain't coffee. Seriously, I don't accept J Carpenter's statement as fact. But I also believe I and someone else asked for the details on who has confirmed that any files other than Carpenter's wife's have been returned uncensored. Some folks are saying 5-7 others, and some will only confirm hers. I think that is an important point. We asked a straight question, if you can answer it, feel free. If not, say so. Also, the bone I was picking was that if it was apparently known when this was brought up that the allegations came out after an ugly divorce and came from someone who obviously has an agenda (his ex), well _that_ fact should have been made public too, no, since everything else seemingly was? (I'm not aiming this at you, since you didn't bring it up here). But _if_ his ex-wife's file is the only one confirmed as being sent out uncensored, don't you think that might be relevant? As for the "several hundred pages of evidence"... sorry, but other than internet postings from many people (some of which seem to contradict each other) I haven't seen anything. I don't expect for the evidence or documentation to be made public at this time, but come on, you can't tell me to that I'm ignoring it if it hasn't been made available, can you? Anyway, I don't wish to carry on about this, but I do wish it could be clarified how many files are _confirmed_ to have been sent out without being censored for personal info, and how this was confirmed. Other than that I will just say that I hope appropriate actions are taken by appropriate people, and will be happy to add my support to any requests that this be done, once the facts are established as opposed to just 'being told how it is'. Tim
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:05:02 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:45:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 21:11:45 +0300 >From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> >Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:54:26 -0400 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com> >>Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>From: Elizabeth Hammond <lizzz@worldnet.att.net> >>>Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:41:27 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:21:29 -0400 >>>>From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca> >>>>Subject: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>There is such a big difference between sleep paralysis and >>>>abduction, that I have trouble believing anyone could confuse >>>>the two or even suggest the first when the second is claimed by >>>>the victim. >Hi Elizabeth, Hi Joseph, hi list! >Abduction versus sleep paralysis ain�t a simple thing, I agree >with that. I wrote an article about in Finnish, will try to >translate it in English. In the meantime, I include a pile of >links you may go to read, although the majority of them are >familiar to you already. >My opinion (which is a result of writing the forementioned >article): >1) abduction-experiences aren�t always explained with sleep > paralysis. >2) Some abductions are definitely sleep paralysis >Sleep paralysis isn�t always total paralysis, there�s part >paralysis and whole paralysis, and meny between them. One >hypothesis is, that you have "suffered" from hypocalemic >periodic paralysis, which is very similar with sleep paralysis. >But I�m not claiming it was 100 % sure hypocalemic periodic >paralysis. <snip> >>>The abject fear comes after the fact. The next day, when you >>>realize something has happened. Or, if you remember bits and >>>pieces, even more terror at what was done to you or what may >>>have been done that you are unable to remember. This was not so >>>with the sleep paralysis. I am not crippled with fear just >>>remembering it as I am with abduction memories. Once it ended, >>>it was over. A nasty incident, to be sure, but not one that >>>fills me with dread as my abduction memories do. >Funny, my abduction was a positive experiece. _If_ it was an >abduction. <snip> Dear Minna, Liz, Listerines and of course, EBK, I am not an expert on Sleep Paralysis, neither am I a researcher except for my own experiences. And so I can speak only about my experiences here. I shall do that now, regarding the approximately two times I have experienced sleep paralysis. Perhaps someone who is more expert may comment on what I have experienced. The two times this happened to me I was wide awake. I simply woke up and could not move a muscle. I was at first, extremely freightened. But as soon as I determined that everything else seemed to be working, that is I was breathing, my heart was beating in my chest and I was able to see, I just lay there and waited. I then determined that I would just stay where I was until someone came to my aid. On both occasions where this occured, it was daylight... the morning sun shining brightly on my bed, lighting up the room with a reassuring brightness. Within just a few minutes, maybe one or two, at most, I was able to begin normal movement. My mother experiences the same thing on occasion. She is the one who told me, each time, "it's nothing Jamey. That happens to me too sometimes." End of being afraid. There were a number of occasions when I woke up, or thought I woke up, with a bad person, an evil monster of some kind, in my room. I had a feeling of doom. It was as if I were the poor bastard in the horror movie for whom the shark music was playing. On the three or maybe more occasions when this happened to me, it became obvious, as I came more and more awake, that I was sort of half asleep or half awake, and that I was coming out of a really bad dream. There was also the extant condition of not being able to move and worse, not being able to call out for help. And for all the times I perceive that I was taken by aliens etc., I always am able to distinguish among the nightmares, the sleep paralysis and the abduction scenarios. Always! So to me, personally, I've always known the difference. This hopefully and hopefully obviously, knocks down the association which many folks make on sleep paralysis vs. the abduction scenario. At least for me. Does that make sense to you guys (and ladies?)? Best personal regards, Jimbo 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:36:59 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 03:03:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 04:55:15 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 21:54:43 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mulvey >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:48:41 -0400 >>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:16:22 -0400 (EDT) >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Hi Jim, >><snip> >Mortellaro writes: >>You ask where I am coming from? OK. I don't like it >>when people get flamed. Here or anywhere else. Even when and if >>they have done wrong. > >and,... > >>I have done nothing to help the situation on this list except to >>intervene when the flames got high... too high. > ><snip> > >Hello EBK, Docca, hi All, > >Jim, I know Errol. That man reads each and every posting that is >submitted to UpDates carefully. The _only_ time that a posting >is returned to the sender is when it is a _blatant_ flame. The >guy just won't publish it period. I know that _you_ know this >too about EBK. The proof (if you need it) is in recently >returned posts of yours (to me) that he "forwarded" to me but >did not publish on the List. Since any mail posted on UpDates is presented for viewing by EBK, I presume that you are quite correct in your statement that if a mail is not posted, it ain't worth sharing with the rest of the list. I got no problem with that. >Knowing you, I'm sure you'll cry "crony-ism" or some other such >nonsense because of my personal relationship/friendship with >Errol, but nonetheless, the basic _fact_ that he doesn't publish >"Flames" remains clearly undisputed. >Who's "Flaming" who Jimbo? I see no flames, nor even smoke here, John. And while I am at it, I attach the post you refer to below, for all to observe and re-read. There is a line which I have used here on UpDates on two occasions, it comes from Frank Herbert's Dune. "I show you a bolt of cloth and you cut it to your own fit." Nowhere in my post do I mention names, not yours or anyone else's. That was done consciously. Why do you believe my words to be directed at you? There is no reason. After my angry response to your post, I wrote an apology to the List for sending it in the first place. It was published. I also wrote a private apology to Errol, asking him to excuse my anger. I do not apologize for my angst, but I apologize for taking it on this List. Something which I recommend highly. Apologizing. Are you hurt? And why is that? As it turns out, there are a few folks on this List, myself included, who need to chill out a bit. And with all due respect, I think you should place yourself on the list. >All I did was to respond to your outrageous claims and >nonsensical intrusions into an issue that was of tremendous >importance to a lot of people. I don't know or care what you >'think' my motivations were for going public with this once I >had confirmed it. All I knew for sure was that I was not going >to become another "silent partner" in this three-year-old >violation against 140 of my fellow abductees. I can recall no outrageous claims or nonsensical intrusions. As you so gratiously pointed out, if something were that nonsensical, I doubt if Errol would post it. So if it is posted, it is acceptable to EBK. See? With all due respect, and I do respect your passion and focus, always said that, I too am entitled to an opinion. I voiced it on a number of occasions, never pointing a finger at you specifically, but having my mail and my person impaled by the master. You are good at it I must admit. I also recognize that there are many on this list who read my posts, and yours. I shall leave it to them to decide if I am wrong in my opines, or if someone else is wrong. I credit most folks here with enough brains to make their own minds up in the matter of Carpenter vs. >From day one, all you have contributed is fantasy. ie; that I >somehow 'implicated' Budd Hopkins in all this business via past >association, and the 'impression' you were trying to give >people that you were somehow meaningfully associated with Budd >or IF for longer than just the few months that it was. Good Lord, John, I never did anything of the kind. I specifically recall your accusations about my misrepresenting my association with Budd. That's untrue, and I do not believe it is relevant. I also recall your bringing this subject up as well as others. You are quite mistaken, John Velez, over a number of points you made in various posts. Not only do these points not have any relevance, but they are no ones' business on line. I did not bring them up, you did. And never did I misrepresent what I did, for how long I did it and for what reasons. Never. >My comments to you were published by EBK, went undisputed by >Greg Sandow (who is fairly close to Budd, reads this list,) nor >did you receive any rebuttals to my statements from Budd or >anyone on else on the IF committee. (Some of which read this >list!) In my post to you I openly invited anyone and everyone >involved to cut me down at the ankles on the List if I was >telling a lie or misrepresenting any of the facts. No one likes to go one on one with you John. I find that line of reasoning a bit of a skew. Especially those who were once associated with you. This can be dangerous to one's health. >It never happened. >"If I'm lyin' I'm cryin' and you don't see any tears in my eyes >do you? ;) >Jimmy, I am not trying to minimize the fact that you helped Budd >and IF. Your help was deeply appreciated and, you _did_ help. >That is not in question and I said so in my original. You just >have the habit of a trout fisherman when proclaiming the 'size' >of the fish. It's a different story when you try to paint that >help that you extended as an "association" that was more than it >was in reality. By these words I must presume that you think I exaggerated some things. What did I exaggerate, please? >Your "association" with Budd and IF is not what you publicly >proclaim it to be. That bit of exaggeration was just plain >deceptive on your part and unfair to mugs like like Peter >Robbins, myself, and a few others who poured blood, sweat, and >tears into the IF pot for years - for free. Yet you seem unable >to understand why I would be offended at what you imply in terms >of your own relationship/contribution to IF. The moment you >dragged Budd's name into all this and started telling 'fish >stories' I was _forced_ to respond. I did not drag Budd's name into anything. I merely posted a mail in which I asked who the innocent were. People, whether you like it or not, were asking me, of all people, whether you were referring to Mr. Hopkins. I asked what others were asking me. But were concerned over going three rounds with you. Me, I frankly don't care what you think any more. >All you've done since then is cry baby shoes left and right on >the List about all the "flames and finger pointing" that goes on >in this forum. Crying no! I did mention flaming and finger pointing. Like, as if you are tho only one on this list to whom such should apply? John, I used to think very highly of you on a personal basis. When it comes to your efforts at supporting abductees, you are tireless. But you do go off on tangents with people sometimes and you are _not_ always right on the money. For example, you are not right on the money in my case. >What "Flames?" EBK doesn't publish them. You _do_ know that >right? I said exactly that.... so? >Whether you agree with my methods or not, this issue needed >public exposure and a public dialog. Both of those 'goals' have >been attained. The only thing that remains is for Carpenter to >do right by those abductees and inform them that he has sold >their private information and reports. Something he should have >done _before_ the fact. He has admitted on this List in his most >recent response to Ann Mulvey that he "agreed" that the >abductees should be informed. (Why he didn't do it himself three >years ago is a mystery to me, but all that really matters is >that they be informed post haste.) >So Docca, where is this "great injustice" that has been >perpetrated against Carpenter and Ufology? Oh that. Heck that's easy! Now, your wish and mine and the wishes of many abductees, of sharing of information, is not going to happen. Remember your request a few months ago, requesting that researchers share information? Sure you do. As do I. Whether right or wrong, because of the issue of Carpenter et al, that is not gonna happen. Am I blaming you? Never said that at all. All I did say was that on this venue and on others, so much BS has been said about the issue and the players as to negate that effort for a long time. Did I ever blame you? No. Did I ever point directly to you? No. So why do you accuse me of same? Is it not true that so many others have posted here and elsewhere on these issues? Yes. And is it true that many exaggerations have been made in the process? Yes. You, sir, are not the only crusader, not the only supporter of doing what is right. And you are not the only one who writes or posts on these issues. >All I see is; Carpenter copping to having made a huge boner by >agreeing that these folks should be informed, a healthy dialog >on this and other lists about witness/abductee rights, and what >is required to protect those rights. And then there's _you_ >Jimmy. >Flaming and pointing fingers. >Have you snapped to the fact yet that _you_ are the only one >(abductee) that has consistently tried to derail the proceedings >by introducing non-issues as well as unnecessary distractions >and accusations? Actually I cannot fathom what you mean by derail the proceedings. Perhpas you can quote my efforts at derailing. I for sure don't believe I did any such thing. Can it be that since you incorrectly thought that I refered to you in the post below, that perhaps you might be wrong about other things as well? Derail? Not. >Don't for a moment believe that it has gone unnoticed by other >abductees who happen to care deeply about this and the outcome. I am happy that other abductees have the oppportunity of making their own minds up as to who is right or wrong. Who is wronged as well. >In all my posts (which are archived for all to see,) I have >never tried to focus on anything other than the rights of those >abductees to know. I have _fought_ to keep this centered on the >issue of privacy and anonymity and _not_ a witch hunt of >Carpenter himself. Go back, read the posts. Cheeses, John, where are you going with this? Why do you tell us that by implication, you have done right and someone else has done wrong? I never accused you of a witch hunt. I have used those words, but not refering to you. Taken strictly form my posts,. you will see that I have accused you of no such thing. Uh, my posts too, are available in the archives. >I'll ask you for the last time, if you cannot contribute >something which helps us to get these folks informed, would you >please stop working against it with all these rants about >'flames, finger pointing, and the fools who do it.' I shall post my opinions. Errol and the List shall determine if there is merit in the posting of it and in the reading of it. I see no rational thought behind your saying that I have worked against you personally. Man, you need to take that vacation you mentioned. You are seeing things which do not exist. >If you want to know who the fool is that engages in such >divisive and destructive practices check out the mug in the >nearest mirror. I am sorry you feel that I am a fool. And I am concerned that you believe (and I believe you do believe it) that I am divisive and destructive. It just ain't so. What in heaven's name are you so upset about and why over me? Ever think that maybe you are and have been, wrong about my motives? You are, John. Quite incorrect, sir. I have _never_ attempted to hurt you or your efforts. I have always supported you. Then, something snapped. Hell, if it was me what snapped, I sure don't remember. Could it be that you are indeed mistaken about the old Mort? You are you know. >Please man, give it a rest. If you cannot help the issue & >these abductees, stop trying to hurt it. The only issue I feel obligated to address at this moment is to refute your ugly accusations as to my intentions. You have used a number of really strong words in referring to me. Devisive Destructive Exaggerating my association with people Blatant flaming Working against _your_ efforts Good Lord man. Who is exaggerating now? In truth I have actually loverd and respected you. And neither Errol nor anyone else, mayt naysay me. In truth. Just aks Docca the Kanappy. Go ahead. Aks. Jimbo
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:18:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 03:06:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Velez >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:13:44 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:49:06 -0400 >>From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 04:38:29 -0400 >>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:24:48 -0400 (EDT) >>>>From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com >>>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>>Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:13:36 -0400 >>>>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Ann, hi All, Ann wrote: >>>>>John, >>>>>Can you please tell this list if you intend to notify the 120 >>>>>families who have remained ignorant for over three years that >>>>>you have sold their abduction files? >>>>>We all await your response. And we wait, and we wait, and we wait,.... The fact is; John Carpenter has stated that he agrees that the abductees should be informed but simultaneously offers the rather 'lame' excuse that "tracking people down" would pose some kind of major stumbling block. A few List members have informed Mr. Carpenter of the wonders of the modern Internet. (in terms of utilizing it to find people who may have moved.) I am waiting to see how long it takes before he actually begins notifying people. He shouldn't "hold up" the notification process because a few people may have relocated in the interim. Notify the ones he _can_ reach _now_, and then take the time to track down the rest. How ever much 'time' it takes to do it. If he agrees that they should be informed then I'd like to see him back up his words with deeds. Time's wasting. Been three years. How much longer? >The above might be somewhat of a dramatic illustration, but I >don't think it's too far off the mark, should the number of >folks on this discussion list insisting that these families be >told the truth, remain in the single digits. Ann, there are more than just a few. I've been getting e-mail from psychologists and social workers that are outraged at all of this. Mr. Carpenter should move on this notification issue in a timely manner because his peers are watching. You've been _great_ throughout all of this Ann. You are a 'Class act' all the way. Thank you for being here and for speaking up. I bow deeply at the waist and tip my hat to you. ;) Warm regards, John
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: P-47: Bulletin of Anomolous Experiences (BAE) From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@JPS.NET> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:21:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 03:37:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: P-47: Bulletin of Anomolous Experiences (BAE) Feel free to repost to other mailing lists. For those interested, the complete five year BAE run is available on CD-ROM directly from Dr. David Gotlib who has now moved back to Canada. I received mine in the mail today and I am extremely pleased. The price is $20 postpaid and it comes in an elegant black jewel case box. BAE is a necessary addendum for added perspective into the UFO abduction debate and should be consulted and referenced in any meaningful discussion of the topic. The following is from the introductory read me file: Bulletin of Anomalous Experience CD-ROM This CD-ROM contains the entire five-year run of Bulletin of Anomalous Experience (BAE) as JPEG scans of the original issues. The scans are arranged in directories by volume and issue number. Also included is a networking directory and a complete five-year index (both were supplements to 1994 issues). A Bit of History ---------------- BAE (called "Ratchet Patrol" for the first two issues, until a casual observer of the newsletter said "Rat Shit Patrol? What's that?" and I decided I needed a better name) started out as a medium for virtual discussions about the UFO abduction experience among interested mental health professionals. This original idea evolved quickly into a more comprehensive bimonthly newsletter covering the broader range of extraordinary ("paranormal") experiences. The "virtual discussions" continued but were to some extent eclipsed by original articles and an extensive review of relevant scientific and medical literature (as well as UFO and abduction publications). Hilary Evans once described BAE as "comfortably tread[ing] the narrow path between the groves of academia and the dust and heat of the marketplace, inquiring and suggesting, not asserting or insisting." BAE allied itself neither with the skeptics nor the true believers; instead, its guiding principle was simply thoughtful study of the abduction experience as an eminently worthwhile scientific enterprise. The issues were produced using an early desktop publishing program and Xeroxed by a local print shop (I did the first few issues myself in my office). Content, not the form, was always the point. Although I stopped producing BAE in December 1994, I continue to get mail requesting back issues, or inquiring if BAE is still published. Those letters were the inspiration for the production of the CDROM, as it is unlikely that BAE will resume publication anytime soon. Dr. David Gotlib can be contacted at: David Gotlib MD 79 Hilton Avenue Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 3E8 Email dgotlib@sympatico.ca Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:09:34 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 04:56:32 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mortellaro >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 07:34:38 -0400 (EDT) >From: Corky Kippenberger <KIPPENBERGER@cs.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:19:38 -0500 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Gary, >Let me cut to the chase, please. >1.) Do you have _any_ source, at all, that has told you that >John Carpenter released files that were unsanitized to _anyone_, >other than what Elizabeth Carpenter has told or shown you? >2.) Did you not think it unethical when Elizabeth handed you the >list of subjects in John's case files? Is this how it happened? >3.) When you stated that _most_ of the files were not sanitized, >what were you basing that statement on? >Simple questions. Can you answer them without moth dancing? I'd >like it clear and simple, Gary, because I've read all the >messages that are relevant to this issue, and I still am not >getting it... Who supplied you with what? I don't need names >other than Elizabeths, nor do I want them. Corky, Listers and EBK, Good questions, ones which I feel should be answered before any further time goes by. If indeed the names were transferred to NIDS santitized, then this more than mitigates guilt. Unless I missed a post toasty, I have not seen the answers. And if this is destructive, I shall eat my hat. I got a lot of hats. I wear them all. Every department I have consulted for or done some vounteer work for, has given me a hat to wear. I would very much prefer to eat the NYState Police Communications hat. It seems to be the tastiest and as a consequence, a lot easier to digest than the others. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Brigham From: Tim D. Brigham <Dellamorte@mad.scientist.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:26:14 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:00:22 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Brigham >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 07:34:38 -0400 (EDT) >From: Corky Kippenberger <KIPPENBERGER@cs.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >To: updates@sympatico.ca >1.) Do you have _any_ source, at all, that has told you that >John Carpenter released files that were unsanitized to _anyone_, >other than what Elizabeth Carpenter has told or shown you? I was finally able to locate where I had heard that 5 or 7 (couldn't recall which) files had been returned unsanitized. The first post, to my knowledge, which states this - >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 02:42:35 -0400 >Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:56:31 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Re: Velez, Andrus And Carpenter - Velez <snip> >What you didn't know because you _didn't_ ask is, I have been >getting information from (now 7 of them) the abductees whose >files were sold. They have all been reporting that the personal >info in the files was _not_ "blacked out" at the time of sale as >Andrus and Bigelow claim. To Bigelow's credit files have been >returned to one individual that I know of, but... nothing was >"blacked out." The name, address, social security number, >medical records were all there in plain view. Part of the sale >material included audio and videotapes of hypnosis sessions and >the medical records of many of the abductees. Maybe I'm alone in this, but this is confusing the hell out of me. John has since said that he could only confirm that one file (which turned out to be that of J Carpenter's ex) was sent unsanitized. John, I can appreciate you are done with this matter for now, but could you please straighten out this contradiction? Did I miss a post, misunderstand something, or did you not address this? How did the individuals you were in contact with know that their info was sent unsanitized, btw, if it wasn't returned? I think the original source for the assertion that files were sent unsanitized is _very_ important, and I am trying to figure out what has been confirmed, how and by who. I'm going directly by your words here. I've asked the same of Gary Hart who claimed that a 'majority' were sent unsanitized, and I await his response as well. Just want to have all the facts about what I/we've been upset about, y'know. Given this being straightened out, I'm going to sit back and see if the 'wheels of justice' actually start to turn or not. Thanks, Tim
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Strickland From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:44:05 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:09:33 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Strickland >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:12:20 -0400 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:01:35 +0100 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dear John R., Greg S., and List Members, I've got to try to debate this issue (sleep paralysis vs. physical reality) though I'm not sure why. Both of you make your arguments based on individualized, "selective" learning and experience... as I do. Only my knowledge about this subject is not based on microscopic examination of my psyche (although that has been done) nor through reading volumes on the subject (which I need to do more of, I admit). I learned through experience. No "Buck Rogers" monster of the 50s could _even_ come close to what showed up in my bedroom at age 5. My imagination isn't that rich. I remember most of each of the "visits." I remember the lies, the "physical exams," the pain, and there was always a small measure of euphoria in learning something new during each of those visits (thank God). Maybe that's what allowed me to keep my sanity. I have never been hypnotized to recall any of this. I reported to my parents when the "first visit" occured (which was the first visit I consciously accepted as "real" at age 8 (partly because it was broad daylight and there were 3 others with me who saw and experienced the same thing I did, and because I was nearly hysterical. I could not get my mind around the reality of it.) But, in actuality, the "visits" started at age 5 (before I could read) and continued sporadically until I burnt myself on their laser in my bedroom at age 13 (that was about 1958... before lasers were invented). I was in danger of being abducted for good that time, and I knew it. There were 2 burns that went to the bone (examined by a MD burn specialist 2 days after the incident occured). One of the burn scars is still visible. It is _not_ a scoop mark. I remember exactly how, when, and where I got those burns. I remember when that happened, and how shocked I was that this was no nightmare, it was all real. I was not hallucinating. I was not dreaming. I was screaming in pain. A "doctor" came through the wall of my bedroom, walked into the bathroom and I was told to go to him and be treated; that he would take the pain away. The "doctor" used something that looked like a tire pressure guage and must have injected something into the burns to kill the pain. There was no pain at the site of the burns after that, which the burn specialist could not understand... especially after he stuck a long needle into each of the burns to see how deep they were. He turned sheet white. He announced to my mother and me that the burns went to the bone (about 4" deep on my calf.) I could tell he did not believe me when I said I didn't really know how I got the burns, but I thought I had burnt myself on a hot water bottle. That was my idea..."they" didn't even know what a hot water bottle was! I had to show them how you could, possibly, get a bad burn from a hot water bottle. I really didn't want to be taken away for good, and I thought that they would ask me if I wanted to come live with them, just to make sure I wouldn't be able to tell anyone what had been going on all these years, and how I _really_ got those burns. I told the one I called "Daniel" that I was flattered by his offer to come live with them, and that I would really like to explore the heavens with them, but I would want to come back and visit my family after a few years. He said that wasn't possible, that I would get very sick if I came back. He knew when I was lying, and I knew he knew that what I felt and what I said was only a half-truth. I told "Daniel" that I wouldn't tell anyone about them and if I did, he could always find me and come back and get me. Several months later, I was visited again by 2 lizard beings who had been with "Daniel" on several occasions when I was visited as a child. I was told that "Daniel" was dead, his ship had crashed over Canada or Alaska. I did not have another "visit" from the familiar ones again. I did have an encounter in 1992, but when they found out they could not block my mind, they quickly left me. They have come back on a couple of occasions since for "check-up" visits, but I am not at all sure that the most recent visit in 1998 was anything more than a dream. It certainly did not have the quality of "realness" that I have experienced in the past. But, then my mind is certainly not as sharp as it was when I was younger. With hindsight, maturity, and thanks to many of your contributions on UFO UpDates, I have come to the conclusion that what we all believe to be reality is also relative, probably based on a whole lot of factors, but which we are just beginning to understand. So, the debate continues here on how we can fit our preconceived ideas about how things ought to be, or should be... if we could just change the shape of the hole into which we are all trying so hard to push our minds. I'm certainly open to any suggestions that would incorporate the above scenarios. Remember though, I carry the proof on my body. You need to come up with an argument that will refute that evidence. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:53:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:11:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:37:46 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 13:05:20 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Sandow >>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:55:27 -0700 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>6) The French wave of 1954 still holds the record for all times >>>and places: ( 431 listings for October alone ). Mars was at some >>>intermediate distance, but Venus made a very close approach to >>>Earth, as little as 0.267 AU in the midst of this highly >>>localized wave. The "spill over" into neighboring countries, >>>long presumed by French observers at the time, has yet to >>>materialize in my records. With the exception of Italy, this >>>flap seemed to be localized to France .. all of France, and >>>almost only France. Sunspot activity was virtually rock-bottom, >>>an average of 7 sunspots/diem for all of October 1954. >>Here's a wonderful opportunity for psychosocial analysis -- but >>please, not from amateurs. Let's hear from someone with >>professional knowledge of both sociology and French culture. >>What was it in 1950's France that made people likely to report >>UFOs? (A question worth asking even if the UFOs turn out to be >>genuine anomalies.) >Greg, Larry, Francofiles everywhere: >They lost Indochina, and the Algerian War began. Hello Bob, Greg and all: Vietnam and North Africa had been festering for years if not decades. Whatever stresses this placed on the French at home, I doubt it had much to do with a UFO wave with a shape like this: http://www.jps.net/larryhat/YDAY54.html The histogram shown is for all of Europe for all of 1954. If I had limited it to France alone, it would be all the more striking. It would put the singularity of this "shock wave" in a more stark relief; one which does not suggest, to me at least, the effects of long standing international disputes. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:00:20 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:14:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:37:46 -0400 >>>Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 13:05:20 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:55:27 -0700 >>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> Hello Again! I forgot to add that I have a nice little file I can send, which better illustrates the singular nature of the French Wave of 1954. This is the same type of histogram as on my website, but with Britain and the rest of Europe removed; i.e. France only. Please email me offlist: <larryhat@jps.net>and ask for FRANCE54.GIF Its a short file, under 8 KB, and worth a look. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:17:24 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 - Hatch >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:37:00 -0500 (CDT) >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@JPS.NET> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:09:46 -0700 >>Subject: UpDate: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hello all: >>As promised (or threatened) I finally got some preliminary >>results from my correlation of monthly sunspot counts and UFO >>sightings frequencies. >>All data below are for the 36 year period from Jan 1940 to Dec >>1975... a period where there is good data overlap between >>sunspot.dat and the *U* Database. >>First the bad news: I had hoped that either UFO sightings would >>increase during sunspot maxima (possibly indicating a probable >>cause) or else decrease, indicating UFO avoidance of highly >>damaging solar radiation. >>In fact, I found no significant difference at all! ><snip> >>Thus, events per month are the virtually the same regardless of >>sunspot activity. Alas. >Larry: >This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >unidentifieds. >However, Persinger et al have argued that Sunspot activity is >related to UFOs and other geophysical phenomena in a non-direct >way. They insist that UFO sightings correlate with these other >phenomena only if you use an appropriate delay. In the case of >earthquakes, it can be as much as 6 months. For Sunspots, about >a week. The Sunspot thing maybe makes sense because of eth >transit time of particles en route. I don't buy the earthquake >relationship at all. I've looked at the data, and it doesn't >jive. >Could you try running the data again, but this time including a >week's delay (or maybe 3 days) on either side, just to please >the Persinger adherents? >If it still doesn't work, then Persinger's TST is yet again >unsupported by the data. Dear Chris: Please see subsequent message on this general theme. 1) Actually, there is a small negative correlation, i.e. UFOs do tend to appear more often in periods of low sunspot activity. However this correlation is so small (2-3%) for all reports of all types here, that I started breaking the data down by Attributes and so on. Then I started getting more interesting looking results. 2) There is no way to "shift" the data by days or weeks. I have monthly averages for sunspots only. I could shift my "tagged" records ahead or back a month, but I highly doubt this would have any much if any effect on the findings. I have no plans to "tweek" with the data, until I squeeze out what information I can from a consistent data set. 3) What small correlation I saw in part 1 of this study seems inconsistent with Persinger's (et.al) theories, at least to me. Later installments are even less consistent with "earthlights" and so on. 4) The *U* Database is anything but "raw data". Perhaps you are thinking of some other database or catalog. I have been filtering out junk sightings for years. If I hadn't, *U* would have several times the present 17,660+ events listed, collected over the 15+ years it took to do all this. I throw out old sightings all the time. Here is a list of my sources: http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html Please allow a little time for the file to load. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Rivera From: Jean-Luc Rivera <JLRIV1@aol.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:41:55 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:19:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Rivera >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:37:46 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 13:05:20 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Sandow >>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:55:27 -0700 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>6) The French wave of 1954 still holds the record for all times >>>and places: ( 431 listings for October alone ). Mars was at some >>>intermediate distance, but Venus made a very close approach to >>>Earth, as little as 0.267 AU in the midst of this highly >>>localized wave. The "spill over" into neighboring countries, >>>long presumed by French observers at the time, has yet to >>>materialize in my records. With the exception of Italy, this >>>flap seemed to be localized to France .. all of France, and >>>almost only France. Sunspot activity was virtually rock-bottom, >>>an average of 7 sunspots/diem for all of October 1954. >>Here's a wonderful opportunity for psychosocial analysis -- but >>please, not from amateurs. Let's hear from someone with >>professional knowledge of both sociology and French culture. >>What was it in 1950's France that made people likely to report >>UFOs? (A question worth asking even if the UFOs turn out to be >>genuine anomalies.) >Greg, Larry, Francofiles everywhere: >They lost Indochina, and the Algerian War began. Bob, Your remark is absolutely correct but if there was such a famous correlation, the psychosociologists still have to explain why there was no such wave between 1960 and 1962, when the war became very nasty in Algeria, French generals tried to seize power and one million people came back to France in a few days. The trauma was far more important than in Indochina. Best Jean-Luc Rivera
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:49:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:21:11 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Sandow >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Here's a wonderful opportunity for psychosocial analysis -- but >>please, not from amateurs. Let's hear from someone with >>professional knowledge of both sociology and French culture. >>What was it in 1950's France that made people likely to report >>UFOs? (A question worth asking even if the UFOs turn out to be >>genuine anomalies.) >Greg, Larry, Francofiles everywhere: >They lost Indochina, and the Algerian War began. This makes people report UFOs? Maybe it's me, but I don't see the connection. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" From: AGETI_Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc <9a4ag@clarc.org> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 04:04:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:33:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" Dear List Members, Source: CNN.com Transcripts http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html Saturday Morning News Bush-Cheney Take Campaign on the Road; Gore Takes a Vacation Aired July 29, 2000 - 8:00 a.m. ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: We begin this morning, where else? Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love. It's the site of a convention. You've heard about it a little bit, the Republican National Convention, which is being carefully orchestrated to send George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House. KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Speaking of brotherly love, Leon Harris joins us from Philadelphia with the latest on that big event, which begins on Monday. Hey, there, Leon. LEON HARRIS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning. Actually, this is now the city of Republican love. How's that for you, huh? Well, good morning folks, as we are high above the floor of the Comcast First Union Center on the city's South Side. Now this center is being transformed. It's almost there. Red, white and blue bunting is going to greet the arriving Republican faithful and all the media covering this gathering. Now, the candidates, Bush and Cheney, are taking their campaign through Kentucky today with stops in Owensboro, Louisville and Covington. And CNN's Jonathan Karl tells us this morning how Cheney is reacting to his return to the campaign trail after a long absence. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DICK CHENEY (R), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Mercy. JONATHAN KARL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Call him the reluctant candidate. Dick Cheney used his kickoff speech to remind people George W. Bush had to talk him into taking the job. CHENEY: I'm proof positive, the mere fact that I'm on the ticket, that he's a smooth talker. KARL: Republicans call him safe, solid, dependable and short- winded. His speech in Springdale, Arkansas lasted barely three minutes. CHENEY: And it is going to be a tough campaign, make no mistake about it. We're going to have to fight every single day in every single state for every single vote. KARL: After this, Cheney's first appearance outside his home state, Bush joked to his aides, "He's the perfect running mate for me because I talk a lot and he doesn't." If it looks like he hasn't campaigned in more than a decade, maybe it's because he hasn't. But with some people, his very lack of polish is an asset. UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: Integrity and character is back. God bless you. KARL: Cheney played low key loyalist. Along the way, someone thought Cheney's impressive resume would help Bush tell the truth about UFOs. UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: Half the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on? GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Sure, I will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a great one. KARL: And low key or not, Cheney drew an enthusiastic response from the Republican faithful. <snip> Best regards: ===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><=== Giuliano Marinkovicc (Croatia, Europe, ICQ UIN #67412597, tel:+385-23-430-970) UFO News Co-ordinator The UFO Enigma on Destination: Space - www.destinationspace.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 07:22:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:47:37 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Mulvey >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:26:14 -0500 >From: Tim D. Brigham <Dellamorte@mad.scientist.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 07:34:38 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Corky Kippenberger <KIPPENBERGER@cs.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >>To: updates@sympatico.ca Hi Tim, >I can appreciate you are done with this matter for now, < I can appreciate that you want more details. We all do I'm also confused by the "most" statement. Buttttttt....<g>....How can you appreciate Carptenter being done with this? John Carpenter is _ far_ from being done-especially now. John Carpenter has plenty to keep him busy as there are still 120 families that don't know that he sold their files some 3 years ago. The issue of file sanitization, ethics, among other things, is something that the State Board of Social Workers in his home state will determine. Unless there is documented proof that we will be told, it's a he-said, she-said thing. Which in the big picture for now doesn't matter. The issue of notifying these families is something he must do now. I hope you have better luck than I in getting a straight answer. He sure came up with a lulu when I asked him about contacting those people. These folks need to be contacted now by John Carpenter using the technological means available to him in locating them - up to and including Robert Bigelow's confidential staff, if he can't do it himself. Good luck with your fact find, but please don't hold back your support for these families because of details that we may not know as fact for a very long time. <snip> >Given this being straightened out, I'm going to sit back and see >if the 'wheels of justice' actually start to turn or not. I doubt the wheels of justice will be rolling in any time soon, but you've heard the one about the squeeky wheel, right? <g> 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Rutkowski From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:49:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Rutkowski >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:37:00 -0500 (CDT) >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >>case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >>found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >>insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >>unidentifieds. >4) The *U* Database is anything but "raw data". Perhaps you are >thinking of some other database or catalog. I have been >filtering out junk sightings for years. If I hadn't, *U* would >have several times the present 17,660+ events listed, collected >over the 15+ years it took to do all this. I throw out old >sightings all the time. >Here is a list of my sources: >http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html Hi Larry! Kudos again right off the bat for your excellent work on the *U* database. You're doing a great job and should be the featured speaker at UFO conventions instead of some of the others who get much more attention. As for the "raw" data, I'd be curious how you manage to filter out "junk" sightings. It's an ongiong problem within investigative ufology, and one we've been struggling with for awhile. Going through your list of sources, it looks like there still may be some ringers in there. Your source /252 for example, a book by Vicky Cameron, is one we've looked at in some detail, and found that many of her cases had simple explanations and in at least one case were hoaxes outright. She also made it clear in her book she did no investigation whatsoever, and therefore her entire book was made up of "raw data." The NUFORC database by Davenport is a good example, too. Peter's work is a tremendous resource, but it's easy to see that the majority of cases reported are IFOs, and we routinely go through them for our own studies. We usually get about 250 cases per year for our annual study, and it takes many hours of studying and re-investigating to find the approximately 5% of those each year which are "real UFOs." And of those, there are likely some could be sifted out if we had the time and money. So, the problem of UFO sighting data is a very real one. Allan Hendry adamantly insisted that UFO databases cannot be used as data in statistical studies because of inherent problems in collection of the reports by investigators with varying opinions, methodology and styles. Investigative ufology is a generally-ignored subfield and it would be interesting to get some discussion going regarding the collection and study of UFO reports. This area of research is, after all, the foundation upon which all other ufology is based. If we don't have a good handle on the nature of UFO sightings themselves, then the value of research on UFO propulsion, crash/retrievals, document retrieval and abductions are all on shaky ground. The work of people like yourself, Ted Phillips, Paul Ferrughelli and others who collect and store UFO data cannot be overemphasized. -- Nobody in particular
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Oz Security Of Health Records From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:10:33 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:52:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Oz Security Of Health Records Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH Phenomena Research Australia EBK Researchers, From the Health Minister July 31st, 2000: Victorians (Australian State) will be guaranteed that personal privacy and confidentiality are paramount in the handling and security of personal health information, the Health Minister, John Thwaites said on Monday, July 31, 2000. With the growth in the computerised transfer and storage of personal records, people need to be assured that their privacy is strongly catered for, Mr Thwaites said. Public comment is being sought on the draft Health Records Bill, which will prevent health agencies from improperly using health information. The Health Records Bill will complement privacy provisions in Victoria's Information Privacy Bill, which has been introduced to Parliament. "The Bill will ensure that agencies cannot pass on personal health information about their patients and clients for marketing or other improper purposes to a third party," Mr Thwaites said. "It will also regulate the use of personal health information held by non-health agencies, such as records on health insurance or health and fitness club clients, or on workplace personnel files." The Bill will ensure consistency in how personal health information is handled and treated right across the sector, including the handling of information by private and public health services which are often being used simultaneously - such as where a GP refers a patient to a public hospital. Mr Thwaites said the privacy standards will be binding, and in accordance with the Health Privacy Principles set out in the legislation. They are designed to give individuals certainty and a high level of control about the manner in which their health information is collected, used, disclosed and stored. Health information includes records on physical, mental and psychological health. It includes health information from disability, palliative and aged care services. "The Bill extends beyond traditional fields of health and medical information in order to protect a broad range of data such as genetic, disability and aged care information that is very sensitive and often relevant to health and medical services," Mr Thwaites said. "With advances in technology revolutionising the way information is stored and transferred, it is vitally important that we have a binding set of principles which enshrine the privacy of the individual in protecting their own confidential health details." People who believe there has been 'an interference in privacy' of their information can apply to the Health Services Commissioner to conciliate or investigate the complaint. If not satisfied they can seek a binding decision from the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal. If the breach is knowingly and flagrantly continued, the Health Services Commissioner can then issue a compliance notice and if ignored take the offender to court. Mr Thwaites said the Bill was a lot stronger on patients privacy than Federal draft legislation now being considered in Canberra. People presently have no way to compel a private health professional or agency to supply them or another health professional with their medical history and records. The Bill will allow individuals to request an explanation of their health record or seek a second opinion. Disputes can be referred to the Health Services Commissioner, or if an agency fails to provide access to records within 45 days, the matter can be taken to the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal for an enforceable order. *** One should also note that information held by non-health agencies will also come under the bill! Regards, John W. Auchettl - Director PRA Research Dr. Ron Barnett - Deputy Director ORIG REF: Ray Hall (Sr.RSci) - PRA PRA WEB: http://www.praufo.web.com * Still in development. THANKS TO: The Hon John Thwaites, MP Minister For Health, State of Victoria BILL: [1]. Copies of the draft Bill are available on the DHS web (You may have access problems): http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/ahs/healthrecords Phenomena Research Australia [PRA] P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170 Australian & Asia UFO 1961-2000 - 39 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:56:58 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:54:19 -0400 Subject: UpDate: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? I did not like the NOVA program. To have, on your show, people like Klass, Sagan and Horowitz only proves your gullibility and lack of insight. I am grateful though for the Hopkins segment. There is one other thing: at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/aliens/wheresphysev.html Quote: Where's the Physical Evidence? A Letter from the Producer March 1996 [...] "In interviews and in writing, and specifically in a letter sent October 17, 1995, we offered several abduction proponents the opportunity to have NOVA hire independent scientists to examine any physical evidence from a current case. We went so far as to offer to perform an MRI or other radiological tests (with the approval of a physician) in cases of alleged nasal implants. We were not taken up on our offer, and it was further suggested that the aliens are too smart to let such evidence fall into our hands." [...] Unquote. Does someone have any feedback on this? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:35:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:04:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:14:54 -0400 >From: Brookesmith Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children >Sender: The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Compliments of the Duke, feeling quite encouraged here. >(I think I'll stop when I'm ready, and it ain't yet.) >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:01:35 +0100 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:10:44 -0400 >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Rimmer >>>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >I myself think it would be helpful if abduction believers and >defenders could offer anyone any sure-fire facts about >abductions in the first place. All that we know about any >specific claimed "abduction" is that someone went to someone >else and told them a story, and in some cases a whole pile of >stories. Beyond that, what? >Very often, the questions skeptics ask about "abductions" are >based on the internal (in)consistencies of such people's >stories. >Given the lack of indisputable facts about "abductions", we >might do our children the favor of sticking to the few facts we >do know, and not encouraging them to fantasize unhappily over >possible fictions. Hi, This has been an interesting (and important) discussion, including the sidetrack into whether science can ever explain abductions or whether we have to put God and spiritual dimensions above and beyond the remit of science. Inevitably, we are all going to have different views on this and to some extent this will depend upon our personal experiences (or lack of them) and whatever interpretation we place upon these. But in the end it all comes down to two things. 1: An experience is occurring with extraordinary properties 2: Its confirmation as subjective reality is vastly more well defined than the (frankly disappointing) level of confirmation as physical reality. From this start point there are essentially three routes to take: You can argue that (a) The phenomenon is only subjectively real (that is it is visionary in nature and may well require psycho-social explanations). This explains much of the data and only requires you to find resolutions for the limited physical evidence (eg ther scars). This is the position most so called sceptics adopt - but is actually the proper scientific path because it involves the minimal rearrangement of evidence and hypotheses. Being the proper scientific answer - however - is not the same thing as being the truth. (b) The phenomenon is objectively real but manifests in such a way as to self cancel all tangible evidence. The super ET theory. Unfortunately this popular impression is impossible to prove (or disprove) because it presupposes a lack of evidence on the grounds that the aliens remove it from our discovery. The only viable way to assess this idea - IMO - is to check its internal consistency. That - to me - is where the problems start. Because you are constantly coming up against major hurdles. Like - how can aliens with the amazing ability to ensure no DNA traces are left behind (eg under the fingernails of abductees) (although has anyone actually ever done fingernail scraping tests on abductees seeking the alien DNA that surely has to be there in microscopic amounts if these people really are being physically kidnapped?) Yet, despite this fastidiousness and tenacity to prevent discovery and proof their memory wipe techniques can be overcome by (in real cases that I have witnessed) one hypnosis session from a part time dentist or a 20 year old Ufologist who read D.I.Y. Hypnosis in a book. Problems like this are enough to make me realise this solution - whilst of course not impossible - is fraught with difficulty. And the problems of this sort are far more extensive than those faced by the 'no physical reality' adherents from (a) - above - who have practically no physical evidence to explain away (Indeed this is why that answer is the choice of scientific preference - all to do with evidence and logic and nothing much to do with bias or scepticism). (c) The phenomenon is beyond our ken. It has a spiritual resolution that is simply not amenable to any scientific or ufological data collection techniques. Of course, that's possible. Who knows the real nature of life, reality and the universal plan? But accepting this as the answer is to admit we cannot go further than we do now. Its effectively a close down sale on Ufology - every research project must go - type of approach. Because our methods are doomed to perpetual defeat. As such - possible as it may be - born in mind as it should be - it has to be regarded as an irrelevance for all practical purposes, leading the debate to the straight choice between (a) and (b) above. Because its all our science and methodology reasonably allows us to do. Either, or both, or neither could be true, of course. There may also be unexpected versions of each. Here are just two that I can see: i - The phenomenon is subjectively real and visionary but it is triggered by physically real phenomena of unknown scientific origin. Phenomena that can produce major physical phenomena (car stops, time dislocations, bodily traumas etc), thus produce the objective evidence we see, and invoke the subjective delusions that much of abduction research investigates as the reality when in fact it is only a side effect. ii - Aliens are in contact but not actually coming to earth. They are only capable of long range probes that treat abductees like receiving radio telescopes. These 'psychic' people are used to communicate, extract information about us and engage in inter-species relationships at a deep level of our inner selves. As such the aliens are real, the contact with them not physical, the experience of contact subjective, but reflective in a psycho-social sense of the 'mental rape' being conducted (hence the extent to which these experiences are visualised and dramatised in this way). The abduction prone personalities are the alien receptors of our society. But they have only ever met aliens inside their heads. Yet the ones they have met there are real. From this conflicting set of data and ideas we see the confusion that is the abduction phenomenon. Moreover, we see that this is not a straight choice between 'loony witnesses who have over active imaginations' and 'three races from different solar systems fighting territorially over the earth' - as far too often this mystery is boiled down to represent. Indeed that the ETH, whilst not a non starter, is only a theory amongst several and no more likely to be true than any other on present evidence. Although it is all too often taken as true because the experience convincingly adopts that form. But then 500 years ago a recognizably similar experience had the form of being trips to fairy land to meet the little people. We may now understand that these experiences were either literally true, subjectively true or some reality for which the fairy theory was a mis-perception. But isn't that the point? How many would now accept the literal 'kidnapped into fairyland' explanation as so certain we must teach it to our children - because that is the form that the phenomenon adopted? Few who really thought this through I would hope. Which brings us to the question of what responsibility we have to children who clearly are today having abduction like experiences. That they do I have no doubt. That they are not being 'talked into this' I have no doubt either. This is a real phenomenon and its alien scenario is the acceptable modern context. So what ought we to do in response? Put yourself in the place of a parent 500 years ago when your child tells you they have been to fairy land and seen fairies on toadstools with magic powers. Do you: agree, that's what happened dear. Fairies are real. Now we have to get the feudal barons to spend money on meeting the fairy folk and learning their science instead of spending their money persecuting Robin Hood. Argue, "No, dear, this is all in your head. There are no fairies. This is just a dream and if you keep on thinking your dreams are real you are going to be regarded as strange and get burned at the stake." Or, say, "well, that's an interesting experience. You are not alone. And don't be scared of it because it really doesn't seem to hurt people and its happened for a long time. Tell me all about it, we'll get it down on record and let those who are trying to get to the bottom of this riddle try to figure out what it means. Meantime, get on with your life and place this in its proper context - as an interesting experience that you should not allow to dominate who you are." Now bear in mind that for fairy we can absolutely substitute alien and ask the same questions of yourself. To me it is self evident what is the appropriate course to adopt and what approaches (the other two bar the last one) are mortgaging the future of our children to a belief system that 50 years from now may well seem quite absurd. By then these children will be adults ,living with whatever legacy our dealings with them today have fostered. That's why we cannot afford to gamble on a possibility or a theory that might be right. Because if we are wrong it is they who will pay the price. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:17:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:07:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:10:10 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:32:34 -0400 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:29:48 -0700 >>>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> >>>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Greg, >I consider you an authority, or at least someone with great >experience in the field of Alien Abduction. >Let me turn this one around: did you see the NOVA program? Do >you know anything other than what you saw in the short segment >they showed you? Do you know what the child might have told his >parents before Budd came on the scene? Are you sure you're not >judging too quickly? >I know, this is cut and paste. But since you're asking me all >the questions and provide no answers, you either did not see the >program or did not ask Budd about this short segment. >Can you be more precise? I saw the program, was present when some of it was taped, and talked at some length to the producer both during the taping and after the episode had aired. There's no doubt that the program was biased against abduction reality. It didn't seem that way when it was taped. The producer was very fervent about being open-minded, and about being impressed with what Budd showed her. The show was a different story. My time is short right now, so I'll make just one general point, and give just one specific example. General point: Many skeptics were quoted on the show, but their views were never questioned. Abductees and Budd were quoted, and their views disputed by both skeptics and the show itself. Specific example: The show never mentioned that abductees claim to have marks that appear on their bodies overnight, without obvious explanation. Budd and various abductees had told the producer that, and showed their own allegedly unexplainable marks. On the skeptical side, the show said that UFO sightings peaked after the release of "Close Encounters," for which there's no evidence in any sightings catalogue. I asked the producer about both these things. She said the abductees' marks weren't mentioned because there was no evidence that they existed. Not that she had evidence that they didn't exist; just that she had no evidence that they did. She said her source for the "Close Encounters" non-factoid was a footnote in Robert Shaeffer's skeptical book about UFOs. She told me that neither she nor her staff had made any effort to fact-check the footnote. Nor, obviously, were they familiar enough with UFO literature to know the "fact" was false. Note the bias. An important abductee claim is left unmentioned, because the producer doesn't know evidence for it. (I might add that John Velez, as he's often said, offered himself for any medical examination NOVA might choose to conduct, and they never took him up on it.) A skeptical claim, on the other hand, is accepted without question, even though there's ample evidence that it's false. This is essential background for any discussion of anything we've seen on that NOVA show. To answer Serge's specific question, Budd has said both privately and publicly that the interview with the child was shown out of context. He very angrily called Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist well known for her skeptical views on recovered memory, who'd been asked by NOVA to watch the excerpt from the interview with the child, and commented on it on the show. Budd asked her if she'd seen any more than the excerpt showed on the show -- he says she told him she hadn't -- and then asked her how, as a scientist, she could she'd comment in public on something without seeing its full context. But I don't know the specifics of what Budd said the show left out. >Perhaps I should clarify some definition of playing with people's >mind: >_Anytime_ a researcher comes in contact with an _alleged_ >_victim_ _of_ _an_ _alien_ _abduction_ he _must_, unless a >therapist himself, _seek_ a professional therapist because an >_out_ _of_ _this_ _world_ _experience_ is bound to cause an _out_ >_of_ _this_ _world_ _human_ _reaction_. >This is psychology 101. Care to find a citation for that? Seriously, as I tried to mention in my post to Serge, there's no evidence that most abductees need psychotherapeutic help. It's also well known that in the early years of his abduction work, Budd always worked with a therapist. He continued on his own with those therapists' encouragement. His work has also been observed by two therapists I've talked to, one of them a Macarthur Prize winner, and both praised it very warmly (even though they're both abduction skeptics). >>But exactly what kind of professional help is appropriate for >>people who come to abduction investigators? From what I've seen, >>from sitting in on Budd's first interviews with people who come >>to him, and from reading many of the letters he gets, people >>approach him because they feel they're having concrete >>experiences. Not abduction experiences; it's rare for him to see >>anyone who states outright, "I'm being abducted by aliens." ><snip> >Ok. Got that: people go to Budd because but don't think they got >abducted. Yes, and I can't insist on this strongly enough. A majority, as far as I know, of the people Budd sees don't come to him believing they've been abducted by aliens. They come to him because he's the first person they've ever heard speak in public -- sometimes the first person they've ever heard speak at all -- about experiences they vividly remember having. They'd never explained those experiences by saying they'd been abducted. They'd never been able to explain them at all. Their reaction to Budd is, very commonly, "This man is talking about experiences like mine. I never even knew anybody else had these experiences, let alone talked about them. I should talk to this man. Maybe his explanation for them is right, maybe not, but at least he'll talk to me." And many of his abductees take a long time to decide they've really been abducted by aliens, and may never be wholly convinced. This doubt is healthy, and is encouraged in Budd's support groups. I wonder how many times I've said all this on this list? Let's remember, too, that Budd has been doing this for well over 20 years, and that the first couple of hundred people he saw wouldn't have been exposed to all the current media excitement about abductions. The subject was genuinely new to them. >>Instead, people claim to remember, as you or I remember what we >>had for breakfast this morning, lights in their rooms, beings by >>their beds, periods of missing time, and other concrete >>experiences they've never been able to explain. They've also >>never been able to talk about these things with anyone. When >>they read Budd's books or see him talk on TV, they discover that >>somebody else knows about these experiences. That's why they >>want to talk to him. ><snip> >Ok. Got that too: now people go to Budd because they think they >got abducted. No. As I've just restated, people go because they have experiences they can't explain. Budd says those experiences could be caused by abductions. The people having the experiences aren't sure of that, and may never have heard about abductions before. Thus they can't think they've been abducted. They're anxious to talk to Budd because they've never before known of anyone to talk to about these experiences. A memory of beings by the bed isn't a memory of an alien abduction. It's just a memory of beings by the bed. The person with the memory doesn't identify the beings as aliens. He or she very often has no explanation, not even a tentative explanation, for the beings at all. I don't know how to make this any clearer. >>So, Serge, what kind of professional helps people who think >>they've had these experiences? Surely it's not a psychotherapist ><snip> >Of course I'm talking about a psychotherapist. Therapists have, generally speaking, been very bad with patients who report anything that smacks of the paranormal. I had a very bad time with a therapist when I mentioned I had out of body experiences. I wasn't claiming that I'd really left my body, and I wasn't even saying the experiences were important to me. Her reaction, however, was to say that other clients who'd reported things like that had thought they were crazy. Her meaning was crystal clear -- why didn't I think I was crazy, too? The larger context for this, which is the only reason I report this anecdotal experience, is that paranormal experiences are routinely considered at least mildly pathological in the psychology literature. So, often, is a belief in them. When I finally challenged my therapist on her reaction to me, she agreed that the professional literature she read "pathologized" (her word) anything paranormal. Later she apologized to me in writing, saying her reaction had been inappropriate and could have had a devastating effect. Both before her reaction, during it, and afterwards I considered her an excellent therapist, and still do. Her reaction was, unfortunately, typical of her profession. Abductees at the very least should be careful about what therapist they pick. >Cold, sweat and shivers, Greg. > >Are you telling me that you do not know the difference between >psychotherapy and psychopathology? No. I'm saying that studies of abductees haven't revealed any pathology that should make all of them seek psychotherapy. That's not to say that therapists can't play a useful role. (Let's remember, once again, that a number of abduction researchers are therapists themselves, and so are a number of abductees. Budd's advisory committe, of which I'm a member, has two therapists on it.) Greg Sandow (positively his last post before vacation)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:30:27 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:12:23 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver Dear Jan, Rebecca, Serge and All: >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:59:29 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> > >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> > >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:47:54 -0700 (PDT) > >Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Keith > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> > > >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:29:48 -0700 > >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> > >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> > > >>I guess it all boils down to the "researcher". > > >>1. A researcher without a degree in medical therapy has no > >>freaking right to play with people's mind. His _only_ concern > >>should be to put the people in touch with a professional. > > >>2. The researcher's prime duty is to establish a rooster of > >>professional therapists who can and will deal with abduction > >>subjects. > > >>3. If the researcher fails to do that, he should resign or > >>associate himself with another researcher who can help people > >>out. > > >>4. Any researcher who dares to hypnotize a subject by himself > >>is an incompetent fool. He should have his car painted in > >>fluorescent red. > > >>5. When it comes to children, multiply that by ten and roll > >>him in tar and chicken feathers. > > >Thank you, Serge! Very well said. > > >best, > > >Rebecca > > >I second this, Rebecca and Serge. One of the best posting I have >read here. Hits all the points right on the head! Sorry Jan. I will <snip> your account of what was obviously a psychologically defficient individual because it has very little to do with the topic you are discussing. Because there are psychologically defficient people running around claiming to be abductees is NO reason to discourage hypnotherapists without degrees from attempting to help those who need it. I have attempted to address this issue in other posts but apparently have failed to help you understand the ramifications of what you are proposing here. 1) Most hypnotherapists (the vast majority of which are quite competent at achieving much better results than any of the degreed individuals you speak about) don't have any degree. 2) Does # 1 bother me. No. Why? Because there is probably no college anywhere that properly prepares a therapist for excellent hypnotherapy work. 3) How do I know #2 is correct? Because I was taught hypnotherapy by one of the most successful (PhD) hypnotherapists in the business. He, like other PhD hypnotherapists will be glad to tell you that they NEVER use anything taught to them in any college. And even after he taught me the many bright techniques he learned (on the job not in school) he still failed to teach me some very helpful techniques that I picked up, once again, on the job, which are NOT taught in any college course I'm sure. 4) I'm not sure why people who know very little about either hypnotherapy or psychology tend to believe that hypnotherapists need to be psychologists or psychiatrists, but... The don't. Why? Because hypnotherapy, not mere exploration or research works VERY well, better than psychology or psychiatry, WITHOUT any psychoanalysis whatsoever. 5) When I was taken by John Scheussler to be hypnotized in reference to my 1st 2 encounters he took me to a hypnotherapist, not a psychiatrist or a psychologist. Though that avenue of research failed am I glad he took me to someone who didn't have these psych degrees. Definitely! Why? Because hypnotherapists do hypnotherapy on a daily basis on every client they see. These other professionals you are promoting do NOT use hypnotherapy as much; not nearly as much. They are far less competent in its usage. And they are far less prepared for abreactions and other problems that may occur under hypnosis. 6) In fact, if you go to a hypnotherapist who is really a psychiatrist or psychologist that uses hypnotherapy as their primary tool you are likely to run into an individual, because they are taught this in the colleges you so revere, that ONLY believes in long term therapy. In such a case you will be throwing your money away. Why? Because short term therapy works. It's far less expensive. What they will probably do is dredge up stuff from within your subconscious and then have you talk about it with them until your bank account runs dry or your insurance company says no more. Don't get me wrong, talk therapy does work some times. But I believe, in most cases, that it's not the most cost effective method of getting results in therapy. The one, other, hypnotherapist I know who advocates it is well known for bilking people for money. This is common knowledge in the hypnotherapy community. And he's quite successful as well. By all means, if you feel more comfortable with a therapist who has extra letters beside their name and can talk with you till your accounts run dry and who can psychoanalyze you left and right go right ahead and plop you and your money down in front of them. On the other hand please don't try and discourage others from going to the vast majority of quite competent hypnotherapists who don't have such needless degrees and who are not only the best at hypnotherapy but also the best at getting results because of your insecurity of working with someone who hasn't sat through some college courses that very rarely ever teach real world hypnotherapy skills. Sincerely; Mike Beaver yoda@foxinternet.net http://web3.foxinternet.net/yoda/index.html ICQ # 15482206
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Monumental UFO Work On-Line From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:01:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:16:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Monumental UFO Work On-Line MONUMENTAL UFO WORK ON LINE The Sign Historical Group (SHG) is proud to announce our hosting of Barry Greenwood's exhaustive inventory of UFO articles from learned journals and popular magazines. The inventory of over 7000 articles from 1600 to the present represents a collection effort spanning 3O years. Strange objects in the atmosphere and near the ground are not the only topics covered here. The article catalogue includes numerous writings about SETI, life on other worlds, ball lightning, and other unusual phenomena. Barry Greenwood's work, an inventory of his collection rather than a formal bibliography, is displayed in small sections rather than one large download. Visitors may also download the material as files in various formats. While Barry's work represents years of hard work, not every UFO article from the non-UFO press is listed here. There are still a few articles from the North American press to be located, but these are few and the publications are generally low circulation. When it comes to foreign and especially non-English language publications, there are still much work to be done. The catalogue, a work in progress, only shows a snapshot of the material gather so far. There are corrections that need to be made and many more articles yet to be gathered. Corrections and contributions of "new" articles are welcome. Especially sought are foreign publications not completely represented here. The introduction to Greenwood's work may be found at: http://www.project1947.com/shg/bgbib.htm Over the years many people have contributed to Barry's collections. Assistance on this project in the initial stage came from Candy Peterson and William LaParl and Wendy Connors contributed new articles to this work. John Stepkowski, Project 1947 webmaster, placed this on the Sign Historical Group's webpage, those with their own websites will recognize the hard work involved here. Loy Pressley's contribution represents almost a year of transcribing handwritten notes, preparing the material for display and working on corrections, SHG acknowledges, his great effort without which this work would only exist as notes on index cards. Of course, Barry Greenwood whose tireless work over 30 years is responsible for the collection and who worked with Loy on corrections and additions has earned a great debt of gratitude from UFO researchers everywhere. Not since George Eberhart' bibliography has such a massive effort been available to the public. Had it not been for the Sign Historical Group, however, this work might have still exist in hand written form only on index cards. Jan Aldrich Vice Chairman Sign Historical Group http://www.project1947/shg P. O. Box 40 Scotland, CT 06264, USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 1 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:56:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:17:33 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Rimmer >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 01:32:12 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi, >I can confirm that George Bush Jnr will carry on like all the >other wannabe presidents, and will make the same old UFO promise >of data release so he can get into power and then forget about >ever mentioning it! >The same ol same ol! This assumes that: a) Any significant proportion of the US population is motivated enough to change the way they vote because of a candidate's views on releasing UFO documents. Which I doubt. It also assumes that, if so, there is not an equal and opposite proportion of the US voting population who are _less_ likely to vote for a candiadate who expresses an interest in UFOs. After all, we are always being told on this list that taking the UFO phenomenon seriously makes one liable to ridicule. Which politician wishes to be ridiculed in election year? It also assumes that the US government actually has any UFO secrets worth releasing. Which I doubt. Any politician, confronted by a potential voter blathering on about UFOs is unlikely to simply respond "p**s off!", and is more likely just to give an anodyne response like Bush's, and hope that no-one (other than the denizens of this List, many of whom aren't even eligible to vote in US presidential elections) will notice it. And quite frankly, I don't blame them. Try asking what Bush or Gore's policy on haunted houses or the Shroud of Turin is, and see what sort of a polite brush-off you get. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:57:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:09:34 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Gary, >>Let me cut to the chase, please. >>1.) Do you have _any_ source, at all, that has told you that >>John Carpenter released files that were unsanitized to _anyone_, >>other than what Elizabeth Carpenter has told or shown you? Any release of information from a person's files requires a release form to be signed. In terms of hypnotherapy, the patient must see, have explained and sign an Informed Consent form. None of this was done. It matters not whether files were blacked out. >>2.) Did you not think it unethical when Elizabeth handed you the >>list of subjects in John's case files? Is this how it happened? I am making this a legal case and need all the evidence associated with the case and have clearly stated the list will remain confidential. I've know many of those involved as a friend. >>3.) When you stated that _most_ of the files were not sanitized, >>what were you basing that statement on? There apparently were several witnesses to the boxing and mailing of the materials. Again, this is not the important issue. >>Simple questions. Can you answer them without moth dancing? I'd >>like it clear and simple, Gary, because I've read all the >>messages that are relevant to this issue, and I still am not >>getting it... Who supplied you with what? I don't need names >>other than Elizabeths, nor do I want them. Any other questions? >>Corky, Listers and EBK, >>Good questions, ones which I feel should be answered before any >>further time goes by. If indeed the names were transferred to >>NIDS santitized, then this more than mitigates guilt. It does not. Please explain. Our firm legal position is that John cannot claim to stop being a licensed clinical social worker at his whim. Even if you tell your patient this it is not so. This is to protect the public from just this type of fraud. Think about it. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:20:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:38:40 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Hart >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:30:33 -0700 (PDT) >>From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com> >>Subject: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Has anyone ever speculated if Bigelow/NIDS is a CIA front (or >>other gov't agency)? What better person to use as a front, >>since he is so wealthy, no one would suspect it. >--- >>Roger Prokic >>Denver, Colorado USA Bigelow has several top-level intelligence people as employees at NIDS. Not just one or two but a handful. I prefer to look at things using probabilities. What is the probability that they are more than hobbyists? Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: John Carpenter's Australian Video From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:34:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:44:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: John Carpenter's Australian Video List, This communication came to me from a colleague in Australia. Gary ________________________________ Greetings Australian Researchers, This message is just going out to the researchers in Australia, as it concerns just them at present. Though other "abductees and experiencers" around the world should be warned and aware that this can happen to them. I've received several replies stating that John Carpenter did not have the permission of those he interviewed for his "research video" to make this video commercially available. This video, "Encounters in Australia" is being sold at UFO conferences in USA and through several UFO Magazines both in USA and England. In fact, I got my copy from a video contact who attended a big UFO conference in USA a couple of years ago and bought it from Carpenter's bookstall. Perhaps John C. figured that no one way "down here" in Australia would ever find out. John Carpenter does not do his work on the Internet, so his ignorance of how fast news can travel these days is understandable but not excusable. Without violating requests for anonymity, here's how a well-repected person in publishing here put it: _________ Dear Mike, When John Carpenter conducted those interviews, it is clear that he did not seek permission from them to sell those interviews. I know that several on that list were outraged to learn that a supposedly professional, private interview was being sold through UFO magazines on video format, with no permission or royalty being granted. Shame on John Carpenter for his actions I say! regards XXXXXXX ------- ________________________________ So it would appear that Mr. Carpenter has much to answer for these days. Of course, progress on this issue is best served by putting enforceable policies into place that would prevent such abuse of "patient's confidentiality" in the future, not by going after the person responsible like some kind of lynch mob "witch hunt". Though I must agree with positions expressed by many researchers recently on this Internet discussion, that when a well known and high profile "celebrity" researcher can get away with selling 140 abductee files at $100. each (with audio tapes) and pocket $14,000 without due consideration for the consequences to his "patients" or his suffering reputation, then it's TIME TO CLEAN UP THIS HOUSE!!!! and let the chips fall where they may... You know the old but ever so true saying: "When good people do nothing...evil flourishes!" ------------------------------------------------------ We can learn from each other's mistakes, but only if we all examine exactly what went wrong!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:33:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:52:25 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Aldrich >From: Steve Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com> >Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:58:07 -0400 (EDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: UpDate: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? So Steve who sent you the E-mail that informed you of this statement? Sincerely, Jan Aldrich > PRG > Paradigm Research Group >I received an email that George W. Bush had stated on a CNN >broadcast today, around 8:15 pm EST, that if elected, he would >release important UFO data. >Can anyone confirm this? >Steve Bassett
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Lemire From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:53:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:48:13 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Lemire >Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 07:48:20 -0400 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> >Subject: Chupacabras In Chile >To: updates@sympatico.ca >To all our Readers-- >The Chupacabras has continued to appear in Chile in spite of the >completely unnatural and snowy winter that has affected the >southern hemisphere--antarctic winds and heavy snow have >blanketed Buenos Aires and Santiago, reaching as far north as >the Atacama Desert, where it hadn't snowed in human memory. Far >from being deterred by the onset of cold weather (as it did in >Puerto Rico during one of the island's famous cold snaps (60 >degrees) in January 1996, the paranormal predator continues to >spread panic throughout the countryside. >The Chilean events have proven to be more divisive than >expected: skeptics are responding more fiercely than ever, >believers in a UFO-related origin to the events are willing to >do battle with-- sword or pistol, on horse or on foot-- to >champion their beliefs, and exponents of the >paranormal/interdimensional origin are still holding their own. >There is no doubt that something is happening in Chile, but true >to the Chupacabras's protean qualities, the entity being >reported doesn't resemble the ones seen earlier during the >Chilean wave, or much less the ones reported in Puerto Rico or >in Mexico five years ago. >Scott Corrales >Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU) >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >SOURCE: La Estrella del Loa (newspaper) >DATE: July 14, 2000 >** It had large slanted, yellow eyes, grey fur and stood on all >fours. "I lost control at that moment" <snip> Scott, You've been feeding us these reports of Chupacabras for a while now. My interest is in those messages that have reported that samples of the animal remains that have been taken for study and analysis. Why don't you follow up on this aspect of the Chupacabra reports. These stories, in my opinion, continue to be meaningless without a serious effort to study the "by-product" of their fascination with the animals. Sincerely, Todd Lemire -- "But I must point out that we have much better eyewitness evidence available for UFOs than I have for the Christian religion." Barry H. Downing, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: 1970's UK Sightings? From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:10:03 +1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:58:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: 1970's UK Sightings? Hi Everyone I would like some help with particular sightings in the UK I'm not to sure of the year 1971 or 1972 and other sightings around 1973 to 1974. Description of one event in 1971-72 sometime in July I think?? Report of an UFO over Blackstone Edge near Littleborough close to The Summit Inn? Not far from the A58. Some would know the area as Robinhoods Rocks or Bed an Old Roman road ran over the top of moors. Another place known to the locals was the Blue Lagoon also known to light up and glow for no reason. I know some of these sightings got printed in the local newspaper but I cant remember the name of the paper. I'm also very interested in sightings that happened between 1971 to 1974 in these areas between Littleborough Todmorden Skipton Clitheroe, Bacup. Further more any in formation that may have come to light of a person (male) reporting a UFO and abduction in the Rishworth moors area between 1971 - 72?... in an area between 3 main Hwys the M62 A672 and the A58. I hope you can help me Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch Director ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) E-Mail: tkbnetw@powerup.com.au E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw ADMINISTRATION: THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) PO Box 805 Springwood Qld 4127 Australia ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number 1800 77 22 88 Freecall ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Disclaimer: The Keith Basterfield List Owners are not responsible for the content or misuse of this list. However, personal insults, flaming will not be tolerated. ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:21:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:59:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - Velez >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:56:58 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I did not like the NOVA program. To have, on your show, people >like Klass, Sagan and Horowitz only proves your gullibility and >lack of insight. >I am grateful though for the Hopkins segment. >There is one other thing: >at: >http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/aliens/wheresphysev.html >Quote: >Where's the Physical Evidence? >A Letter from the Producer >March 1996 >[...] >"In interviews and in writing, and specifically in a letter sent >October 17, 1995, we offered several abduction proponents the >opportunity to have NOVA hire independent scientists to examine >any physical evidence from a current case. We went so far as to >offer to perform an MRI or other radiological tests (with the >approval of a physician) in cases of alleged nasal implants. We >were not taken up on our offer, and it was further suggested >that the aliens are too smart to let such evidence fall into our >hands." >[...] >Unquote. >Does someone have any feedback on this? >Serge Salvaille Hi Serge, hi All, We covered all this on the list about four years ago Serge. The segment producer Denise DiIanni is lying and covering her ass. I have attached two gif files. They are scans of a letter that she wrote to me in response to _several_ letters I had written expressing concern as to why _my_ request for medical, psychological, and other testing were not being scheduled or performed. Please note carefully that I said; "My request" for tests. The attached gif files is the actual letter with the NOVA/PBS letter head and signed by segment producer Denise DiIanni. It speaks for itself. She's telling a lie of monumental proportions on that website. She is a person whose only real concern is erasing the bad publicity and the black mark on her own reputation that was sustained after having produced that awful and reprehensible NOVA segment. I'll just let her own letter say the rest for me in terms of "who" is attempting to choke whose chicken! <LOL> *Greg Sandow and Budd Hopkins will _both_ vouch for every word I am about to say. On my first meeting with Denise DiIanni (regarding my participation in this program) I told her that I would do it _only_ on the condition that she perform certain tests. I handed her a hand written list of tests that I was willing to submit to in order to help _substantiate_ my claims. (Of "UFO/alien abduction") I _insisted_ on a couple of tests. One was a complete psychological work-up/evaluation to be administered by psychologists or psychiatrists of _their_ own (NOVA) choosing. The other test I had insisted on was; a complete medical work-up. Including X-rays or MRI/CAT scan in order to determine if there were in fact any artificial or suspect items in my body. I invited them to interview my family. I invited them to come to my home and conduct any physical tests they wanted to. I told them that short of surgery I was willing to go along with just about anything in the name of a scientific peek into this abduction business. As you will read in the letter, she is telling me that NOVA cannot pay for or recommend (for legal reasons which I understand) that I take an MRI. On their website she says they offered it and that Budd and myself had refused it. It's BS and her letter to me from Oct. 19 1995 is the proof. What happened to prompt her to post that was; she and her staff had scheduled a series of seventeen (17) TV and radio shows in order to promote the program. Once we had discovered the hatchet job that they (*planned) to unleash on us, Budd wanted to drop out of the 'media blitz' of programs to promote the show. I told him no, that we _should_ do them and use them to present our side of the story! It was going to be the only opportunity for us to do so. Budd agreed and we did all 17 shows in one month! I was the first one scheduled to appear with Denise in a two hour Art Bell segment. I asked her 'on air'; why she and NOVA had refused to conduct any of the tests that I had requested, why were we being diagnosed psychologically on air by an astronomer, (Carl Sagan who very authoritatively asserts that we (abductees) "must be hallucinating or delusional") and by others (Loftus, Baker, and Persinger) none of which had ever met us, and never even requested to interview us, or to study our reports to find out just what we were individually and collectively claiming! She was struck dumb on the air and she refused to appear with me on any of the subsequent 16 scheduled promotional programs. <EG> Don Ecker invited Budd and myself on his two hour program and he gave us an opportunity to get a fair hearing of our side of the story. (I have maintained a warm relationship with Don over the years as a result) Guys like Don are rare and he and a few others went out of their way to make sure that 'whole' story went out. Not just NOVA's take on it. Please: DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANY OF THIS! Allow me to present Ms. Denise Di Ianni with the 'noose' (her own letter to me) she may use to publicly hang her sorry, lying ass with. Please see attached gif's. Her comments on that site imply that we are afraid of investigation or close scrutiny. It isn't true. Not a word of it. Regards, John Velez (*Thank you my dear friend Michelle Dechamps for having provided us with a promo copy of the segment in advance of the actual broadcast. Michelle saved our asses for us and I am eternally grateful for his efforts on behalf of Budd, myself, and the other abductees that appeared on that segment. God bless you mon ami Michelle.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- NOVA1.gif NOVA2.gif -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:46:08 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:22:07 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:37:00 -0500 (CDT) >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >>>case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >>>found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >>>insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >>>unidentifieds. >>4) The *U* Database is anything but "raw data". Perhaps you are >>thinking of some other database or catalog. I have been >>filtering out junk sightings for years. If I hadn't, *U* would >>have several times the present 17,660+ events listed, collected >>over the 15+ years it took to do all this. I throw out old >>sightings all the time. >>Here is a list of my sources: >>http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html >Hi Larry! >Kudos again right off the bat for your excellent work on the *U* >database. You're doing a great job and should be the featured >speaker at UFO conventions instead of some of the others who get >much more attention. The others show up sober. >As for the "raw" data, I'd be curious how you manage to filter >out "junk" sightings. It's an ongiong problem within >investigative ufology, and one we've been struggling with for >awhile. That's a very good question, and there's no easy short answer. I rely on my own common sense. First I consider the source. Tabloids etc. are clearly out of the question. If they mistakenly report an actual event, they leave out the vitals! (Date, place, time of day, references) that's easy. I have to read between the lines. It doesn't take a genius to see that Raymond Fowler or Richard Haines are much more cautious and thorough than say Brad Steiger ( add your own favorite clowns ). That said, I read the text of each report looking for strong and weak points, alternative explanations and what not. Its mental legwork really. How many witnesses? Who were they? Did they go _out_looking_ for UFOs? I toss out the "night lights" and fireballs. There goes half the junk in one whack. A structured craft with some visible dimensions should be directly inferred if not plainly seen. That's not quite good enough, I want the craft to maneuver in some way that excludes balloons, blimps and aircraft seen at a distance. Take a look at some weekly UFO newsletters. If a heading says " UFOs seen over Ashtabula " (or wherever) odds are it was night lights. If there's a nice daylight disk or something, the headline is "Saucers over Suchandsuch." These come in as text files, usually 25 KB to 30 KB in length. I pare those down to anything from 50 bytes to maybe 2 KB. The 50 byte jobs simply have a heading and NUR for "no useable reports". The vast majority of my sightings come from the long running journals, books and catalogs. Not all of my listings match all these criteria of course, I am still weeding out junk I punched in 10 or 15 years ago when I was starved for data, and somewhat less discriminating. >Going through your list of sources, it looks like there >still may be some ringers in there. I'm sure of it. >Your source /252 for example, a book by Vicky Cameron, is one >we've looked at in some detail, and found that many of her cases >had simple explanations and in at least one case were hoaxes >outright. She also made it clear in her book she did no >investigation whatsoever, and therefore her entire book was made >up of "raw data." Canadian data is still somewhat hard to come by. Vicky's book has all of 31 *U* listings, barely in the "top 100" for raw event count. Compare this to 110 listings for a single book from Ray Fowler. His 4 books total 204 *U* listings. The heavy hitters are the long running UFO journals: LDLN with 1821 listings, FSR (827), MUFON Journal (968), NICAP UFO Inv. (520), APRO Bulletin (1167)... Loren Gross's indispensable little booklets contributed an amazing 446 cases for 1952 alone. As I find better sources for an existing listing, I change the main reference to that source... and away from the potboilers. I'm glad you mentioned Cameron, and not some even greater embarrassment from my long list of sources! I will gladly email you a listing of the 31 Cameron citations with dates and short synopsis offlist if you like. If you can find the time, I would greatly appreciate any feedback you have on these .. most especially that suspected hoax! >The NUFORC database by Davenport is a good example, too. Agreed! But the exact same filters apply as with the weekly email bulletins. >Peter's work is a tremendous resource, but it's easy to see >that the majority of cases reported are IFOs, and we routinely >go through them for our own studies. >We usually get about 250 cases per year for our annual study, >and it takes many hours of studying and re-investigating to find >the approximately 5% of those each year which are "real UFOs." >And of those, there are likely some could be sifted out if we >had the time and money. So, the problem of UFO sighting data is >a very real one. Allan Hendry adamantly insisted that UFO >databases cannot be used as data in statistical studies because >of inherent problems in collection of the reports by >investigators with varying opinions, methodology and styles. Hendry may well be right. That is why I try to word any findings here cautiously. Still, I would disagree with him somewhat. Given 10,000 or 11,000 filtered listings, I would hope some sort of useful indications could be squeezed out. If you have enough separate sources, and I stress _separate_, there might be enough overlap to smooth out local, temporal, geographical and personal biases. That's hard to do for Canada, much easier here. >Investigative ufology is a generally-ignored subfield and it >would be interesting to get some discussion going regarding the >collection and study of UFO reports. This area of research is, >after all, the foundation upon which all other ufology is based. >If we don't have a good handle on the nature of UFO sightings >themselves, then the value of research on UFO propulsion, >crash/retrievals, document retrieval and abductions are all on >shaky ground. >The work of people like yourself, Ted Phillips, Paul Ferrughelli >and others who collect and store UFO data cannot be >overemphasized. >-- >Nobody in particular Thank you for your kind words! Please email me offline. I want to clean up any bad data I may have. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:03:51 -0300 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:26:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:37:00 -0500 (CDT) >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >>>case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >>>found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >>>insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >>>unidentifieds. The beauty of Project Blue Book Special Report 14 is that 10% were listed as Insufficient Information and 20% as Unknowns after consistent investigation by a small group of final report evaluators. All 4 had to agree on Unknowns. Any 2 could list as a known >>4) The *U* Database is anything but "raw data". Perhaps you are >>thinking of some other database or catalog. I have been >>filtering out junk sightings for years. If I hadn't, *U* would >>have several times the present 17,660+ events listed, collected >>over the 15+ years it took to do all this. I throw out old >>sightings all the time. >>Here is a list of my sources: >>http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html >Hi Larry! >Kudos again right off the bat for your excellent work on the *U* >database. You're doing a great job and should be the featured >speaker at UFO conventions instead of some of the others who get >much more attention. >As for the "raw" data, I'd be curious how you manage to filter >out "junk" sightings. It's an ongiong problem within >investigative ufology, and one we've been struggling with for >awhile. Going through your list of sources, it looks like there >still may be some ringers in there. Your source /252 for >example, a book by Vicky Cameron, is one we've looked at in some >detail, and found that many of her cases had simple explanations >and in at least one case were hoaxes outright. She also made it >clear in her book she did no investigation whatsoever, and >therefore her entire book was made up of "raw data." >The NUFORC database by Davenport is a good example, too. Peter's >work is a tremendous resource, but it's easy to see that the >majority of cases reported are IFOs, and we routinely go through >them for our own studies. >We usually get about 250 cases per year for our annual study, >and it takes many hours of studying and re-investigating to find >the approximately 5% of those each year which are "real UFOs." >And of those, there are likely some could be sifted out if we >had the time and money. So, the problem of UFO sighting data is >a very real one. Allan Hendry adamantly insisted that UFO >databases cannot be used as data in statistical studies because >of inherent problems in collection of the reports by >investigators with varying opinions, methodology and styles. >Investigative ufology is a generally-ignored subfield and it >would be interesting to get some discussion going regarding the >collection and study of UFO reports. This area of research is, >after all, the foundation upon which all other ufology is based. >If we don't have a good handle on the nature of UFO sightings >themselves, then the value of research on UFO propulsion, >crash/retrievals, document retrieval and abductions are all on >shaky ground. >The work of people like yourself, Ted Phillips, Paul Ferrughelli >and others who collect and store UFO data cannot be >overemphasized. One might also look at the 30% UNKNOWNS of the Condon Report and the 746 of The UFO Evidence and the cases investigated by Jim McDonald such as the 41 in his Congressional Testimony. -- 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:02:38 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:54:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Young >From: Jean-Luc Rivera <JLRIV1@aol.com> >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:41:55 -0400 (EDT) >Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:19:42 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:37:46 -0400 >>>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:55:27 -0700 >>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Your remark is absolutely correct but if there was such a famous >correlation, the psychosociologists still have to explain why >there was no such wave between 1960 and 1962, when the war >became very nasty in Algeria, French generals tried to seize >power and one million people came back to France in a few days. >The trauma was far more important than in Indochina. Jean-Luc, Larry, Greg, et al.: Thanks, makes sense. Of course, 1952 wasn't 1962 in terms of public perceptions or attitudes toward UFOs. I did notice some smallish bulges on Larry's histograph, today, at: http://www.jps.net/larryhat/YDAY54.html from April to May (Dien Bien Phu fell on May 8) and in late July (the Indochina War ended on the 20th), but the big bulge later in the year probably is something different. I wonder what the French UFO sightings were like from '60 to '62? Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 2 UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Kean From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:31:49 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:57:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Kean >Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:15:05 -0300 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:36:13 -0400 >>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>To: 'UFO Updates' <updates@sympatico.ca> Stan wrote:- >There has been an enormous amount of effort put in to the Hill >Case. I met with Betty and Barney and John Fuller and Marjorie >Fish and spoke with Dr. Simon. I reviewed Marjorie's work with >Terence Dickinson then editor of ASTRONOMY and with Dr. George >Mitchell an astronomer at OSU as well as with Allen Hynek. >It stands up very well, despite false attacks by the likes of >Sagan, Vallee and many others who misrepresented what MF did. Stan, Correct me if I am wrong, but surely MF only 'identified' 15 out of the 28 stars on Betty Hill's map. What about the remainder ? Regards, Victor J.Kean Project FT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:09:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:05:24 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Maccabee >Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:27:55 -0400 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >The sad story of engineer Paul Bennewitz also brings us some >interesting informations on alleged personnel involved in these >operations. To begin with, we know that, when he reported to >Kirtland that he had recorded strange radio signals around >Manzano, which he attributed to ufos, he was received by several >officers, on 10 November 1980, according to Bruce Baccabee, in >his report on the UFO landings near Kirtland (Fufor, 1985):> >"The meeting included a Brigadier General, several Colonels, a >Major, an instrumentation specialist, and Dr Lehman, the >Director of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB. >This sounds like a rather" powerfull" group to discuss a subject >as officially uninteresting to the USAF/AFOSI as UFO reports."> My paper on the Kirtland Landings did not discuss the Bennewitz situation in any detail. For those who have never seen the paper, see below. The complete paper with illustrations will soon be posted at brumac.8k.com. _______________________________________________________________ This article was written in 1985, several years before the controversy over Richard Doty's activities and MJ-12 became public knowledge. At the time, I was not interested in the Paul Bennewitz aspect of the Kirtland UFO activity. I was only interested in the report of actual sightings of unidentified objects at or near Kirtland Air Force Base. Hence the Bennewitz controversy (and Bill Moore's activities related to Bennewitz, activities not revealed until the late 1980's) are only discussed briefly. This paper has been available from the Fund for UFO Research since 1985. *************************************************************** * UFO LANDINGS NEAR KIRTLAND AFB or WELCOME TO THE COSMIC WATERGATE by Bruce Maccabee c 1985,2000 by B. Maccabee SUMMARY The morning of August 9, 1980, was only about 20 minutes old when a security guard spotted a "round disc shaped object" with a very bright light which had landed in a restricted test area east of Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Subsequently the object ascended rapidly into the air. Both the descent and the ascension were witnessed by a group of guards about five miles away at the time. A report of the landing, prepared by agent Richard Doty of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) at Kirtland, became public in the spring of 1983, apparently as a result of a "leak" which was followed by a Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIPA) request by a UFO investigator (Barry Greenwood). In the spring of 1984, I contacted Doty to find out if he had more information than was contained in the 1 1/2 pages which had been released. I was not surprised to hear him tell me that he had interviewed the witnesses, gone to the landing site. and had written a larger report. I was not surprised because I found it difficult to believe that the Air Force would overlook something as important as a landing of SOMETHING inside a restricted (nuclear) storage area. He also said that there was more that he couldn't tell me. He further suggested that I write to Headquarters (HQ/AFOSI) to obtain all releasable information. I therefore wrote to HQ/AFOSI and requested the follow-on document under the FOIPA. The Chief of the Information Release Division, Noah Lawrence, denied that there was another document because there was none on file at HQ/AFOSI. Subsequently, because of my insistence, he called Doty on the phone and Doty (evidently) told him there was no such document. I then had a long conversation with Lawrence and he admitted that there was a "discrepancy" between what Doty told me and what he told Lawrence. Lawrence then asked that Doty be interviewed by his commanding officer (Lawrence did not interview Doty himself). The commanding officer (evidently) reported back to Lawrence that Doty denied the existence of another document. According to Lawrence, without a specific name or a file location of this report continued requests are futile. Unbeknownst to me, investigator Bill Moore had independently researched the case in 1982. After I had completed my investigation I told him what I had learned and he informed me of his investigation. The results of his investigation, which are included in a summary written by Moore and presented at the end of my paper, agree with my results, adding further evidence to my suspicion of a cover-up. This report summarizes what is now known about the incident and my attempts to find a doorway into the "Cosmic Watergate" which prevents the public from knowing the truth about the involvement of military intelligence agencies with the UFO problem. (**NOTE written in July, 2000** This paper was written in 1985. There has been no indication that the documents cited in this report are bogus. Instead, all investigation indicates that the event did happen. The events cited here are indirectly related to the Bennewitz affair and to the initial MJ-12 document (that refers to "Project Aquarius.") The document cited here was part of the initial connection between Bill Moore and his "inside contacts" that later led to the Eisenhower Briefing Document and other MJ-12 documents, the provenance of which is uncertain. Perhaps the leaking of this document to Moore was intended to establish the credibility of the leaker who would then provide further documents for whatever reason (unauthorized release of real documents or authorized release of disinforming documents?).****** _______________________________________________________________ _ PART 1: THE SIGHTINGS I begin the history of the Kirtland sightings with a list of the original sources for information (all dates are 1984 except, for Source A) SOURCE SYMBOL The Kirtland Landing Document dated Sept., 9, 1980; released by HQ/AFOSI, Spring, 1983 (A) Interview with Doty at his office, Feb. 15,1984 (B) Telephone conversation with Doty, morning,Feb. 17(C) Interview with Russ Curtis, Sandia Security, about noon, -Feb. 17 (D) Discussion with Doty at his office, afternoon, Feb. 17(E) Telephone conversation with Doty, April 26 (F) The sighting events, which occurred long before my involvement, can be reconstructed from information provided in Source A and from sources C and F. According to Source (A), Major Ernest Edwards of Central Security Control, Manzano Weapons Storage Area, reported the following information to Richard Doty at the AFOSI office at Kirtland, AFB, Albuquerque, N.M. (The main sighting) At about 10 minutes before midnight, Friday evening, August 9, 1980, three security policemen who were on duty at the Manzano Weapons storage area saw a "very bright light in the sky approximately 3 miles north-northeast of their position" (A) which was on the east side (A,C) of the Manzano storage area. (The storage area consists of a number of tunnels dug into three mountains that are just east of Kirtland AFB. The area is surrounded by a doubly fenced security perimeter. Nuclear devices are stored in the tunnels.) (NOTE 2000***: Sometime in the 1990's the Manzano Weapons Storage Area was been dismantled and the security fence was removed.) The light travelled southward at a "great speed and stopped suddenly in the sky over Coyote Canyon." The guards at first thought they were looking at a helicopter but "after observing the strange maneuvers (stop and go), they felt that a helicopter couldn't have performed such skills" (A). The light evidently descended behind distant mountains because the guards reported that "the light landed in the Coyote Canyon Area", although they apparently could not actually see where it had landed (A,C. A topographical map of the Coyote Canyon area shows that the canyon runs in an east-northeasterly direction from an area South of the Manzano storage area, and lies generally east of the storage area. It shows several structures - buildings - scattered throughout the canyon.) The three guards contacted Central Security Control (CSC) inside Manzano and CSC then contacted "Sandia Security, who conducts frequent building checks on two alarmed structures in the area." Sandia Security "advised that a patrol was already in the area and would investigate" (A). The scene now shifts about 5 miles east of the Manzano Storage Area (C,F) to the "furthest bunker on the left" (C) of an access road running along Coyote Canyon. A guard "who wishes his name not be divulged for fear of harassment" (A) was driving east on the road as part of a routine security check of the "alarmed structure (the bunker mentioned above) at approximately 20 minutes past midnight, i.e., during the early morning of Saturday, August 9, about 1/2 an hour after the sighting by the three Manzano guards described above. "As he approached the structure he observed a bright light near the ground behind the structure" (A). (It is interesting to note the phraseology used here, "near the ground," implying that the light was at some distance above the ground.) "He also observed an object he first thought was a helicopter. But after driving closer, he observed a round, disc shaped object. He attempted to radio for a back up patrol but his radio would not work. As he approached the object on foot armed with a shotgun, the object took off in a vertical direction at a high rate of speed. The guard was a former helicopter mechanic in the U.S. Army and stated that the object he observed was not a helicopter" (A). Returning to the three guards at Manzano, at an unstated time after they saw the bright light descend behind the hills east of them, they saw it "take off and leave proceeding straight up at a high speed and disappear" (A). The preceding history of the landing of a "round, disk shaped object" at Kirtland on August 8-9 constitutes the total amount of information available to civilian UFO researchers. The lack of detail is frustrating. One can easily ask a number of questions related to the events reported by the Sandia Guard. In particular, did the radio work before he approached the object in his vehicle? (One would assume so since he was probably no more than seven miles from his home station.) Did the radio work after the the vehicle had departed? How close did he get to the Object? (Since the bunker, according to a topographical map, is about 400 feet from the road, it is possible that he was within 500 feet of it.) How large was the "round disk shaped object?" Could he see any details of the structure? How high was the bright light above the ground and was it a part of the object or was it attached to another object? Were there any traces left on the ground at the landing site (depressions, burns). Were there any effects on devices stored in the bunker? Source A briefly mentions three other landings. The first landing was reported by "another (Sandia) security guard (who) observed a (sic) object land near an alarmed structure sometime during the first week of August." However the guard did not report it until shortly before Sept. 8 "for fear of harassment." The second landing, Aug. 8-9, has been discussed. The third landing was reported by a New Mexico State Patrolman who "sighted an aerial object land in the Manzano's (sic) between Belen and Albuquerque N.M." during the night of Aug. 10, l98O. This landing apparently occurred roughly south or south-southwest of the site of the Aug.8-9 landing described above. Finally, Source A reports that Major Edwards "advised on Aug. 22 (that) three other security policemen observed the same phenomena described by the first three. Again the object landed in Coyote Canyon. They did not see the object take off." Thus it appears that four landings occurred at or near Kirtland AFB during August, 1980: the first during the first week, the second during the night of August 8-9, the third during the night of August 10, and the fourth at some unspecified date presumably just before Aug. 22. The remainder of this paper concentrates on my investigation of the second Kirtland landing. PART 2: HOW THE AFOSI LEARNED OF THE LANDINGS Evidently the lone security policeman who witnessed the August 9 landing did not hesitate to report his sighting to Sandia Base Security heaquarters. The sighting was during the early morning of August 9, a Saturday, and that was the date of the guard's report to Sandia Security. Sandia Security had to wait until Monday the 11th to report the incident to the AFOSI agent. According to Source A (which was written nearly a month after these events), "On 11 Aug 198O, Russ Curtis, Sandia Security, advised that on 9 Aug 8O, a Sandia Security Guard (who wishes his name not be divulged for fear of harassment)" related the sighting described above. One might well pause at this point and ask why Sandia security would report the sighting to the AFOSI since UFO sightings are not of interest to the Air Force, according to public statements. There are two answers to this question, both of which are supplied by Source A. First, Source A explicitly states that the Air Force investigates sightings over Air Force bases. Secondly, and perhaps of more importance, is the fact that the AFOSI is supposed to get all reports related to incidents near nuclear devices. That nuclear devices were in the vicinity of the "round disc shaped object" is definite since Source A states "The two alarmed Structures located within the area contains (sic) HQ CR 44 material." HQ CR 44 is "Headquarters Collection Requirement #44 which implements DOD Directive 5210.41, "Security Criteria and Standards for Protecting Nuclear Weapons." Although CR 44 is primarily concerned with the possibilities for sabotage by "persons not connected with the Department of Defense" and with counterintelligence, it also states (para. 4.c.2) that local A.F. base commanders responsible for safety and security of nuclear weapons "are required to inform AFOSI of local incidents posing a threat to the security of nuclear weapons." The local AFOSI office, in turn, fowards copies of such information to a number of AFOSI offices. Although Source A does not specifically state that Doty initiated a search for witnesses who could corroborate the single guard's report, one can deduce that such a search was made from the fact that the Manzano and Sandia security organizations interviewed the Manzano guards. According to Russ Curtis, Sandia Security interviewed the Sandia guards who were on duty that night and reported the results to Doty (Sources D and E). Reference A does not indicate when Major Edwards interviewed the Manzano guards, but it does state that on Aug. 22 Edwards reported the fourth landing (see discussion above) to Doty. Then, on Sept. 2, Major Edwards provided the full details of the sighting by the group of three guards who witnessed the second Kirtland Landing (Aug. 8-9). During the spring of 1983 reporter Dan Spurling interviewed Edwards by telephone. Edwards, who had been transferred to Hahn AFB in Germany, said, "The best I can say is something happened which I could not explain nor could I get any evidence of anything occurring at Manzano or in the Coyote Canyon area from any other military source that would have explained the situation and the happenings there. I really can't say for sure what it was. All I can say is that there was something that I guess matched a lot of the stories and reports of UFO sightings. I could not explain it nor could I come up with any reasonable explanation through any other source. " According to Source A it was not until Sept. 8 that Doty learned of the first Kirtland landing (see the discussion above). However, Source A indicates that Doty learned of the third landing within a day of its occurrence. According to Source A, referring to the patrolman's sighting (see discussion above), "The patrolman reported the sighting to the Kirtland AFB Command Post, who later referred the patrolman to the AFOSI Dist 17. AFOSI Dist 17 advised the patrolman to make a report through his own agency. On 11 Aug 80 the Kirtland Public Information office advised the patrolman (that) the USAF no longer investigates such sightings unless they occur on a USAF base." Thus it appears that Doty learned of the patrolman's sighting on Aug. 11, the same date that he learned of the Aug.8-9 sighting. During the days or weeks following the landing Doty "Contacted all the agencies who utilize the test range and it was learned (that) no aerial tests are conducted in the Coyote Canyon area. Only ground tests are conducted" (Source A). On Sept. 8, the date on which Doty learned of the first Kirtland landing, he wrote the 1 1/2 page report (Source A) and forwarded it to HQ/AFOSI. He sent it to a particular division, HQ/IVOS, which is the Security Projects Division, Counterintelligence Directorate, HQ/AFOSI. PART 3: WHAT THE AFOSI AGENT TOLD ME Although I had received a copy of Source A in 1983, it was not until the early spring of 1984 that I was able to personally talk to Doty about its accuracy. I wanted to find out if there was any further information and, in particular, if an investigation had been carried out. The implications of such an event seemed so important that I couldn't imagine that the local AFOSI office, or Doty himself, would simply file the information supplied by others without checking up on it. I was at Kirtland Air Force Base attending a meeting so, during a break in the meeting, I went to the AFOSI office and, quite unannounced, confronted Doty at his office. I showed him the document and said I would like to ask him some questions about it. He invited me into his office and we talked; or, more accurately, I asked questions and he gave brief answers to many of the questions and refused to answer others. The discussion (Source B) ranged over several topics besides the Aug. 8-9 landing. For example, he said that the landing was only one of a number of incidents in the area over the years, but he wouldn't tell me about any of the others. In my previous studies of early cases in the southwest I had run across the name Edward A. Doty, who is mentioned in the final report an Project Twinkle. (Project Twinkle had been set up in the late 1940's and early 1950"s to obtain data an the green fireball phenomena and other objects that were seen near military installations in the southwest.) In 1951 Edward Doty was a Major and he was stationed at Holloman AFB, where he was involved with the Project Twinkle investigations. I mentioned the name Edward Doty and asked Richard if Edward was his father. Richard confirmed that Edward was his father. (Note: I subsequently learned that actually Edward Doty was not his father but another relative.) He then told me that he had discussed UFO sightings with his father. I also learned that Richard had been quite "famous" for a short period of time after Source A was released because of the widespread media interest. With regard to the Aug. 8-9 landing itself, one of the first things Doty said was that he endorsed the accuracy of every statement in Source A. I questioned him further on his endorsement and he simply reiterated that "everything was correct to the best of his knowledge" or words to that effect. This surprised me somewhat, since the document really only quotes the statements of others, so I asked him if he had confirmed the accuracy of the document by talking to the witnesses and he said that he had. More explicity, he said that he personally investigated the landing. I asked him if he carried out a "good" investigation, i.e., by going to the locations of the sightings with the witnesses, estimating angles, sizes, directions of sighting lines, etc. I was particularly interested in the landing itself and whether or not he had stood where the guard had stood in order to estimate the size of the object. He said that he had gone to the spot, but he would not give me any details beyond what was in the document. He simply said that he was sure that the guard saw what was reported, and again he endorsed the accuracy of the document. Upon further questioning about his investigation he told me that there was a larger report and that what I had was only a preliminary report." I asked if he had a copy and he said no, he hadn't retained a copy, but that he had sent all the material to headquarters. It seemed strange to me that he wouldn't keep a copy of whatever information he had an the sighting, but I could see I would get nowhere by pressing him. He suggested that I write to HQ/AFOSI for all releasable information. I asked him if the report were classified and he said he couldn't comment on the classification. I made the question a little less direct by asking if he thought it might be compartmented and he sort of chuckled and said that it probably was. What he didn't say, but what may be inferred from his admission is that if it is compartmented, then the report was classified Top Secret and only people with certain clearances ("tickets" to a compartment) would have access to the document. (Such documents are beyond the reach of the FOIPA under ordinary circumstances.) When I left Doty I was convinced that the previously released document is accurate. I decided to do a little investigating on my own. Although I didn't expect any further help from Doty, at least, there was nothing in his attitude which made me suspect that I would run into any interference from him. One further thing I had learned from him was that I couldn't simply drive to the landing site because it was inside a restricted area. This fact led me to the first direct evidence of a "cover up." PART 4: THE INVESTIGATION BEGINS Within the day after my first meeting with Doty I decided to try to visit the landing site myself. Although the landing site was in a restricted area, I thought that I could enter the area if I had an escort or permission from Russ Curtis. Two days after my first conversation with Doty I called him on the telephone to ask general directions to the landing site. He sounded doubtful about the possibility that I could get into the area to see it, but nevertheless he told me it was about 5 miles east of the Manzano Storage area and, more specifically, that the alarmed structure mentioned in the document was the "furthest bunker to the left" along the road going into the canyon (Source C). This seemed specific enough for me and I went to the Sandia Base headquarters several hours later to ask Mr. Curtis if I could go to the landing site. I showed Curtis the document and mentioned that I investigated unusual events like this. After a brief glance at the document Curtis responded by saying that he couldn't let me into the restricted area to investigate an event (i.e., the landing) that had never happened. This response surprised me completely. I wouldn't have been surprised if he had said that he wouldn't let me go to the landing site for security reasons, but his denial of the information in Doty's report was something I hadn't expected. I questioned him further and he continued to deny that any Sandia guard had made such a report. He even went so far as to say that the first he had heard of the event was when Doty gave him a copy of the report (i.e., a copy of Source A). This statement was ridiculous an the face of it because Curtis is identified in the report as the source of information an the landing. Curtis stated that he knew which guards had been in the area at the time and that he had interviewed them after Doty had contacted him for information. He further stated that all the guards denied seeing any such object and that he gave written statements based on the interviews to Doty (Source D). I left Curtis feeling that he was trying to cover up something. (Note: After writing this I learned from Bill Moore that he had talked to Curtis in 1982. At that time Curtis did not deny the incident. but said, among other things, the "information of this nature is not normally handled through this office." A report by Moore on his interview of Curtis is presented in Appendix B.) I immediately went back to Doty's office and said "I've got a bone to pick with you. Curtis has denied the document." Doty looked surprised and said that he didn't know what Curtis' orders were with regard to talking about the landing, but that Curtis certainly knew about it. He pointed put that the guard was guaranteed anonymity and then he reaffirmed his previous statement that the document was accurate. He further stated that the guard had told him about what happened and that there was a lot more he couldn't tell me. I mentioned that Curtis had said he had given Doty copies of interviews with the Sandia guards and Doty agreed, describing them as a collection of two paragraph simple interviews. PART 5: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUESTS When I left Doty the second time I was convinced that there was much more to the landing than was reported in the "preliminary document" which had been released, and furthermore I was convinced that Doty had investigated the sighting himself. Otherwise, how could he be so sure of the accuracy of the document, even in the face of Curtis' rejection of it? I was also convinced that he had filed a much more detailed report. My problem was to get a copy of that report. I therefore wrote my first FOIPA request fr information on this matter (Feb. 20, 1984). In it I asked for a clean copy of the already released landing document and then asked for "a copy of the follow-on report filed by the AFOSI agent, including copies of witness interviews and on-site investigations as well as any conclusions regarding the nature of the object/phenomenon." I asked the FOIPA officer (Noah Lawrence) to forward my request to the office which possessed the follow-on document if it weren't at HQ/AFOSI. I concluded my request with the statement "In the event that the report has been treated as compartmented information, please so indicate in your response." I included this statement because Doty had suggested that it was compartmented, in which case it wouldn't be released under the FOIPA. However, I hoped that Lawrence might confirm the existence of the document by stating its classification even if he wouldn't release it. Lawrence responded (Feb. 29) to my FOIPA request by sending me a clean copy of the released document, as I requested, plus several documents relating to the investigation of Dr. Paul Bennewitz, a scientist and entrepreneur who makes and sells certain types of test instruments. Dr. Bennewitz had claimed that he had seen and photographed strange aerial objects over the Manzano storage area, that he had recorded electromagnetic signals from the Manzano/Coyote Canyon areas, and that he even had evidence of contact with aliens who were flying the objects. These documents concerning Bennewitz were interesting because they indicated that the Air Force would investigate a civilian who claimed to have information about flying saucers. However, the information supplied by Bennewitz to the AFOSI investigators was not directly related to the Kirtland Landing which is the subject of this paper, so I will not discuss it further after pointing out the following: a) The subject title of the Bennewitz documents was the same as the title of the landing document, "Kirtland AFB, NM, 8 Aug-3 Sep 80 Alleged Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Lights in Restricted Test Range", even though the date of the first Bennewitz interview was late October, 1980. Furthermore, Bennewitz did not specifically report on events during August 1980. Nevertheless. the inclusion of the Bennewitz material under the same heading suggests that the AFOSI considered that Bennewitz's information had bearing on, or was further confirmation of, UFO activity around Kirtland AFB in August 1980. b) The first AFOSI agent who was contacted was none other than Richard Doty. He was contacted by Bennewitz "through Major Ernest E. Edwards", the same man who had supplied Doty with the information that Manzano guards had seen object landing in the Coyote Canyon area. Probably Bennewitz, who claimed that there was a threat against the Manzano area, first managed to reach Edwards and then Edwards, having already made contact with Doty because of the earlier sightings, immediately contacted Doty to inform him of the new information from Bennewitz. (c) The date that Bennewitz contacted Doty was Oct. 24, 1980. On Oct. 26 Agent Doty and Jerry Miller visited Bennewitz. Miller, a former investigator who supplied information to Project Blue Book, the only publically-known Air Force UFO investigating agency (Blue Book ended in 1969), is described as "one of the most knowledgeable and impartial investigators of Aerial Objects in the southwest." According to the first Bennewitz, document, which is dated Oct. 28, Bennewitz showed some film of aerial objects flying over and around the Manzano Weapons Storage Area and Coyote Canyon. According to the document, Miller, after analyzing the data, concluded that the film clearly shows some type of unidentified aerial objerts." The period of time covered by the evidence provided by Bennewitz was 15 months. Thus it is surprising that the title of the Bennewitz documents only referred to the "alleged landings" of 8 Aug-3 Sep, a period of only one month out of the fifteen covered by Bennewitz. d) the AFOSI convened a second meeting with Bennewitz on 10 Nov 1980. The meeting included a Brigadier General several Colonels, a Major, an instrumentation specialist, and Dr. Lehman, the Director of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB. This sounds like a "powerful" group to discuss a subject as officially uninteresting to the USAF/AFOSI as UFO reports. The fact that all of this attention was given to Bennewitz suggests that the events of August 1980 were treated seriously and may even have "scared" the AFOSI. Although the AFOSI may have treated the investigation seriously, ultimately nothing came of the Bennewitz investigation, so far as I could determine. (NOTE 2000: in the late 1980's Bill Moore stated that Bennewitz had been the subject of a disinformation plan. Perhaps this was because with his elecronic listening devices he had detected classified radio signals emanating from Kirtland AFB, signals which had nothing to do with UFOs but which were, nevertheless, something that the Air Force wanted to keep secret. At any rate the Bennewitz story is far more complicated than has been indicated in this paper.) Returning to the main subject of this paper, I found that the clean copy of the landing document was interesting, even though it revealed no new information about the events described in Part 1. It was interesting because of the change in classification. The originally "leaked" version was classified SECRET with the word SECRET at the top of each page and at the bottom of the second page. The bottom of the first page was stamped FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY. The clean copy released by Lawrence had no evidence of a SECRET stamp although it did have the FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY stamp. I compared the new, clean copy with the original copy of a copy and determined by comparison of typed and handwritten letters and numbers that the word SECRET must have been stamped onto copies of the original report, and that the original report was only marked FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY. Thus it appears that someone decided that the landing document contained material that should be classified secret. I wrote another letter (March 6) in which I thanked Mr. Lawrence for the clean copy and then pointed out that he hadn't responded to the second part of my original request, which was for the follow-on document or "final report" of the landing incident. I also asked him to define the terms DC II and HQ CR 44, which appear in the landing document. Lawrence responded (March 14) saying "AFOSI is not maintaining any additional information pertaining to the incident at the Manzano Weapons Storage Area." He also gave definitions of the terms I had mentioned: DC II stands for Defense Central Index of Investigations and HQ CR 44 "is an abbreviation for Headquarters Collection Requirement Number 44." Lawrence did not state the type of information is requested (required) by CR 44. However, I obtained a sanitized version of CR 44 and found that it outlines the types of information that must be reported when any incident occurs in an area where nuclear weapons are stored or otherwise used. HQ CR 44 has been further described in Part II of this paper. I wrote another letter (March 24) in which I asked Lawrence to be specific as to whether he meant that only HQ AFOSI had no further documents, or whether he actually meant that no office of the AFOSI had further information. In the event that no AFOSI office had the information, I asked him to refer back to my original FOIPA request in which I had asked for my letter to be forwarded to the office where the final report resides. I then asked for the name of that organization. I also asked for copies of all correspondence between his office and other offices or organizations "which have been generated by my request," for a statement of policy under which an investigation of an event such as the landing incident would be carried out, for a statement of policy regarding what is done with reports of investigations of this nature, for definitions of the abbreviations HQIVG, HQIVOS. and HQIVOSP which appear in the landing and Bennewitz documents, and finally I asked for the clearance level of the "Chief, Information Release Division" (i.e., of Lawrence). Lawrence responded (Apr. 6) that no AFOSI office had a follow-on document or final report and that he was not aware of any reports maintained by other government agencies. He also stated that there was no correspondence with other offices of agencies that resulted from my FOIPA request. With regard to the Air Force policy he claimed that "AFOSI does not investigate alleged sightings of unidentified flying objects." He further stated that "most AFOSI records, excluding certain counterintelligence records are maintained for 15 years. The file released to you on February 19, 1984 will be destroyed at the end of 1995." He defined HQ IVO as the functional address indicator (FAI) for Directorate of Counterintelligence, HQ AFOSI; HQ IVOS as the FAI for the Security Projects Division, Counterintelligence Directorate, HQ AFOSI; and HQ IVOSP as the FAI for the Security Programs Branch, Security Projects Division, Counterintelligence Directorate, HQ AFOSI. Finally he stated that all AFOSI personnel have Top Secret clearances and ended his letter with the statement, "We can be of no further assistance to you regarding this matter." PART 5: THE PLOT THICKENS AS DOTYS STORY CHANGES After receiving this letter I could see that I was about to lose any chance I might have of uncovering the follow-on document. Therefore I decided to find out if Doty would let me refer directly to him as the source of information that there was a follow-on document. I called him up on April 26 (Source F). He reconfirmed that the landing had taken place about 5 miles due east of the Manzano storage area, that the guards who saw the object were on the east side of Manzano, and that he had interviewed the guards. (He also confirmed that he had interviewed the three guards involved in the sighting later in August.) He confirmed that there were a couple of hills between the guards at Manzano and the landing site (which would explain why the Manzano guards saw the light drop downward and disappear behind the mountains, but did not actually see the object while it was on the ground). He confirmed that he wrote a report (other than the document I already had) on the events. I asked him if I could use his name as a reference for that information and he was at first vague, saying that I should write to headquarters for all available information. I then asked him if I could say that he wrote a follow on report and his answer was an abrupt "no." But, did you do such a report, I asked. He answered yes and then said he would rather not have me use his name in connection with a follow-on report. I then asked him if I could say that he interviewed the guards, and this time he said yes. I asked him if he knew why Russ Curtis denied the accuracy of the already released document and he said that he didn't know what Curtis' orders were. I asked him if anything similar (i.e., a UFO sighting or landing) had occurred recently but he would not comment on that question, and our discussion ended. That very same day I again wrote to Noah Lawrence. In that letter I included the following statement: "I have talked to Richard Doty... (who)... has supplied me with very basic information on his investigation... such as that he interviewed the three Manzano guards... the single guard who reported the landed bright object, ... and the other guards. I have also talked to Russ Curtis who reported that Sandia guards were interviewed. The results of those interviews were given to Doty. Doty further told me that he had sent all information that he had on the sightings to headquarters and retained none." My letter continued "I therefore resubmit my request for the follow-on information on these sightings. If you cannot locate the report that I request, then perhaps you could look through the list of messages and documents received from the 17th District during the period 9 Sept -9 Oct. 1980). There should be transferral documents or statements indicating the receipt of Doty's report and also indicating where the report would have been sent (or who got copies). Doty told me that he did not know what had happened to the more detailed report, but that it might be compartmented. If this is so, please indicate." Thus in this letter I provided enough information to build a strong circumstantial case for there being a follow-on document. This case is based on Doty's statement, which he said I could use, that he interviewed all the witnesses and upon the independent statement by Russ Curtis that the Sandia guards had been interviewed and the interviews given to Doty. Using this evidence alone one can ask, where are the written records of those interviews if not in some follow-on report? Furthermore, this evidence proves that Doty did carry out an investigation. Are we to believe, then, that Doty made no written record of his investigation? About three weeks later I got my response from Lawrence (letter dated l May 1984):"The incident reported in... (the released document)... is written documentation of information received from the Security Police Commander (SPC) at Kirtland Air Force Base. Although AFOSI made some preliminary inquiries regarding data provided by SPC, no formal investigation was conducted. AFOSI conducts investigations at the request of Air Force commanders. The documents released to you clearly show the Commander Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, did not request an AFOSI investigation." Of the course, the document actually has nothing to say about the desires of the Commander at Kirtland AFB with regard to the Kirtland Landing. (However, the documents that relate to the sightings by Dr. Bennewitz, mentioned earlier, clearly indicate that SOMEBODY requested an investigation of Bennewitz in the same time frame - the fall 1980 - as the Kirtland Landing.) Lawrence's statement indicates that he had not carefully read the released document and that he had not seriously considered my statement that Doty had interviewed all the witnesses. He refers to "preliminary inquiries regarding data provided by SPC" but that "no formal investigation was conducted." Perhaps the problem lies in the definition of "formal investigation." Perhaps interviewing everybody is not sufficiently formal. It seemed to me that Lawrence had not treated my last letter seriously, so I called him up to find out what was going on. On May 25 he told me that he had talked to Doty after getting my letter According to Lawrence Doty said that he (Doty) had received information through normal procedures and had "tested the complaint" (or words to that effect) to find out if there had been a threat to the base. Having concluded that there was no threat he collected no further information. Lawrence further said that Doty told him that he (Doty) had been misquoted (by me) in regard to the existence of a follow-on report. Since I was positive about what Doty, had told me in person and on the phone, it seemed to me that Doty had changed his story when talking to Lawrence. I questioned Lawrence regarding the propriety of Doty carrying out an investigation and Lawrence stated that Doty had done correctly in looking into the incident briefly to determine whether or not there had been a threat. Lawrence further indicated that he had searched diligently for another document, visiting various AFOSI offices a number of times to find out if a further document had, in fact, become separated from the document which was released. Lawrence agreed that there was a discrepancy between what Doty told me and what he told Lawrence, and then Lawrence asked me to tell him exactly what I had been told by Doty. I therefore gave him a reasonably detailed overview of my conversations with Doty. I told him that Doty had said, during our first conversation, that he had interviewed all the witnesses, had gone to the locations of the sightings, etc. and that there was a follow-on report. I mentioned that during the second conversation (by phone) Doty had revealed more information than was in the released document (i.e., the actual location of the reported landing) and that he had confirmed Curtis' statement about the interview statements of the Sandia guards. I mentioned that during my third conversation with him, just after talking to Curtis, Doty reconfirmed the accuracy of the document and said that there was more that he couldn't tell me. Finally, I summarized my most recent phone conversation in which Doty confirmed what he had told me two months earlier. I referred to my notes as I talked to Lawrence and he made notes on what I told him. At the end of the discussion he said that he intended to bring Doty's superior into the discussion. He promised to respond to me by letter in less than a week. Not having heard from him by June 1, I called. He said that Doty had not yet been contacted, but that he had talked to Doty's commanding officer and asked the officer to interview Doty as soon as possible. The commander would send a copy of the results of the interview to Lawrence and Lawrence would respond to me based on those results. Lawrence also said he again checked various offices and again failed to turn up a follow-on document. Lawrence also said that "oddly enough" there is a man at AFOSI headquarters who was at Kirtland at the time and who remembers the incident but doesn't remember any other report. However this man was not involved with the Kirtland Landing investigation. (The agent referred to may be Thomas Cseh, who wrote one of the documents related to Benhewitz, but who was not involved in the landing investigation.) PART 6: CONCLUSION - THE COVER UP BEGINS HERE About two weeks later I received a letter in which Lawrence wrote, "Appropriate inquiries have been made regarding what was thought to be inconsistencies in our separate telephone conversations with SA (special agent) Doty. I am fully satisfied that there are no additional APOSI originated documents pertaining to the information reported in AFOSI File 9017D93-0/29 (i.e., the released document). Also, as I previously stated, I am unaware of any documents regarding this matter which may have been prepared by other Air Force components. Please note that you were provided with three documents (dated 28 Oct 80, 26 Nov. 80, and 30 Jul 81; i.e., the Bennewitz documents) in addition to the 2-9 Sep 80 document signed by SA Doty. We believe that in your conversation with SA Doty, any reference by him to additional documents pertained to these three documents." When I read the letter I became angry. Although there was no clear statement in the letter that Doty had actually contradicted, under interrogation, what he had told me, it was evident that he had done so. What was clear was that Lawrence, if he was telling the truth, was unaware of any follow-on document. When I read the last sentence of Lawrence's letter I smelled a rat. I called Lawrence about a week later and told him so. It seemed to me that he or Doty was trying to cover-up the follow-on landing documents by implying that I did not know what Doty and I had actually talked about in our first conversation. Did he really believe that the Bennewitz documents were the follow-on report I referred to? I told him I was sure that Doty and I had never discussed Bennewitz, but that if we had, the discussion had been so brief as to fail to register in my memory. Certainly I was positive that the follow-on report to which Doty referred concerned the landing, not Bennewitz. I wanted to know whether or not Lawrence had carried out a good interrogation of Doty. Since Lawrence did not talk to Doty directly, but only to the commanding officer, I asked him if he could say exactly what questions were asked of Doty and he said no. I asked if Doty had been asked if he had actually interviewed the witnesses, but Lawrence didn't know the answer. I asked if Doty had been questioned about going to the actual landing spot, but Lawrence didn't know the answer. I asked whether Doty confirmed receiving a collection of interviews of the Sandia Guards, but Lawrence didn't know the answer. Basically, Lawrence did not know whether or not Doty had been asked certain key questions which would support my claim that there is a follow-on document. Lawrence justified his failure to actually find out what Doty was asked by saying that he trusted the commanding officer do a good interview. "SIC TRANSIT GLORIA FOIPA." So, what are we left with? From the point of view of you, dear reader, it may appear to be simply a case of my word against Doty's. But it is not that simple. As evidence that there should be more written information an the landing, I offer first the released document itself. Note that it was written nearly a month after Doty first learned of the landings which were reported by Curtis and by the New Mexico policeman. Why did Doty wait so long to file a report? If he had wanted to send a brief report of the incident he could have sent one during the second week of August. But, taking Doty at his word that the released document is "absolutely" accurate, it is clear why he waited. He had to wait several weeks to locate other witnesses who could confirm, at least in part, the landing. The fact that he was willing to wait nearly a month before reporting the incident indicates that it was not treated as a top priority event, i.e., there was no perceived threat against the base. But if there was no threat, then why bother to report it at all a month afterward? Lawrence said he did not know whether Doty had been asked by the commanding officer why he made the report, so we don't know the answer to that question. But I can guess: it was as Doty told me, a preliminary report based on information supplied by another source, namely, Major Edwards of Manzano Security, about an incident which fell within the purview of "CR 44". Therefore, as soon as Doty got the information that the landing event had essentially been confirmed by three witnesses other than the Sandia guard (who actually saw the landed object and saw it take off) he knew that the report would be treated seriously by headquarters. He learned about the Manzano guards during the first week of September. He probably immediately began his own interviews of the Manzano guards. Then, on Sept. 8 he learned of the second Sandia guard who had witnessed a landing in early August. He included this information in the released document with no comment. Now, with four landings of "objects" reported, Doty could not ignore the situation. It seems likely that Doty filed the document with headquarters to indicate the seriousness of the situation. However, he did not refer to his own efforts in obtaining information (interviewing witnesses, going to the landing site, etc.) because, as Lawrence pointed out, the AFOSI does not investigate incidents such as these unless the Air Force base commander requests an investigation. Doty was "lucky" in this regard because, using the supplied information, he was able to provide for HQ AFOSI a moderately detailed and convincing report an the sightings without revealing that he had independently talked to witnesses. At the same time he could truthfully indicate (in the released document) that his (basic) information came from other sources. Furthermore, he could truthfully tell me, several years later, that the information in the released document was completely correct, that he knew it was so because he had investigated, and that there was more information which he couldn't tell me. As further evidence that there should be more written information I offer the statement by Russ Curtis that he gave Doty a collection of interviews of the Sandia guards and Doty's own confirmation of Curtis' statement. What evidence is there of a cover-up? The first indication I had that an intentional cover-up was in force was when Russ Curtis stated that the incident had never occurred and that the first time he had seen the released document was when Doty gave him a copy. The next indication came when Doty told me that there was more information which he couldn't tell me about the landing. Why couldn't he tell me, I wondered. After all, UFOs are not official Air Force business, according to the Air Force. The final indication came in Lawrence's last letter which clearly indicates that either (a) Doty changed his story and lied to his Commanding officer, or (b) he convinced the commanding officer that the truth could not be told to Lawrence, or (c) Lawrence has been told the full story and has lied to me. I wouldn't be surprised at any one of the above three. So, if there is an intentional cover-up, then why was I told anything? I think that Doty was trying to be helpful by giving me enough information to make it clear that the released document was accurate without revealing any further information about the landing. Apparently I caught him completely off guard when I called him an the phone two days after our first meeting and asked for reasonably exact directions to the landing site so that I could go there myself. The Landing Document does not state the location of the landing. The only way Doty could have found out the landing location was to interview the guard who saw the landing. Did Doty suddenly realize his indiscretions when he was first asked by Lawrence about a follow-on report? Did he then decide to clam up?" Only he knows. The totality of my effort to determine the accuracy of the Kirtland Landing Document leaves us with the following new information: (a) according to Doty it did take place as described in the released document (b) there has been an overt attempt to deny to the general public any further evidence which was turned up during the investigations of the landing and of the other four UFO sightings mentioned in the released document c) in an investigation of this type, when one is trying to pry UFO information out of the Air Force, it is not sufficient to simply write FOIPA act requests; it is also necessary to talk to the actual people involved. POSTSCRIPT A After I had completed this paper I sent copies of Parts 1 through 5 to Noah Lawrence in order to give him a chance to comment on, criticize or correct my statements about his involvement. I also asked him, "If you still say there is no follow-on report, then what do you think that Doty did with the information he obtained by interviewing the witnesses and with the statements of the Sandia Guards (the existence of which were confirmed by Russ Curtis). Several weeks later I received a letter from Lawrence who stated "We do not wish to critique your report, which is returned herewith. Our responses to your previous requests have provided to you all the information we have regarding the Kirtland AFB incident." At the bottom of the letterhead paper on which all of Lawrence's letters have been written is the statment:"HELPING TO PROTECT A GREAT WAY OF LIFE." I do not doubt the accuracy of this statement. However, I sometimes wonder what ELSE the AFOSI is helping to protect. POSTSCRIPT B I won one from the AFOSI! As part of my investigation I requested documents which describe how the AOSI is authorized to carry out investigations. Lawrence responded that the documents required two hours of professional search time and one hour of clerical search time, and, accordingly, I would be charged $43.70 for the documents (which includes $0.10 per page for copy fees). In his letter Lawrence indicated that if I decided to appeal the decision I should write to the Secretary of the Air Force via AFOSI headquarters. (This way he would know if I actually wrote to the Secretary!) I sent a check for the full amount to AFOSI in order to expedite the shipment of the documents. I also took his advice and wrote a letter to the Secretary as follows: "As part of a research and public information project I have requested information concerning official policy of the AFOSI. Inasmuch as the release of this information is in the public interest and inasmuch as I personally have to bear the expense, I protest the charges for search and copying. However, to decrease the amount of time I have to wait for the information I have paid the requested fees. I hope that you will agree that it was inappropriate for the AFOSI/DADF to charge me for this information and will direct that the money be returned. About a month later (after I had received the information and after I had mailed a copy of the report to Lawrence) I received a letter in which Lawrence said "We have reconsidered our decision to charge you $43.70 for search and reproduction fees. Accordingly your check, in that amount is returned." HOORAY! ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPENDIX Contained in this Appendix is a summary of William Moore's investigation. Moore's summary shows that he preceded me on a number of points, including the emphasis that Doty put on the accuracy of the Landing Document, Doty's claim that he had personnally investigated, and that there "were 'most likely' other documents as well." Moore also talked to Russ Curtis and Curtis did not deny that the landing took place but rather remembered that "unusual lights" had been reported in the area. *********************************************************** NOTES PERTINENT TO "WELCOME TO THE COSMIC WATERGATE" by Bill Moore (1985) (1) I was leaked a copy of the Kirtland document by a contact in the Washington, DC area in late January, 1982. The comment was "This is something you might be interested in". During the summer of 1982, I served for a brief period as a consultant to KPIX-TV, San Francisco, CA, while they were engaged in making a special on UFOs which at the time was intended to run only locally. (It was subsequently syndicated to a number of other stations around the country.) In my capacity as consultant, I made the Kirtland document available to KPIX who then agreed to send me to New Mexico to see what more could be learned about it, As a result of all of the above, a short clip on the Kirtland incident was used in the KPIX special, a part of which pictured the document I had made available to the station. It was as a result of seeing this special that Barry Greenwood filed his FOIA request with AFOSI and obtained his copy of the document more than a year after I had obtained mine. Although I was not able to learn much about the incident while in New Mexico, I did manage to obtain the following. (2) Doty confirmed to me that the report was entirely accurate, that he had investigated thoroughly and that there were "most likely" other documents as well, although he would not confirm or deny officially. This was on June 16, 1982 over coffee in Albuquerque. The next day, in a subsequent discussion, he made an unclassified map of the area available to me and indicated on it the location of the area and structures involved. The map was dated 1 January 1975. (3) An interview (brief) with Russ Curtis at 3:30 PM on June 21st, 1982, produced a gruff comment that he remembered some talk about lights in the area, but couldn't comment specifically because "Manzano is strictly military; not, my department at all. He readily admitted he knew Doty and confirmed that there are 'alarmed structures' in the Coyote Canyon area, but balked at discussing the nature of these structures or the contents of them. I asked if this information was classified, to which he replied "As far as I'm concerned, it is.' His final comment concerning the "unusual lights" was that information of this nature is not normally handled through his office". He refused to elaborate. (4) An effort to locate the other military personnel mentioned in the document produced the followin results: (A) A1C Martin W. Rist was listed in the phone book as living at 139 Gen. Arnold St. NE. The listed phone number produced a "no longer in service" recording when dialed. A physical check of the address revealed a family named Chavez living there. Subsequent checking with the AFB revealed that Rist had been transferred out several months earlier. Efforts to determine where he had been transferred to produced a dead end. (B) AMN Anthony D. Frazier had apparently been gone from the base for some time. (C) SSgt Stephen Ferenz was still listed in the phone directory as living at 2202 1vy Pl. NE. When I dialed the number given, I was informed that the number had been changed and that the new number was unlisted. A physical check of the address revealed (curiously) that there was no such address. I then obtained a number for him through the Base Locator and made several calls before I was able to speak with him. The conversation was brief and to the point. He had been told not to discuss the matter." Click. (5) An interview with Jerry Miller (mentioned in the Bennewitz material) on June 21,1982 at 7 PM at his home, produced a "recollection" of having heard of such an event, along with a statement that he had had no "direct involvement with it" and hence "couldn't discuss it". Miller seemed more interested in asking me questions about UFOs than in put to him. He admitted he had been "consulted" concerning Bennewitz and that he had "met with him" and viewed his "set-up', but would not commit himself beyond 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:50:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:14:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart - Velez >From: "Tim D. Brigham" <Dellamorte@mad.scientist.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >Date: Tue, Aug 1, 2000, 2:26 AM >>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 07:34:38 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Corky Kippenberger <KIPPENBERGER@cs.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary Hart >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>1.) Do you have _any_ source, at all, that has told you that >>John Carpenter released files that were unsanitized to _anyone_, >>other than what Elizabeth Carpenter has told or shown you? >I was finally able to locate where I had heard that 5 or 7 >(couldn't recall which) files had been returned unsanitized. The >first post, to my knowledge, which states this - >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 02:42:35 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:56:31 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Velez, Andrus And Carpenter - Velez <snip> >>What you didn't know because you _didn't_ ask is, I have been >>getting information from (now 7 of them) the abductees whose >>files were sold. They have all been reporting that the personal >>info in the files was _not_ "blacked out" at the time of sale as >>Andrus and Bigelow claim. To Bigelow's credit files have been >>returned to one individual that I know of, but... nothing was >>"blacked out." The name, address, social security number, >>medical records were all there in plain view. Part of the sale >>material included audio and videotapes of hypnosis sessions and >>the medical records of many of the abductees. Tim asked: >Maybe I'm alone in this, but this is confusing the hell out of >me. John has since said that he could only confirm that one file >(which turned out to be that of J Carpenter's ex) was sent >unsanitized. John, I can appreciate you are done with this >matter for now, but could you please straighten out this >contradiction? I'm sorry man. I just reread this and it does read like I'm claiming that seven files were unsnaitized. What I was trying to say was; that at that point in time I was corresponding with seven of the abductees (who identified themselves as being among the twenty clients of John Carpenter who 'had been told') whose files were sold and that -one set- of files had been returned unsanitized. I didn't mean to give the impression that -seven- sets of files had been returned unredacted. As The _only_ excuse I can offer for having created any confusion is that I wrote the thing after a long days work and it was three in the morning. My appologies to you Mr. Tim and to any other List members that were (rightfully) confused about how I had worded that. What you managed to surmise on your own is true. Only one set of files were returned unsanitized. Not seven. John Carpenter has already admitted on this list that his own wife's file was sold to Bigelow unsanitized and he goes on to state that it was "ok" because she was using her "maiden name." All I asked him at that point was two questions: (Which were never addressed or even acknowledged!) 1. What kind of assurances is he prepared to provide the other 139 abductees that their files were properly redacted? 2. When is he going to do what he should have done initially and inform these people that their reports and files have been sold to someone that they did not confide in initially. To someone that they had not chosen themselves to confise in. Tim we disagree on a lot of stuff re: UFOs, abductions, etc. but I'm positive that you will agree that I have asked him perfectly reasonable and pertinent questions here. Questions which he has refused to acknowledge or respond to. >Given this being straightened out, I'm going to sit back and see >if the 'wheels of justice' actually start to turn or not. I don't know about "the Wheels of Justice" and all that, but I do know that he is being observed by many of his peers, (psychologists and social workers that have written to me) and if he doesn't respond to this issue in a timely manner he will only be trashing his own reputation. No more abductees, no more lectures, no more UFO nothing! This will bury him in ufology if he doesn't do the right thing by his own clients. Thanx for pointing out my poorly worded/phrased statement Tim. It _was_ confusing! I hope I have corrected it and put it to rest for you and others. I'm waiting to see what Mr. Carpenter does too Tim. But not for too long. Regards, John (tongue tied) Velez -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:05:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:16:08 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:34:01 -0500 >>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca >>List, >>This communication came to me from a colleague in Australia. >>Gary >________________________________ >>Greetings Australian Researchers, >>This message is just going out to the researchers in Australia, >>as it concerns just them at present. Though other "abductees and >>experiencers" around the world should be warned and aware that >>this can happen to them. >>I've received several replies stating that John Carpenter did >>not have the permission of those he interviewed for his >>"research video" to make this video commercially available. This >>video, "Encounters in Australia" is being sold at UFO >>conferences in USA and through several UFO Magazines both in USA >>and England. Hi Gary, Is this the video which includes the Kelly Cahill case? Roy.. FAX: 0870 284 9697 http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:19:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:57:29 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:09:34 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Gary, >>>Let me cut to the chase, please. >>>1.) Do you have _any_ source, at all, that has told you that >>>John Carpenter released files that were unsanitized to _anyone_, >>>other than what Elizabeth Carpenter has told or shown you? >Any release of information from a person's files requires a >release form to be signed. In terms of hypnotherapy, the patient >must see, have explained and sign an Informed Consent form. None >of this was done. It matters not whether files were blacked out. <snip> >>>Good questions, ones which I feel should be answered before any >>>further time goes by. If indeed the names were transferred to >>>NIDS santitized, then this more than mitigates guilt. >It does not. Please explain. Our firm legal position is that >John cannot claim to stop being a licensed clinical social >worker at his whim. Even if you tell your patient this it is not >so. This is to protect the public from just this type of fraud. >Think about it. Dear Gary, The word I selected was "mitigate." The context was that guilt is more than mitigated as a result of those files being presented sanitized. The verb intransitive is defined by my "just friend" Merriam as follows: "to cause to become less harsh or hostile : MOLLIFY <aggressiveness may be mitigated" I meant exactly that. In addition, was Carpenter practicing as a licensed social worker during these times he was researching cases? That is a question to which I do not know the answer. Is this too fine a point? Not from the legal perspective. The moral one, is another matter to which I personally refuse to engage. Like Pontius, I will not judge him. I am not God. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Laajala From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:05:48 +0300 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:37:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Laajala >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:05:02 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 21:11:45 +0300 >>From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> >>Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dear Minna, Liz, Listerines and of course, EBK, >I am not an expert on Sleep Paralysis, neither am I a researcher >except for my own experiences. And so I can speak only about my >experiences here. I shall do that now, regarding the >approximately two times I have experienced sleep paralysis. >Perhaps someone who is more expert may comment on what I have >experienced. Hi Jim(bo), Hi List, Hi EBK! I'm not either any researcher of this subject, only curious layman. So don't consider having a large knowing of sleep paralysis - if any. I can make assumptions like any of us, but they aren't words of an expert. The little I know, I'll share now with all you folks. Please don't stone me because of the mile-long mail! My another apology considers my earlier mail: as you all saw, with a hurry the results looks a lot like pissed as running! I must apologise my errors in that mail... Maybe some day I'll learn not to gesticulate... SLEEP PARALYSIS OR HYPOCALEMIC PERIODIC PARALYSIS? The most common stories about the experiences reminding sleep paralysis vale bedroom- abductions, in which person at night wakes either to a feeling of someone's presence, or even sees strange creatures. Experiences are often associated with enormous fear, the feeling of paralyzing, and sometimes also with feelings of "controlled" (= unable to function) thinking. Strange creatures can be sensed, either completely physical beings, or partly transparent light- figures, which are seemed to be like projected from a movie- projector. Also the happenings are often associated with sight-, sound-, and sometimes also scent- and taste-hallucinations. In addition with resemblance between sleep paralysis and bedroom-abductions, there is also a third phenomenon, which causes confusions ( to some people) and even debate about what the experience is as a matter of fact. This third phenomenon is called "hypocalemic periodic paralysis". As it is not sure what is paralysis and what abduction, what to do? Only one, who has a qualification to separate these symptoms from each others, is a neurologist. I got curious, and searched as much information as was assumed to be possible to a common layman to find. In following I will separate two easily confused paralysis, sleep paralysis and hypocalemic periodic paralysis. After separating these two paralysis it should be a bit easier to wonder is the rest of the un-solved cases abductions, or what might cause them. I don't claim sleep paralysis or hypocalemic periodic paralysis explains all abductions, but at least in Finland it explains some experiences. Sleep paralysis is been explained as an abduction. Harward's physiatric professor and Medicine Doctor John E Mack describes in his book Abductions a series of happenings as a typical abduction. Description brings vividly to mind the typical sleep paralysis. The nature of sleep paralysis is characterised in many ways. In one way it is suspected as a curse and/or teasing by the spirits. More medical suspects thinks it would be a disturbance in REM- sleep-state, the chemicals in brains, over-producing the hormones (W1), or un-balances in the balance of electrolytes. (W4) Many people has few single, although rare attacks of sleep paralysis during their life. Few has more often repeating attacks. Most commonly attacks takes few seconds, but can endure even several minutes. The whole cycle may repeat at same night, or appear only once in a life-time. Especially in repeating attacks it is possible, that they may be caused by narcolepsy yet diagnosed, or hypocalemic periodic paralysis, so then is necessary to contact a neurologist. SLEEP PARALYSIS OR HYPOCALEMIC PERIODIC PARALYSIS? Hypocalemic periodic paralysis is often thought to be a sleep paralysis. In some internet- pages (W4 and W10) sleep paralysis is separated in two groups, in which sleep paralysis is named by many ways. The groups are divided as follows: Type 1 "sleep paralysis", no hallucinations: - CSP Common Sleep Paralysis (W10) - ISP Isolated Sleep Paralysis (W4) - Familial sleep paralysis (W10) - HSP Hallucinatory Sleep Paralysis (W10) Type 2 "sleep paralysis" with hallucinations: - RISP Recurrent Isolated Sleep Paralysis (W4) - Hypnogogic or hypnopompic sleep paralysis - Predormital or postdormital paralysis - Hag Phenomena (W5, W10) Type 1 sleep paralysis seems extremely strongly like hypocalemic periodic paralysis. In this group exists no hallucinations, attack duration may change stretching even for days. Again: sleep paralysis is short and pithy event. Hypocalemic periodic paralysis is experienced during daytime too in full awareness, which isn't typical to the right type of sleep paralysis. Type 2 sleep paralysis includes also hallucinations. What makes the "diagnose" more difficult is the fact, that even all sleep paralysis attacks don't include hallucinations. By some net-pages sleep paralysis are assumed to be heritable (W5, W10), and appearing locally (W10). What sleep paralysis and hypocalemic periodic paralysis are? 1) Sleep paralysis is neurological sleep-disorder, which is caused by the disorder in REM-sleep-state. Seems, that the experiencer's awareness and sleep-state chances and mixes. As a event sleep paralysis is very similar with hypocalemic periodic paralysis. The typical sleep paralysis is experienced at night between sleep and awake, just before falling asleep or just on waking up. In other words: person experiences partly awareness and partly a sleep-state. These states are called hypnogogic: (= as falling asleep), and hypnopompic (= as waking up). The hypnogogic and hypnopompic hallucinations are very common in both, narcolepsy and sleep paralysis, but they won't appear in hypocalemic periodic paralysis. It appears, that when person is half awake, half asleep, muscles won't reach the "orders" to move. This is caused by the REM-phase of the sleep, which makes sure we won't stand up and rush to run, as we dream we're escaping monsters. Different states of horrible nightmare-like sighting, hearing, and sometimes also scent and taste- hallucinations, and now and then OBE-experiences are often associated with the attacks. Every sleep paralysis attack though won't concern hallucinations and OBE-experiences. The person dropped between awareness and dream world is aware of happenings and remembers them also in the morning (what e.g. sleep-walkers wont do). 2) Hypocalmic periodic paralysis is a state of weakness in muscles caused by the descending of the calcium-level in the ions of the brain cells, and/or at the liquid around the brains. This state can progress to a paralysis. The degree of its difficulty depends on the amount of the calcium. Hypocalemic periodic paralysis can endure to the minute to even days, and maybe just this feature separates it from sleep paralysis - including the lack of hallucinations. In addition the attacks of hypocalemic periodic paralysis can come at any time of the day, when sleep paralysis comes most commonly at night-time, or early in the morning. Most commonly it strikes at the second half of the night or the early hours of the morning. As the state of paralysis in sleep paralysis concerns the whole body, hypocalemic periodic paralysis commonly saves at least the following muscles from paralysis: * eyes * throat * face * larynx * tongue * rectal muscles * midriff Occasionally can however these muscles paralyze, too. After attacks can appear for instance headache, diarrhea now and then, exhaustion, increasing of urinary emit. After sleep paralysis comparable after-symptoms shouldn't appear. During the paralysis- experience the person is aware, and remembers events yet in the morning. TYPICAL PARALYTIC STROKE Partly sleep paralysis and hypocalemic periodic calcium -paralysis has a lot common features - especially as attacks initial phase. Essentially differentials vale at hypocalemic periodic calcium- paralysis missing hallucinations, its long duration, its effects also by day, and also provocative factors of paralysis. Real attack begins with feelings of body beginning to getting more heavier and heavier. To the occasion is associated surprising and gradually strengthening muscular slacken, which can progress either to whole or to partial paralysis. Often persons are able to look around, but not always e.g. at least to lift their head, hand or foot. In hypocalemic periodic paralysis muscles of the head can be workable. Commonly efforts to move oneself fails with different degrees or completely- despite the struggle. Muscular slacken rises also to throat, speaking and shouting becomes difficult, even fails. Also during the attack is often felt fatigue and exhaustion at hypocalemic periodic paralysis, but not before attack. In addition to paralysis at hypocalemic periodic paralysis person could also have e.g. following symptoms (by day): - chances of the function of nervous and muscular systems - lack of appetite - nausea - descending of blood pressure - plenty of urinate- production - ECG chances - descending of weight - digitalis intoxication -risk - weakening of brains - fatigue - weakened reflexes - intestines reduction - constipation - paralysis locally at small intestine at extreme elements - cardiac rhythm disturbance - big hunger - thirst - dry mouth - tremble - cardiac vibration - excessive perspiration - diarrhea - unusual nervousness Generally person wakens to a perception of a mild or serious condition of weakness at limbs. At the day-time attacks occurs especially after the rest. At the top of the attack person can be helpless, can't ask for help and tendon reflexes are decelerated. Comparable other symptoms should not occur with sleep paralysis. If sleep paralysis is associated with for example predisposition to fall asleep by day-time - especially during or after routine or tediousness actions, (= sudden slacken of muscular action,) and/or especially as a result of powerfully outburst of feelings, is there a reason to suspect narcolepsy. In sleep paralysis attack continues ahead from described as follows: At same time with progressing paralysis person experiences also respiratory problems. In connection with paralyzing and breathing problems person begins to hear sound-hallucinations; odd, humming, ringing, tinkling voices, which strengthens from some part many degrees getting soon unbearableness strength. Person can also feel vibration, even redolent of earthquake. In association with sounds is reported experiences of explosive or drilling feelings in the head. The feelings are described as being comparable with heart attack. (W4) In this state steps along also perceptions of visual hallucinations; person can observe twisted objects, glimpses of bright light, even whole room's fulfillment with coloured light, and so on. The most upsetting and admittedly perhaps frightening visual perceptions are most likely perceptions of presences of "something" - usually as a malicious being. To have this perception about appearing of beings can be affected by the feelings of increasing weight on breastbone, which is described often just as felling of somebody sitting on person's chest. (W5) (W10) That "some" is usually described as either one being, or group of beings. Their appearance - as far as they are seen - varies extremely much. It can vary from shadows to animals. To narcolepsy the typical hallucinations can be gigantic insects or so called blue men, who come into person's room through wall (M1). Occasionally experiencers are reported, that they have for example been trying to change the tone of the being to a more friendly with a forgiving attitude, prayers and so on. The activity of the being/beings vary. Sometimes it/they satisfy only to stay at the background and stare the person, sometimes they are told to try to drag person's legs, sometimes they are reported trying to strangle the experiencer. (W10). According to some reports (W4) some do experience in this situation the successfully getting control of fear, after which man can fall asleep again, (= although recovering from the panic takes awhile). Unless the fear is not under control it seems, the following situation advances to a out of body- experience (W4),(W10). Part of the experience are the feelings like body swinging, floating, flying shrinking, plus the typical OBE -experiences (= a journey towards the light through the tunnel, and so on). WHAT AWAKENS PARALYTIC STROKES? It seems, that narcolepsy has a huge role about the existence of sleep paralysis, although there is narcolepsy without sleep paralysis, and sleep paralysis without narcolepsy. It seems, that especially sleep paralysis is caused by the disturbance in the system at REM-dream, which controls body movement, which seems in sleep paralysis to allow seeing dreams and awakening at the same time, but maintains the body's immobility. Also in internet are many presented their presumptions about the factors of sleep paralysis attacks. These assumptions are based either on persons own experiences, to collected reports, or to both altogether (W1)(W4)(W10). There is certain features, which are thought in these assumptions affecting to the reproducting or reduction of sleep paralysis attacks. I'll include here a list of the suggested originators of sleep paralysis, and then after to that list I'll include another, which is the list of the suggested originators of hypocalemic periodic paralysis: 1) Sleep paralysis: - fatigue exhaustion - jet lag - lack of sleep (= from a longer period) - mixed sleeping rhythm - agony - stress - intensive expercising of meditation - radical changes on one's life (= getting the job, marriage, divorce, child birth and so on) - radical changes on intermediate materials of brains - hormone over-production (W10) - sleeping on one's back - narcolepsy 2) The originator to hypocalemic periodic paralysis: - kaliumin loss through digestive tract (emesis, diarrhea) - scald - insufficient food - bad appetite - unilateral food - alcoholism - reduction of muscles happening with ageing - hypertension - illness in digestive system, which is associated with food requirements capillary rise predisposition - cold bag - feeling stress - pregnancy - sugar - salt - dream - rest after work-out - medicines that reductions the potential of cell walls - medicines that reduces potassium-levels n the blood - unusually amount of work-out - big meal with carbohydrate (these two are individualise how delicately) - stress HOW PARALYSIS STROKES ARE PREVENTED AND TREATED One common factor to both paralytic strokes is no doubt the confusion and fear, even panic. The more frightening experience, the more important is often to the experienced person to find the explanation to the event, or at least name for it. Fear only brings up confusion and doubtfully the feelings won't ease that fact, that attacks could repeat, and it seems to a experiencer, that 1) he/she is getting insane because he/she experiences something so weird 2) ability to do anything to prevent them is limited, if it even exists. In addition to this is there a chance, that especially with sleep paralysis attacks there's a chance of yet not diagnosed narcolepsy, which again as not treated disease can harm person's life remarkably, even as only one originator of the sleep paralysis attacks. Especially frequent paralysis should be a reason enough to contact a neurologist. During acute attacks person notices he/she is completely paralysed one medicine can be to try to control the fear, and at the same time trying to start moving the little parts of the body, like toes, earflaps, eyelids, and after succeeding in this attempts to move successfully bigger wholeness (W5). To some experiencers a change of attitude has been a big help. Frightening, shocking, and upsetting experience becomes a interesting field of new studies, as some experiencers tell themselves. (W4),(W10). Each new experience is then a interesting "material"- increase to be compared with previous research material. This changed attitude may affect also so, that horrible experience is experienced as a extremely interesting one, and new experiences are even expected! Also one good way could be to keep a diary about the experiences. Notes may be benefit if it's decided to contact a neurologist. In addition with a change of attitude, s.c. proper ways of life are offered as a good medicine (W3)(W10). As mentioned, stress the lack of sleep, mixed sleeping rhythm, and radical changes in life are was some studies found to be factors of awakening of sleep paralysis attacks. One extremely essential factor has also been the position of sleeping (W3)(W10). From 60 % to nearly one hundred thousand percentage of experiences has been sleeping on their back. It's also good to avoid alcohol, and caffeine- including drinks, heavy eating and smoking in the evening, and changes of the rhythms of sleep (W3). With some amount to sleep paralysis has been given medication. In narcolepsy- cases getting narcolepsy to under treatment usually reduces- if not even stops completely sleep paralysis-experiences. Actual sleep paralysis-medicine do not exist- according to internet- pages. Some psycho-pharmaceutical drugs have been helping, maybe because they contain same materials, that pass information to one place to another in our brains. Those are for example serotonin, melatonin, imipramine, which is used to narcolepsy ( W4) because with it the paralysis are easier to control. Source material: About sleep paralysis: W1) http://www.angelfire.com/co/SleepParalysisLucid/moreInfoPar.html W2) http://www.watarts.waterloo.ca/~acheyne/S_P.html W3) http://www.watarst.waterloo.ca/~acheyne/prevent.html W4) http://www.eden.com/~sbonham/Sse.htm front page, which after is a lot to read W5) http://www.standford.edu/~dement/paralysis.html W6) http://www.daily.standford.ogr/Daily96-97/4-9-7/NEWS/NEWdrugog.h tml W7) http://www.trionica.com/ W8) http://www.nationaljewish.org/MSU/11n4MSU_Sleep.html W9) http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/1700/sunds.html W10) http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/1700/hag.html W11) http://www.shoah.free-online.co.uk/801/Adduct/abdsleep.html W12) http://mdausa.org/experts/ask_pp.html About hypocalemic periodic paralysis: W13) http://www.periodicparalysis.org/PPRC/PP/HypoKPPDiagnosticProtoc ol.asp W14) http://www.mdausa.org/experts/ask_pp.html W15) http://www.calexplorer.com/list/ppsite.htm W16) http://www.calexplorer.com/list/phypo.htm W17) http://www.neuro.wustl.edu/neuromuscular/pathol/hopp.htm W18) http://www.periodicparalysis.org/ W19) http://www.periodicparalysis.org/PPRC/PP/HypokalemicPP.asp Books: B1) Mack John E: Abductions Magazines: M1) Skeptikko 3/99 (= Finnish sceptical organisation) E-mails: E1) Dr. Markku Partinen: sleep paralysis is a disturbance in a REM- sleep's regulate- system E2) Dr. Markku Partinen: sleep paralysis and HyPP very alike Attention: Dr. Markku Partinen is a finnish sleep paralysis- investigator. Attention 2: If I'm on Stone Age with my knowledge of sleep paralysis, please, civilise me! Minna Laajala UFO-Finland www.ufofinland.net ufofinland@saunalahti.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Corrales From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:38:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:41:50 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Corrales >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:53:33 -0400 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> >Subject: Re: Chupacabras In Chile >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 07:48:20 -0400 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> >>Subject: Chupacabras In Chile >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Scott >You've been feeding us these reports of Chupacabras for a while >now. My interest is in those messages that have reported that >samples of the animal remains that have been taken for study and >analysis. Why don't you follow up on this aspect of the >Chupacabra reports. These stories, in my opinion, continue to be >meaningless without a serious effort to study the "by-product" >of their fascination with the animals. Sincerely, >Todd Lemire Dear Todd, With all due respect, I'm not "feeding" anyone reports on anything. I'm sharing information on a situation of the utmost importance taking place in another part of the world. If you come up with the plane fare, I'd be very happy to go the 7000 miles down to Chile and take a look...just before being thrown into prison by the authorities. This is what is so hard to convey--we've grown accustomed in the U.S. to the old "the public has a right to know, etc." which is simply not a consideration in South America. To do what you suggest would be "interfering with police business" and surely actionable. If the accounts on Chupacabras activity are meaningless, then I suggest you stop reading them. Very best regards, Scott Corrales Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Bassett From: Steve Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:55:39 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:47:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Bassett >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:33:39 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Steve Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:58:07 -0400 (EDT) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: UpDate: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? >So Steve who sent you the E-mail that informed you of this >statement? >Sincerely, >Jan Aldrich The original contact I received regarding the Bush CNN comment was copied to PRG from Rick Sterling, a thoughtful activist on the PRG mail list. It is shown below. SB ----- Subj: Gov. Bush States He Will Release UFO Data Date: 7/28/00 5:13:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:MarsCity1">MarsCity1</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:lunaranomalies@uswest.net">lunaranomalies@uswest.net</A> CC: <A HREF="mailto:decker@ufomag.com">decker@ufomag.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:ParadigmRG">ParadigmRG</A> Mike, Gov. George W. Bush stated today that if elected,he would release important UFO data. This statement was reported on CNN at approximately 8:15 PM (WV Time). Thanks again. Rick L. Sterling
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Sanchez-Ocejo From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:48:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:53:31 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Chupacabras In Chile - Sanchez-Ocejo >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:53:33 -0400 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> >Subject: Re: Chupacabras In Chile >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 07:48:20 -0400 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> >>Subject: Chupacabras In Chile >>To: updates@sympatico.ca ><snip> >Scott, >You've been feeding us these reports of Chupacabras for a while >now. My interest is in those messages that have reported that >samples of the animal remains that have been taken for study and >analysis. Why don't you follow up on this aspect of the >Chupacabra reports. These stories, in my opinion, continue to be >meaningless without a serious effort to study the "by-product" >of their fascination with the animals. <snip> Dear Mr. Todd Lamire, I just came back from Chile and personally visited the areas that are still suffering the attacks - the Northern part of Chile; Calama, Tocopilla and Maria Elena. In our field investigation, we interviewed witnesses, obtained first-hand accounts, collected data and physical evidence of UFO involvement, comparison of tracks, reaction of authorities, photos, videos, etc... I'm in the process of evaluating and putting together all the data. As soon as posible, I will post a report here, in English. Very truly yours, Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo Miami UFO Center (Espaol) http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html Miami UFO Reporter (English) http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/index.html Miami "Chupacabras" (Espaol) http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html Patagrande -Bigfoot- (Espaol) http://patagrande.homestead.com/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:56:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:34:01 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca >List, >This communication came to me from a colleague in Australia. >Gary ________________________________ >Greetings Australian Researchers, >This message is just going out to the researchers in Australia, >as it concerns just them at present. Though other "abductees and >experiencers" around the world should be warned and aware that >this can happen to them. >I've received several replies stating that John Carpenter did >not have the permission of those he interviewed for his >"research video" to make this video commercially available. This >video, "Encounters in Australia" is being sold at UFO >conferences in USA and through several UFO Magazines both in USA >and England. >In fact, I got my copy from a video contact who attended a big >UFO conference in USA a couple of years ago and bought it from >Carpenter's bookstall. Perhaps John C. figured that no one way >"down here" in Australia would ever find out. John Carpenter >does not do his work on the Internet, so his ignorance of how >fast news can travel these days is understandable but not >excusable. >Without violating requests for anonymity, here's how a >well-repected person in publishing here put it: >_________ >Dear Mike, >When John Carpenter conducted those interviews, it is clear that >he did not seek permission from them to sell those interviews. >I know that several on that list were outraged to learn that a >supposedly professional, private interview was being sold >through UFO magazines on video format, with no permission or >royalty being granted. >Shame on John Carpenter for his actions I say! >regards >XXXXXXX >________________________________ >So it would appear that Mr. Carpenter has much to answer for >these days. Of course, progress on this issue is best served by >putting enforceable policies into place that would prevent such >abuse of "patient's confidentiality" in the future, not by going >after the person responsible like some kind of lynch mob "witch >hunt". >Though I must agree with positions expressed by many researchers >recently on this Internet discussion, that when a well known >and high profile "celebrity" researcher can get away with >selling 140 abductee files at $100. each (with audio tapes) >and pocket $14,000 without due consideration for the consequences >to his "patients" or his suffering reputation, then it's >TIME TO CLEAN UP THIS HOUSE!!!! >and let the chips fall where they may... >You know the old but ever so true saying: >"When good people do nothing...evil flourishes!" >------------------------------------------------------ >We can learn from each other's mistakes, >but only if we all examine exactly what went wrong!< Hi Gary, Sorry - I can't walk away from this one..... If your Australian colleague is so outraged by this alleged confidentiality violation of John Carpenter's, and is willing to make such serious accusation, why won't he allow you to type his name?? Why can't he come out publically and say that he has signed documents from "X" numbers of verified individuals who claim that this has happened AND that these individiuals have filed formal complaints against John Carpenter? Please verify and get permission from these _alleged_ individuals. Yes, it "appears" Mr. Carpenter has much to answer for - but you may have an equal amount should this be some screwed up rumor with no validity behind it. So, if you've already checked your facts, get this person to post to this group himself using his real name. This is a very serious charge and "XXXXX" won't cut it. You know that I have personally told you here and in emails, several times over the past couple of weeks that receiving *anonymous* anything is bogus. How on earth you could post this amazes me. If you are indeed making this a legal case, I strongly suggest that you seek your attorney's advice before posting any more charges against Carpenter. If your attorney gave you the high sign to do that - it's time for another attorney. This kind of behavior does nothing to help abductees, ufology, MUFON or anybody else. Lastly, I called State Committee of Social Workers at 573-751-0885 and inquired about Mr. Carpenter. Not _one_ complaint has been filed against him. I sure don't understand that given what you've told us about the people that you've spoken to about their issues with the man. This is like loud screeching background noise to the real issue of getting those 120 people notified. We _know_ they don't know their files were sold and need to learn that truth! Ann
The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Polanik From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:07:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:59:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Polanik >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:05:02 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I am not an expert on Sleep Paralysis, neither am I a researcher >except for my own experiences. And so I can speak only about my >experiences here. >And for all the times I perceive that I was taken by aliens >etc., I always am able to distinguish among the nightmares, the >sleep paralysis and the abduction scenarios. Always! >So to me, personally, I've always known the difference. This >hopefully and hopefully obviously, knocks down the association >which many folks make on sleep paralysis vs. the abduction >scenario. At least for me. > >Jimbo Mortellaro Ok, Jimbo, you've always been able to label or identify your experiences as being this or that according to how it seemed to you at the time. But how do we know that you've _always_ been able to do so correctly? Perhaps we are speaking about different aspects of the phenomenon, so let me introduce the metaphor of the cinema to clarify. The movie experiencer goes to the theater, watches the movie, returns home and makes a report. The experiencer labels or identifies the movie's genre (sci-fi thriller, western, romantic comedy, etc.) by describing what they saw, heard and felt during the movie... all the while ignoring the fact that all the movies appear on the screen curtesy of the same projector/projectionist up there in the projection room. As an experiencer are you satisfied identifying the genre of the experience (Awareness during Sleep Paralysis, nightmare, Alien Abduction, etc)? If not, and I believe that many experiencers and most researchers are not satisfied to stop there, then we must consider the possibility that all the different experiential genres are associated with a common phenomenon: Awareness during Sleep Paralysis. [Note: Unlike most skeptics, I am not calling this phenomenon 'sleep paralysis' as that merely confuses the issue. Sleep paralysis keeps dreamers from harming themselves and others while acting out their dreams. It's natural and protective. Every one of us experiences sleep paralysis 4-6 times each night as we cycle into REM sleep. Therefore, the presence of sleep paralysis doesn't discriminate between abductees and non-abductees. Therefore, it can't explain away alien abductions (or other anomalous experiences). What _does_ discriminate between experiencers and non-experiencers are the indications of the presence of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that may be found in experiencer reports.] Joe
The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Polanik From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:24:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:01:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Polanik >UpDate: Spacenapping >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:02:27 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >In my experience of UK abduction research I have encountered a >number of cases where there is no question that an abduction >like experience was reported by the witness whilst they had not >physically travelled anywhere. <snip> The field of ufology could do itself a valuable service by dwelling on this point of scientific methodology: the most valuable evidence is that which simultaneously confirms one theory AND disconfirms the other. In all but a miniscule number of cases of reported alien abduction, the evidence is consistent with _both_ the usual, objective ETH _and_ more unusual theories that treat the experience as being at least partially subjective: a visionary experience, an OBE, Awareness during Sleep Paralysis, a virtual reality dream, a demonic assault or whatever. Unfortunately, too many researchers and too many experiencers act as if evidence that is consistent with both theories only supports the one theory they accept as true. If we were to look, we would find a handful of cases where witnesses observed what was presumed to be the physical body of the experiencer during the time of the experience. In most of these cases the result is as described by Randles: The physical body remained behind while the experiencer seemed (to himself/herself) to be somewhere else doing or perceiving something else. Nevertheless, it only takes one case of physical abduction to prove that ET fails to observe the Prime Directive. So cases where witnesses reported seeing the abduction as it happened, the Brooklyn Bridge abduction (if that's what it was) and the Travis Walton case, would support the ETH. But in the overwhelming majority of cases the evidence is ambiguous. One can usually say that something 'real' has happened, but one can't say what it was. It might be interesting for Listerines to consciously sift thru the experiences they've had and the cases they know about to find evidence that points one way but not the other. And to see which way the evidence points. Is anyone up for actually weighing the evidence? Joe
The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:36:56 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:04:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:10:03 +1000 >From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> >Subject: 1970's UK Sightings? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi Everyone >I would like some help with particular sightings in the UK >Description of one event in 1971-72 sometime in July I think?? >Report of an UFO over Blackstone Edge near Littleborough close >to The Summit Inn? Not far from the A58. Some would know the >area as Robinhoods Rocks or Bed an Old Roman road ran over the >top of moors. >>I'm also very interested in sightings that happened between >1971 to 1974 in these areas between Littleborough Todmorden >Skipton Clitheroe, Bacup. >I hope you can help me Hi, This is actually the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK (possibly in Europe) and the region you suggest generated literally dozens of sightings during these four years - possibly even more. So its tough to be more helpful if you cannot narrow down the dates and locations further to what you seek as there are just so many cases to deal with. If you prefer to do this off-List, please feel free and I'll check the archives of the Northern UFO Network that covers this region and fish out appropriate information for you. As it happens I was born in the small Pennine mill town of Bacup and the area between here and Todmorden (just four miles over the moors) is a hot bed of close encounters and abductions - with huge numbers on record. I suspect the incidence of abductions within such a narrow area may be greater than almost anywhere as I have personally investigated half a dozen separate cases and there are others. I have written an entire book on some of these cases (The Pennine UFO Mystery) This area really is a 'window area' in the truest sense and in our TV series 'Strange But True?' we filmed an entire episode in the Bacup/Todmorden area to emphasise this point. At the moment a UFO centre is being created in Bacup with the aid of the local Council to celebrate its focus at the heart of all this activity.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:51:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:06:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:46:08 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>, >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>Hi Larry! >>As for the "raw" data, I'd be curious how you manage to filter >>out "junk" sightings. It's an ongiong problem within >>investigative ufology, and one we've been struggling with for >>awhile. >That's a very good question, and there's no easy short answer. >I rely on my own common sense... >I have to read between the lines... >That said, I read the text of each report looking for strong and >weak points, alternative explanations and what not. Its mental >legwork really. How many witnesses? Who were they? Did they go >_out_looking_ for UFOs? Hi Larry, I'm quite leery of the assumption behind this last criterion -- Did they go out _looking_ for UFOs? I presume you are implying that if they did, you'd be more likely to filter out their reports. If so, this harks back to the model of UFO sightings being relatively rare, *random* events, and so a person wouldn't likely have had two or more different sightings. However, those who have had a definite sighting are much more likely afterwards to keep their vision directed upwards and outwards than before, in the chance of seeing another UFO. So such a person may spend occasional periods gazing at the sky, and may even convince a few friends to join him in a UFO watch. These persons then stand a better chance of sighting a UFO, even with the assumption of randomness, than those who have never witnessed one and who are much less likely to be open to the reality of the UFO phenomenon; these latter aren't looking for UFOs. These past UFO witnesses are persons who have had time to think over what skeptics may have claimed about their first sighting, and so have become better than average observers, in general, in any subsequent sighting. They're more careful to take note in a subsequent sighting of characteristics that for sure can't be explained by manmade or natural events, so as to be able to better reply to skeptics if they decide to go public. During the long period of sightings before his abduction, Ed Walters is a key example of what I'm talking about, in terms of being a UFO witness with multiple sightings. From the abduction phenomenon alone we've learned that UFO-aliens can single particular people out for repeated contacts. They know in advance just whom they are contacting/abducting, and I see no reason why this wouldn't apply also to those having (only) sightings. This is suggested also by the many reports of UFO witnesses who have remarked that the UFO did a certain maneuver immediately after they had thought some particular thought, with which the immediately responding UFO maneuver was consistent. Since this and the abduction phenomenon, with its common occurrences of mental comunication between abductee and alien, indicate that the UFO aliens can remotely read our thoughts, we shouldn't assume that this isn't the case also with respect to witnesses of UFO sightings. It follows that UFO sightings need not occur randomly amongst the population, if UFO aliens know in advance the mental outlook of the potential witness. Instead, more persons could have had multiple sightings than would be expected from statistics based only upon the average percentage of persons who have had a sighting. However, if one of your criteria is to be able to satisfy negative skeptics who aren't aware of the above, then I understand your reason for including that criterion. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:38:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:10:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? An intrusion into the CNN.com website has altered the transcript of the Saturday Morning News with a correspondent speculating that the reason Governor George W. Bush picking former Congressman and Former Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney as his Vice Presidential running mate was to reveal "the truth" about UFOs. The UFO portion of the transcript, completely out of context, has a statement inserted into correspondent Jonathan Karl commentary with an interruption, by an unidentified citizen and finally statement by Governor Bush that Chaney "knows." Offices of CNN.com in both New York and Atlanta have been informed of this alteration as has the Media Center at the Republican National Convention. From the hoaxer(s) point of view this was an excellent time to initiate this scam. The news organization moved large portions of their operations to the convention city, and regular offices are left with reduced staff. Likewise most of the candidates personnel have also moved to the convention. So the chances for detection of such a hoax are lessen. Denials from the candidates offices are harder to get with all the confusion of the surrounding the operations of the convention. The other problem for the hoaxer is that he has to get the altered transcript before the public. To accomplish this he has to use catspaws who are credulous and will not, for a moment, stop to examine the material or confirm its authenticity. This should sound familar, it has been done before. I've talked to local newsmen about this transcript. If there was any chance that the statement were true, it would be on the wire services already, not placed there by someone who happened to stumble across this transcript, but as an execlusive CNN story with a CNN byline. Jan Aldrich Source: CNN.com Transcripts http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html Saturday Morning News Bush-Cheney Take Campaign on the Road; Gore Takes a Vacation Aired July 29, 2000 - 8:00 a.m. ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: We begin this morning, where else? Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love. It's the site of a convention. You've heard about it a little bit, the Republican National Convention, which is being carefully orchestrated to send George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House. KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Speaking of brotherly love, Leon Harris joins us from Philadelphia with the latest on that big event, which begins on Monday. Hey, there, Leon. LEON HARRIS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning. Actually, this is now the city of Republican love. How's that for you, huh? Well, good morning folks, as we are high above the floor of the Comcast First Union Center on the city's South Side. Now this center is being transformed. It's almost there. Red, white and blue bunting is going to greet the arriving Republican faithful and all the media covering this gathering. Now, the candidates, Bush and Cheney, are taking their campaign through Kentucky today with stops in Owensboro, Louisville and Covington. And CNN's Jonathan Karl tells us this morning how Cheney is reacting to his return to the campaign trail after a long absence. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DICK CHENEY (R), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Mercy. JONATHAN KARL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Call him the reluctant candidate. Dick Cheney used his kickoff speech to remind people George W. Bush had to talk him into taking the job. CHENEY: I'm proof positive, the mere fact that I'm on the ticket, that he's a smooth talker. KARL: Republicans call him safe, solid, dependable and short- winded. His speech in Springdale, Arkansas lasted barely three minutes. CHENEY: And it is going to be a tough campaign, make no mistake about it. We're going to have to fight every single day in every single state for every single vote. KARL: After this, Cheney's first appearance outside his home state, Bush joked to his aides, "He's the perfect running mate for me because I talk a lot and he doesn't." If it looks like he hasn't campaigned in more than a decade, maybe it's because he hasn't. But with some people, his very lack of polish is an asset. UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: Integrity and character is back. God bless you. KARL: Cheney played low key loyalist. Along the way, someone thought Cheney's impressive resume would help Bush tell the truth about UFOs. UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: Half the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on? GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Sure, I will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a great one. KARL: And low key or not, Cheney drew an enthusiastic response from the Republican faithful. <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:12:24 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:13:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Beaver >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:59:29 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:47:54 -0700 (PDT) >Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Keith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:29:48 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I guess it all boils down to the "researcher". >1. A researcher without a degree in medical therapy has no >freaking right to play with people's mind. His _only_ concern >should be to put the people in touch with a professional. >2. The researcher's prime duty is to establish a rooster of >professional therapists who can and will deal with abduction >subjects. >3. If the researcher fails to do that, he should resign or >associate himself with another researcher who can help people >out. >4. Any researcher who dares to hypnotize a subject by himself >is an incompetent fool. He should have his car painted in >fluorescent red. >5. When it comes to children, multiply that by ten and roll >him in tar and chicken feathers. >Thank you, Serge! Very well said. >best, >Rebecca >I second this, Rebecca and Serge. One of the best posting I have >read here. Hits all the points right on the head! Dear Jan, Rebecca, Serge and All: Sorry Jan. I will <snip> your account of what was obviously a psychologically deficient individual because it has very little to do with the topic you are discussing. Because there are psychologically deficient people running around claiming to be abductees is _no_ reason to discourage hypnotherapists without degrees from attempting to help those who need it. I have attempted to address this issue in other posts but apparently have failed to help you understand the ramifications of what you are proposing here. 1) Most hypnotherapists (the vast majority of which are quite competent at achieving much better results than any of the degreed individuals you speak about) don't have any degree. 2) Does # 1 bother me. No. Why? Because there is probably no college anywhere that properly prepares a therapist for excellent hypnotherapy work. 3) How do I know #2 is correct? Because I was taught hypnotherapy by one of the most successful (PhD) hypnotherapists in the business. He, like other PhD hypnotherapists will be glad to tell you that they NEVER use anything taught to them in any college. And even after he taught me the many bright techniques he learned (on the job not in school) he still failed to teach me some very helpful techniques that I picked up, once again, on the job, which are NOT taught in any college course I'm sure. 4) I'm not sure why people who know very little about either hypnotherapy or psychology tend to believe that hypnotherapists need to be psychologists or psychiatrists, but... The don't. Why? Because hypnotherapy, not mere exploration or research works VERY well, better than psychology or psychiatry, WITHOUT any psychoanalysis whatsoever. 5) When I was taken by John Scheussler to be hypnotized in reference to my 1st 2 encounters he took me to a hypnotherapist, not a psychiatrist or a psychologist. Though that avenue of research failed am I glad he took me to someone who didn't have these psych degrees. Definitely! Why? Because hypnotherapists do hypnotherapy on a daily basis on every client they see. These other professionals you are promoting do NOT use hypnotherapy as much; not nearly as much. They are far less competent in its usage. And they are far less prepared for abreactions and other problems that may occur under hypnosis. 6) In fact, if you go to a hypnotherapist who is really a psychiatrist or psychologist that uses hypnotherapy as their primary tool you are likely to run into an individual, because they are taught this in the colleges you so revere, that ONLY believes in long term therapy. In such a case you will be throwing your money away. Why? Because short term therapy works. It's far less expensive. What they will probably do is dredge up stuff from within your subconscious and then have you talk about it with them until your bank account runs dry or your insurance company says no more. Don't get me wrong, talk therapy does work some times. But I believe, in most cases, that it's not the most cost effective method of getting results in therapy. The one, other, hypnotherapist I know who advocates it is well known for bilking people for money. This is common knowledge in the hypnotherapy community. And he's quite successful as well. By all means, if you feel more comfortable with a therapist who has extra letters beside their name and can talk with you till your accounts run dry and who can psychoanalyze you left and right go right ahead and plop you and your money down in front of them. On the other hand please don't try and discourage others from going to the vast majority of quite competent hypnotherapists who don't have such needless degrees and who are not only the best at hypnotherapy but also the best at getting results because of your insecurity of working with someone who hasn't sat through some college courses that very rarely ever teach real world hypnotherapy skills. Sincerely; Mike Beaver yoda@foxinternet.net http://web3.foxinternet.net/yoda/index.html ICQ # 15482206
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: For The Record From: Steve Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:22:43 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:15:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: For The Record PRG Paradigm Research Group Only for purposes of putting this on record with the list: For the last 5 days I have gotten about two dozen hang up calls coming in on two of my four lines. Thanks, SB ***************************************************************** Paradigm Research Group URL: www.paradigmclock.com E-mail: ParadigmRG@aol.com Phone: 301-564-1820 Fax: 301-564-4066 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 ***************************************************************** Spread the word about X-PPAC & the politics of disclosure. Contribute online at: www.x-ppac.org or mail to: 4938 Hampden Lane,161 Bethesda, MD 20814 ***************************************************************** "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish, if you are willing to give away the credit." *****************************************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life From: ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:13:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:13:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life netscape.com/news/TopStories/08_01_2000.rontz1536-story-bcnewsspacealiensdc.html Wednesday - 06:29 08/02/2000, EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - With millions of dollars in funding pledged by two of the men behind software giant Microsoft, the search for intelligent life on other planets got a big boost Tuesday as officials unveiled plans for a massive new telescope to scan the skies. The Allen Telescope Array named for Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul Allen, who put up $11.5 million for the project will be "the world's most powerful instrument designed to seek out signals from civilizations elsewhere in our galaxy," the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute said. Joining Allen in funding the project was former Microsoft Chief Technology Officer Nathan Myhrvold, who contributed $1 million toward the total of $26 million needed to build the field of hundreds of linked radio telescope dishes in northern California. "While the best scientific estimates tell us the probability of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is fairly high, there is great uncertainty and some controversy in the calculation," Myhrvold said in a statement. "One thing however, is beyond dispute. That is, if we don't continue supporting projects like the Allen Telescope Array, our chances of discovery will remain at zero." Plans for the telescope mark a turning point for the SETI Institute ( http://www.seti.org ), the Silicon Valley-based nonprofit body which is the world's largest private organization devoted to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. The institute's Project Phoenix, which spends more than $4 million a year to buy time on large radio telescopes, is widely held to be the inspiration for the 1997 film "Contact" starring Jodie Foster. But institute researchers have never before had their own installation devoted exclusively to hunting down signals from alien worlds. "We're overjoyed, and we're ready to move ahead," the institute's director of research Jill Tarter said. "Paul and Nathan have understood from the beginning how exciting and groundbreaking this telescope could be. They have contributed time and ideas to our work, and now they are quite literally giving us the means to make it happen." The telescope, which will be jointly administered by the University of California-Berkeley, will be situated about 290 miles (464 km) north of San Francisco at the university's Hat Creek Observatory a remote site that is "radio quiet" with little static or man-made interference. Astronomers hope the new telescope will be an important new tool in the hunt for alien life, which has been going on for more than four decades. While researchers have carefully screened records of extraterrestrial radio emissions, they have yet to come up with a signal displaying a pattern that could clearly indicate it was produced by intelligent life. The Allen project will differ significantly from radio telescopes currently in use. Unlike mammoth dishes such as the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico, the Allen Array will be constructed from between 500 to 1,000 small, mass-produced dishes resembling those used for home satellite television reception. "They are going to be single, backyard style dishes, arrayed together in a field," said Greg Klerkx, the SETI Institute's director of development. "It will be a lot of small dishes, but their signals will be electronically linked to form one picture of the stars." Klerkx said project astronomers were starting to develop a list of "target" stars for observation focusing on those suns which most resemble our own Solar system and are closest to us as the best possible chance for discovering nearby intelligent life. The new telescope will incorporate miniaturized electronics as well as large amounts of affordable computer processing, which will enable it to look at up to a dozen candidate star systems simultaneously, scientists say. It should also prove useful for traditional research in radio astronomy, enabling scientists to look more closely at interstellar chemistry, the structure of galactic magnetic fields and the physics of rotating neutron stars. SETI Institute officials hope to have a large-scale prototype of the new telescope ready by 2003 and to push the project quickly toward completion, with the full telescope scheduled to become operational in 2005.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Searching For IFO Pictures From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:02:53 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:00:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Searching For IFO Pictures Dear Friends, This is a call for all UFO-researchers. I�m searching pictures for a IFO-picture-gallery on my www.alien.de/cenap Homepage. Please support this project with original-material from your own files. I known that UFO-researchers from time to time get pictures from "John Public" as UFO-evidence. Mostly you know the pictures show IFOs. I would like to build a collection of such IFO-pictures for public education purposes. I hope the members of this List can send me JPEGs for a broader view of IFOs in the course of a selection and explanation for the public. Thanks. Werner Walter cenap@alien.de
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:30:07 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:53:58 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Bowden >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:54:14 -0400 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:50:57 +0100 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>The child starts to make up a little story as kids of that age >>do. >>Of course by now the previously unknown alien image is being >>fixed in the youngsters mind. >>We finally see Budd leaving the house convinced that the whole >>family are being abducted by space aliens. >>I thought it was an appalling thing to do, especially to a >>little kid. >This may be what NOVA showed. Is it a complete account of what >happened? Budd emphatically says no. Unfortunately, since I'm >leaving for two weeks of business trip combined with vacation, I >can't find out more until I'm back. Greg, If what Budd said on video or what Budd did on video did not actually happen then please explain what I was seeing. You speak of 'complete account' then go ahead and tell us what led up to the infant interview. What was it that made Budd try again after the child said he doesn't recognize the alien image. Here's hoping you have a good two weeks, Dave.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Monumental UFO Work On-Line - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:39:30 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:55:19 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Monumental UFO Work On-Line - Maccabee >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:01:08 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Monumental UFO Work On-Line >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >MONUMENTAL UFO WORK ON LINE> >The Sign Historical Group (SHG) is proud to announce our hosting >of Barry Greenwood's exhaustive inventory of UFO articles from >learned journals and popular magazines. I congratulate Barry Greenwood on his years of data collection and publication and tjank him for making available material that is of great historical interest.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:02:04 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:00:49 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' On CNN? - Mortellaro >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:56:46 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 01:32:12 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Hi, >>I can confirm that George Bush Jnr will carry on like all the >>other wannabe presidents, and will make the same old UFO promise >>of data release so he can get into power and then forget about >>ever mentioning it! >>The same ol same ol! >This assumes that: >a) Any significant proportion of the US population is motivated >enough to change the way they vote because of a candidate's >views on releasing UFO documents. Which I doubt. >It also assumes that, if so, there is not an equal and opposite >proportion of the US voting population who are _less_ likely to >vote for a candiadate who expresses an interest in UFOs. After >all, we are always being told on this list that taking the UFO >phenomenon seriously makes one liable to ridicule. Which >politician wishes to be ridiculed in election year? >It also assumes that the US government actually has any UFO >secrets worth releasing. Which I doubt. >Any politician, confronted by a potential voter blathering on >about UFOs is unlikely to simply respond "p**s off!", and is >more likely just to give an anodyne response like Bush's, and >hope that no-one (other than the denizens of this List, many of >whom aren't even eligible to vote in US presidential elections) >will notice it. And quite frankly, I don't blame them. Try >asking what Bush or Gore's policy on haunted houses or the >Shroud of Turin is, and see what sort of a polite brush-off you >get. Dear John, List Twisters and *good ol' Mr. Wilson-Knapp, *That's from a Dennis the Menace show. Uh, let me give you another perspective. I don't think the comment was assigned much of a mien, it may have been directed at those few votes (not as "few" as one might at first imagine) which _would_ be swayed in his direction if his words were true. In other words, any subject, even the Shroud or ghosts, are worth the effort, as long as it buys _any_ votes. A political candidate would promise to bring back Elvis if it meant a vote otherwise lost. Jim Mortellaro, Candidate for President of UpDates I shall take over the world after this coup!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Paul Allen and SETI From: Steve Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:02:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Paul Allen and SETI PRG Paradigm Research Group It was very painful to read the article regarding SETI and Paul Allen. All the years the UFO/ET research has suffered without serious funding, then when we are so close to bringing this issue to resolution and needing funds so badly, Paul Allen decides to throw $12 million dollars down the toilet of what is basically a front project (granted the participants likely do not know this) for the government cover-up. SB ***************************************************************** Paradigm Research Group URL: www.paradigmclock.com E-mail: ParadigmRG@aol.com Phone: 301-564-1820 Fax: 301-564-4066 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 ***************************************************************** Spread the word about X-PPAC & the politics of disclosure. Contribute online at: www.x-ppac.org or mail to: 4938 Hampden Lane,161 Bethesda, MD 20814 ***************************************************************** "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish, if you are willing to give away the credit." *****************************************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:34:26 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:04:43 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:07:10 -0400 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:05:02 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Sleep Paralysis Vs Abduction - Mortellaro >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>I am not an expert on Sleep Paralysis, neither am I a researcher >>except for my own experiences. And so I can speak only about my >>experiences here. >>And for all the times I perceive that I was taken by aliens >>etc., I always am able to distinguish among the nightmares, the >>sleep paralysis and the abduction scenarios. Always! >>So to me, personally, I've always known the difference. This >>hopefully and hopefully obviously, knocks down the association >>which many folks make on sleep paralysis vs. the abduction >>scenario. At least for me. >Ok, Jimbo, you've always been able to label or identify your >experiences as being this or that according to how it seemed to >you at the time. >But how do we know that you've _always_ been able to do so >correctly? >Perhaps we are speaking about different aspects of the >phenomenon, so let me introduce the metaphor of the cinema to >clarify. >The movie experiencer goes to the theater, watches the movie, >returns home and makes a report. The experiencer labels or >identifies the movie's genre (sci-fi thriller, western, romantic >comedy, etc.) by describing what they saw, heard and felt during >the movie... all the while ignoring the fact that all the movies >appear on the screen curtesy of the same projector/projectionist >up there in the projection room. >As an experiencer are you satisfied identifying the genre of the >experience (Awareness during Sleep Paralysis, nightmare, Alien >Abduction, etc)? >If not, and I believe that many experiencers and most >researchers are not satisfied to stop there, then we must >consider the possibility that all the different experiential >genres are associated with a common phenomenon: Awareness during >Sleep Paralysis. >[Note: Unlike most skeptics, I am not calling this phenomenon >'sleep paralysis' as that merely confuses the issue. Sleep >paralysis keeps dreamers from harming themselves and others >while acting out their dreams. It's natural and protective. >Every one of us experiences sleep paralysis 4-6 times each night >as we cycle into REM sleep. Therefore, the presence of sleep >paralysis doesn't discriminate between abductees and >non-abductees. Therefore, it can't explain away alien abductions >(or other anomalous experiences). What _does_ discriminate >between experiencers and non-experiencers are the indications of >the presence of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that may be >found in experiencer reports.] Hiya Joe, Listerines and EBK, You make good points, Joe. Please note a few thingies about the words I usually use. I usually refer to myself as a "perceived experiencer". This means that in my mind, I perceive that such and such occurred. Perhaps this word is ill-used. I just looked it up. Anyway, the context and meaning I wish to convey, is that it is my perception that I have been abducted. I hold out for the possibility that my perceptions may be inaccurate. I have "always" used that word. Well, almost always. And so I actually agree with you. All I am saying is that in my mind, an event occurred. And in my mind, it was real. I also say that I am always able to discern the difference between a dream and an event. This does not necessarily mean I am always correct. It's OK to be skeptical. However I can assure you that if you were able to be inside my mind right now, you too, would believe what I believe. You just sort of have to have been there yourself in order to understand. However you might not like the strange sensations I get from the copious amounts of Gripple I drink. Strictly for "medicinal" porpoises. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 3 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:53:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:06:52 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Hatch >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:02:38 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Jean-Luc Rivera <JLRIV1@aol.com> >>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:41:55 -0400 (EDT) >>Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:19:42 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:37:46 -0400 >>>>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:55:27 -0700 >>>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>>>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Your remark is absolutely correct but if there was such a famous >>correlation, the psychosociologists still have to explain why >>there was no such wave between 1960 and 1962, when the war >>became very nasty in Algeria, French generals tried to seize >>power and one million people came back to France in a few days. >>The trauma was far more important than in Indochina. >Jean-Luc, Larry, Greg, et al.: >Thanks, makes sense. Of course, 1952 wasn't 1962 in terms of >public perceptions or attitudes toward UFOs. I did notice some >smallish bulges on Larry's histograph, today, at: >http://www.jps.net/larryhat/YDAY54.html >from April to May (Dien Bien Phu fell on May 8) and in late July >(the Indochina War ended on the 20th), but the big bulge later >in the year probably is something different. >I wonder what the French UFO sightings were like from '60 to >'62? Hello Bob et al: The period 1960-1962 was slow pretty much everywhere, France is no exception. For the 36 month period Jan 1960 through Dec 1962 I list only 22 sightings in France! Compare that with the _single_ year 1954, 474 events listed in France .. or even more outstanding, 336 in the single month of October 1954 ( 336 in France alone ). Comparing October 1954 ( 336 events/month ) to the average for 1960-1962 ( 22 events/36 months) I get a rate of 0.611 sightings per month. Thus UFO sightings, as listed here, came in at a rate 550 times as high in October 54, compared to the 1960-1962 average. I think we can drop the " North Africa war jitters " explanation for the great non-waves of 1960-1962. War-jitters, like El Nino, is a nice pat answer for anything the experts cannot figure out properly. I am reminded of "the wind making the stars sway" or "swamp gas". Maybe this relaxes people so they can sleep better. All of 1960 was a period of high sunspot activity (as defined here), plus a couple of months in 1961. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Kean From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:18:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:52:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Kean >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:36:56 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >This is actually the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire >UK (possibly in Europe) and the region you suggest generated >literally dozens of sightings during these four years - possibly >even more. Hi Jenny, No way is the area to which you refer "the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK......." You are ignoring the South-East of the UK where the almost nightly shuttle of FTs between certain 'sensitive sites' has been independently reported from 1989 - 1997. Unless, of course, you have actually identified the FT as being 'non-UFO'. Regards, Victor J.Kean Project FT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 02:50:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:59:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Hatch >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:51:33 -0700 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:46:08 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>, >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>>Hi Larry! >>>As for the "raw" data, I'd be curious how you manage to filter >>>out "junk" sightings. It's an ongiong problem within >>>investigative ufology, and one we've been struggling with for >>>awhile. >>That's a very good question, and there's no easy short answer. >>I rely on my own common sense... >>I have to read between the lines... >>That said, I read the text of each report looking for strong and >>weak points, alternative explanations and what not. Its mental >>legwork really. How many witnesses? Who were they? Did they go >>_out_looking_ for UFOs? >Hi Larry, Hello Jim: If EBK doesn't mind, I will try to respond to your questions in-line for better clarity. >I'm quite leery of the assumption behind this last criterion -- >Did they go out _looking_ for UFOs? I'm immediately leery of groups going out specifically to " look for UFOs ". The Gulf Breeze "gatherings" made the news for a while. Every passing night-light brought raves. There is a really great account about some guys in a car in Canada that got attacked by an octopus alien. This critter attached itself to the roof of the car, tentacles probing around like it wanted to get in. Fortunately it loosed it grip and went away just before they reached town (and independent witnesses). So what were they doing way out in the sticks? You guessed it. >I presume you are implying that if they did, you'd be >more likely to filter out their reports. I would definitely be more cautious about how they worded their descriptions of the UFO. A point of light becomes a round object ( naturally ) which then becomes a disk and so on. I don't junk these reports outright, its just one "caution flag", out of many, that might arise. Another c-flag is when the primary witness is a boy aged say 9 to 15. ( roughly ) Some darned good reports come in from them, but the flag goes up regardless. >If so, this harks back to the model of UFO sightings >being relatively rare, *random* events, and so a person >wouldn't likely have had two or more different sightings. That's if 2 or more sightings are indeed random, yes. >However, those who have had a definite sighting are much >more likely afterwards to keep their vision directed >upwards and outwards than before, in the chance of seeing >another UFO. So such a person may spend occasional >periods gazing at the sky, and may even convince a >few friends to join him in a UFO watch. Sure! No problem, but that's _not_ random any more!! >These persons then stand a better chance of sighting a UFO, >even with the assumption of randomness, than those who have >never witnessed one and who are much less likely to be open >to the reality of the UFO phenomenon; these latter aren't >looking for UFOs. Agreed: but now the dice are heavily loaded, with more eyes, over long hours etc. Subsequent sightings, perhaps genuine ones, are indeed more likely. In many cases, I suspect that second and subsequent sightings might fall into the Gulf Breeze mold however. Betty and Barney Hill started out with no expectation of UFOs or anything like what is now well documented. Later, Betty went on to become what many consider an embarrassment. >These past UFO witnesses are persons who have had time to think >over what skeptics may have claimed about their first sighting, >and so have become better than average observers, in general, in >any subsequent sighting. Some of them yes. >They're more careful to take note in a subsequent sighting >of characteristics that for sure can't be explained by manmade >or natural events, so as to be able to better reply to skeptics >if they decide to go public. Hopefully so. Others go reporting UFOs with the regularity of a rooster. I simply have to apply some sorts of filters here, or my long hard work will degenerate to blither. This is done selectively. No one "flag" decides a case. >... Ed Walters is a key example of what I'm talking about, >in terms of being a UFO witness with multiple sightings. I think I understand your views a little better now. >From the abduction phenomenon alone we've learned that >UFO-aliens can single particular people out for repeated >contacts. They know in advance just whom they are >contacting/abducting, and I see no reason why this wouldn't >apply also to those having (only) sightings. This is suggested >also by the many reports of UFO witnesses who have remarked that >the UFO did a certain maneuver immediately after they had >thought some particular thought, with which the immediately >responding UFO maneuver was consistent. Since this and the >abduction phenomenon, with its common occurrences of mental >comunication between abductee and alien, indicate that the UFO >aliens can remotely read our thoughts, we shouldn't assume that >this isn't the case also with respect to witnesses of UFO >sightings. It follows that UFO sightings need not occur randomly >amongst the population, if UFO aliens know in advance the mental >outlook of the potential witness. Instead, more persons could >have had multiple sightings than would be expected from >statistics based only upon the average percentage of persons who >have had a sighting. >However, if one of your criteria is to be able to satisfy >negative skeptics who aren't aware of the above, then I >understand your reason for including that criterion. >Jim Deardorff It is my intention to filter out junk sightings, so that the more interesting ones stand out in better relief. Your last paragraph above was unnecessary. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:56:26 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:02:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Spacenapping - Randles >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:24:15 -0400 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: Spacenapping - Polanik >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>UpDate: Spacenapping >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:02:27 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>In my experience of UK abduction research I have encountered a >>number of cases where there is no question that an abduction >>like experience was reported by the witness whilst they had not >>physically travelled anywhere. >In all but a minuscule number of cases of reported alien >abduction, the evidence is consistent with _both_ the usual, >objective ETH _and_ more unusual theories that treat the >experience as being at least partially subjective: >If we were to look, we would find a handful of cases where >witnesses observed what was presumed to be the physical body of >the experiencer during the time of the experience. In most of >these cases the result is as described by Randles: >Nevertheless, it only takes one case of physical abduction to >prove that ET fails to observe the Prime Directive. So cases >where witnesses reported seeing the abduction as it happened, >the Brooklyn Bridge abduction (if that's what it was) and the >Travis Walton case, would support the ETH. >It might be interesting for Listerines to consciously sift thru >the experiences they've had and the cases they know about to >find evidence that points one way but not the other. And to see >which way the evidence points. >Is anyone up for actually weighing the evidence? > Hi, I agree absolutely. Although I would always caution against making any firm conclusions on the basis of single (or even two or three) cases in the UFO field, this area of abduction research (along with the very little pursued systematic search for alien DNA at the site of an alleged event - in the same way as police routinely sift for forensic clues) are surely the keys to resolving this absolutely critical debate about the physical reality of spacenapping. It would be very useful to know of any cases that list members believe do support the ground rule we have to set - that an uninvolved witness actually saw the abductee being physically taken away into what appears to be an alien craft. It is often easy to read a case this way when the rule does not apply. The Dandenong Mountains case (which I do consider impressive) doesn't seem to qualify as all the participants were directly involved in the abduction - so this in effect becomes just a very good multiple witness case. In the Alan Godfrey abduction the observers who saw the UFO saw only a light and not anything resembling an alien craft. Nor did they witness the literal kidnap from his patrol car of the abductee. Even the Travis Walton case cited is not really such a case - for here the observers (who may be debatable as being independent anyhow) only saw Travis 'zapped' by a light beam. To my recall they did not see him liberally being spacenapped. So their story might support the physical reality of a UFO - but, as I have noted, that's not what we have to establish. We need proof one step beyond that level. Establishing that an event of some sort happened within physical reality (i.e. it was not a dream or hallucination) is, in my view, already possible. There is a physical component to CE 4 cases - I am sure. But we need evidence that the physical component was an alien craft that bodily spacenapped the abductee into itself. That evidence has to be from a completely uninvolved chance observer who saw this happen as surely someone, somewhere on occasion would. Why? Because we have parallel evidence of this sort where chance observers say the abductee DID NOT get spacenapped and only believed that they did (presumably because they had such a powerful vision of this abduction). As such to determine the choice between vision, vision triggered by some physically energy field that can be witnessed by passers by, and literal alien kidnap into a spaceship, we have to produce data that strongly supports the final possibility (only) and in the sort of numbers that support either of the first two. Right now, so far as I can see, there are about 30 good cases I can easily bring to mind that support the first two arguments but fall short of any support for the latter - and just one (the Manhattan Transfer) that supports the latter to the virtual exclusion of the other two. Surely there are others out there somewhere? Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:00:37 -0300 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:04:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:31:49 -0400 >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:15:05 -0300 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:36:13 -0400 >>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>>To: 'UFO Updates' <updates@sympatico.ca> >Stan wrote:- >>There has been an enormous amount of effort put in to the Hill >>Case. I met with Betty and Barney and John Fuller and Marjorie >>Fish and spoke with Dr. Simon. I reviewed Marjorie's work with >>Terence Dickinson then editor of ASTRONOMY and with Dr. George >>Mitchell an astronomer at OSU as well as with Allen Hynek. >>It stands up very well, despite false attacks by the likes of >>Sagan, Vallee and many others who misrepresented what MF did. >Stan, >Correct me if I am wrong, but surely MF only 'identified' 15 out >of the 28 stars on Betty Hill's map. What about the remainder ? She focused on the stars connected with lines, trade routes, occasional expeditions, etc. Turns out that they were all sun-like stars and also all the sunlike stars in the volume of the map. As it happens they were all in a plane as well Actually there were 16 including the sun. Hardly a coincidence as investigated by several astronomers and described in the Zeta Reticuli Incident. The others were background noise. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:20:55 -0300 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:07:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:38:06 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >An intrusion into the CNN.com website has altered the transcript >of the Saturday Morning News with a correspondent speculating >that the reason Governor George W. Bush picking former >Congressman and Former Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney as >his Vice Presidential running mate was to reveal "the truth" >about UFOs. >The UFO portion of the transcript, completely out of context, >has a statement inserted into correspondent Jonathan Karl >commentary with an interruption, by an unidentified citizen and >finally statement by Governor Bush that Chaney "knows." <snip> >GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Sure, I >will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a >great one. ><snip> As previously noted the unidentified man who asked about UFOs was Charles Huffer. It was he who said "This man knows all about it" when Cheney approached. _Not_ Bush. A simple goof... hard to call it hacking. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Friedman From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:36:34 -0300 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:11:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Friedman >From: ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto >Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life >netscape.com/news/TopStories/08_01_2000.rontz1536-story-bcnewsspacealiensdc.ht ml >Wednesday - 06:29 08/02/2000, EST >SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - With millions of dollars in funding >pledged by two of the men behind software giant Microsoft, the >search for intelligent life on other planets got a big boost >Tuesday as officials unveiled plans for a massive new telescope >to scan the skies. >The Allen Telescope Array named for Microsoft Corp. co-founder >Paul Allen, who put up $11.5 million for the project will be >"the world's most powerful instrument designed to seek out >signals from civilizations elsewhere in our galaxy," the SETI >(Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute said. >Joining Allen in funding the project was former Microsoft Chief >Technology Officer Nathan Myhrvold, who contributed $1 million >toward the total of $26 million needed to build the field of >hundreds of linked radio telescope dishes in northern >California. >"While the best scientific estimates tell us the probability of >intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is fairly high, there >is great uncertainty and some controversy in the calculation," >Myhrvold said in a statement. >"One thing however, is beyond dispute. That is, if we don't >continue supporting projects like the Allen Telescope Array, our >chances of discovery will remain at zero." <snip> Oh, the egos of the SETI cultists. It is certainly true that with radio telescopes one won't discover aliens flying around in our atmosphere. Love that phrase "scientific estimates"... Estimates? Yes. Scientific? Not a chance! Remember no colonization, no migration, no review of the enormous amount of evidence for some UFOs as ET spacecraft and the total lack of Radio Telescope evidence of ETS out there. The new facility won't even be able to scan the Southern sky. Great for job security for radio astronomers and tax deductions for donors. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:33:16 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:14:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:56:46 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >This assumes that: >a) Any significant proportion of the US population is motivated >enough to change the way they vote because of a candidate's >views on releasing UFO documents. Which I doubt. Please inform the List of the cost of your survey of the US population on this question - or is this just your opinion? Roy.. Independent UFO Investigator (U.K.) FAX: 0870 284 9697 E-MAIL: royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk Web: http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Botsford From: Diana Botsford <diana@destinationspace.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 08:35:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:16:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Botsford If anyone has the $45 to put out, you can go to: http://www.fdch.com/ms4.html and purchase a copy of the actual video of the Saturday, July 29th, 8am, ET broadcast where this statement of Bush's was alledgely made. Sometimes speculation is a waste of time and just getting the goods makes a lot more sense. Diana Botsford Producer Destination: Space http://www.destinationspace.net - - - - - - "To follow knowledge like a sinking star, Beyond the utmost bound of human thought . . To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield." Tennyson's Ulysses
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:19:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:51:33 -0700 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:46:08 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>, >>That said, I read the text of each report looking for strong and >>weak points, alternative explanations and what not. Its mental >>legwork really. How many witnesses? Who were they? Did they go >>_out_looking_ for UFOs? >I'm quite leery of the assumption behind this last criterion -- >Did they go out _looking_ for UFOs? I presume you are implying >that if they did, you'd be more likely to filter out their >reports. <snip> >During the long period of sightings before his abduction, Ed >Walters is a key example of what I'm talking about, in terms of >being a UFO witness with multiple sightings. Jim, List: You mean between the time when he got his advance from his publisher and when he was cashing the checks from his book sales? Your argument is only valid if one's purpose was to just make sure to "pad the data pile". How would you propose filtering the sightings made by the 40% of adult Americans who believe that alien spaceships are flying above, but who have never seen one, themselves? (52% of believers - 12% of witnesses). What would your criteria be? Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: UFO Sightings OZ File 03.08.2000 From: Diane Harrison - Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:01:13 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:21:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO Sightings OZ File 03.08.2000 UFO Sightings OZ File 03.08.2000 FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR NSW 1800 Callin Code: 00760 17.06.2000 NSW Date: 17.06.2000 Day: Saturday Time Seen: Friday 16th June between 5.45pm and 6.00pm Location: Empire Bay (Gosford area) Reportee: Alison F Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 02 43 Report: Alison noticed an illuminated object over the water, hovering low on the horizon. The object had 8 square lights right around, it was football shaped with a white /gold glow and the well defined square lights were brighter than the rest of the object. The proximity estimated was quite close, approx 200-300 mtrs and elevation about a tree and a half above the water. The object was not as big as the Goodyear blimp which was not flying in that area and in fact not even in the air at that time on that day. The illumination made no noise, had no navigation lights, appeared as a �solid� light and no evidence of searchlight beams could be found. The illumination was larger than thumb and forefinger at full stretch at arms length, very large or very close, the witness felt the latter was the case. It was later briefly seen as the witness dropped her parents off to Umina as an illumination in the clouds, there was no beam under the cloud and the moon was visible to the R/H/S of the object although the night was somewhat cloudy. The duration of the main sighting was approx 10-15 mins and was reported to the witness by a local real estate agent as they were in casual conversation in a shop the next morning, who witnessed the same object at the same time. Regards Doug Moffett Thankyou Doug for this report. ____________________________________ FOLLOWUP George Simpson AUFORN Vic 1800 Callin Code: 00793 VIC 12.07.2000 Date: 12.07.2000 Day: Wednesday Time Reported: 8.26pm Location: VIC post code given as 3956 Reportee: Tahlie C Report given to nearest rep: George Simpson Tel: 566 Message : Please ring. Report by George Tahlie and her mother we returning home to Venus Bay travelling along the South Gippsland Hwy between Wonthaggi and Inverloch at about 9pm on Monday 10 July 2000 when they saw an unusual light up ahead. It appeared as a bright start does when seen through trees. However there were no trees in the particular area. As they watched this light it approached them at an alarming speed. In about one second it came from about one half of one kilometre ahead and passed right next to their car and disappeared behind them into the distance. It was not very high when it passed them because Mrs. C could clearly see spark trails just outside her drivers side window. There was no sound. It moved so rapidly that they could not gauge its size. They were both left with the impression that they had seen something odd. Then Tahlie decided to report it. Thank you George for this report _____________________________________ FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00781 08.07.00 QLD Date: 08.07.2000 Day: Saturday Time Reported: 11:35am Location: Cape York Peninsula Reportee: Brad Report given to nearest rep: Diane Harrison Tel: 07 40 Saw UFO Activity on Friday Night Cheers Robert. Report: Day: Friday 7th July Time: 11.35pm Shape: Round Size: small ball Objects: 2 Colour: silver orange with red sparks Sound: none Duration: 5 minutes Direction: Heading East Witnesses: 3 Witness said two of his girl friends saw two orange silver balls traveling across the sky at high speed ... what was strange about them...they stayed in complete formation one behind the other. The object made no noise but they left a very unusual contrail which was arced shape.. nothing like what a plane. The witness said he called the Cairns police... they didn't having any other reports of the object on record. Regards Diane _____________________________________ FOLLOWUP George Simpson AUFORN Vic 1800 Callin Code: 00801 VIC 16.07.2000 Date: 16.07.2000 Day: Sunday Time Reported: 6.52 pm Location: VIC Reportee: Not given Report given to nearest rep: George Simpson via Di Harrison Tel: 03 953 Message : Please ring. Witness saw object with long orange tail between 5.15am and 5.30am 16th of July. Report By George Observer named Barry lives in Sandrigham, Melbourne and over looks port Philip Bay on Sunday 16th July at 5.10am. He saw a long "red line in the sky. It was fairly high up and appeared to be a red-orange colour, probably several kilometers long, and perfectly straight as if drawn using a ruler. He went inside to get his wife to come out and see it also, but it had disappeared. Thank you George for this report ___________________________________ FOLLOWUP George Simpson AUFORN Vic 1800 Callin Code: 00802 VIC 16.07.2000 Date: 16.07.2000 Day: Sunday Time Reported: 7.06 pm Location: VIC Reportee: Not given Report given to nearest rep: George Simpson via Di Harrison Tel: 03 972 Message : Please ring. No message left. Report by George On Saturday night 15th July at about 11pm DW saw 3 amber lights flying overhead at very high altitude in a line towards the S.W. These lights were widely spaced and evenly spaced apart. The witness often sees many aircraft in the area where she lives which is Mooroolbark, a South Eastern suburb in the foothills of the Dandenong ranges. These lights were eerie because they were "silent" and they followed each other while being spaced. The witness wishes to remain anonymous. Thankyou George for this report. __________________________________ FOLLOWUP George Simpson AUFORN Vic 1800 Callin Code: 00803 VIC 16.07.2000 Date: 16.07.2000 Day: Sunday Time Reported: 9.56 pm Location: VIC Reportee: Not given Report given to nearest rep: George Simpson Tel: 30 9 Message : Please ring. Red fireballs seen Report by George This sighting occurred during the Lunar Eclipse of July 16 2000. Firstly, a flashing light came over a group of people who were outside waiting to observe the eclipse. This Light was unusual because it was silent and it stopped, and then shot off at high speed. Secondly, two flashing lights came over and did the same thing, stopped, and then took off. Thirdly, another flashing light came over, this one resembling a fireball, stopped and then changed colour from red to green and blue and produced or �poured out� a very intensely bright light which was followed by an intense explosion. The whole street saw it, according to CC. After the explosion the object flew off at about a 45 degree angle and disappeared. The local police were contacted, soon afterwards the �Mill Park� police said a �car� �blew up�� in the area. This was not a rational explanation as no exploded cars were reported in the area. Another witness about 2km away also saw the light stop, and saw the sudden very bright light and heard the explosion. Needless to say the eclipse fell into insignificance in the minds of those witnesses who later had difficulty getting to sleep with the events of the evening staying in their minds. Thank you George for this report. _____________________________________ FOLLOWUP Robert Andrews TUFOIC 1800 Callin Code: 00809 TAS 18.07.00 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:10:55 +1000 Date: 18.07.2000 Day: Tuesday Time Reported: 8:11pm Location: Davenport, TAS Reportee: no name supplied (male) Report given to nearest rep: Robert Andrews Tel: 03 6423 Andrew Reports: The UFO was actualy seen on sunday evening on the 16th. Our investigator Keith Robert's concluded that it was a Garbage Bag Balloon hoax. Similar event occoured on the same night in Launceston. We get a lot of these Garbage bag things up in Launceston/Devonport area. Hope this helps, Robert Andrews Thank you for your prompt reply Andrew Regards Rita Robb AUFORN ______________________________________ FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR NSW 1800 Callin Code: 00820 28.07.2000 NSW Date: 28.07.2000 Day: Friday Time Seen: Wednesday 26th July 7.20pm to 7.30pm Location: Narrabeen Reportee: John A Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 02 998or 0411 Report: John was heading down the Wakehurst Parkway toward the intersection of Pittwater Rd when he noticed what appeared to be two landing lights of an aeroplane approaching from the South. He was talking to his wife on the hands free mobile at the time as he continued to watch the lights. As he watched a third light became visible, he became intrigued and his wife suggested he should pull over, which he did. He watched the lights as it came over him, at its zenith he could determine a black shape of either a v or triangular shaped object against the black night sky. At a point of about 45 degrees away from him two independantly strobing blue/white colour lights were observed. The estimated height of the object was only about 500 mtrs and the speed was very slow, taking 8 to 9 minutes to dissapear from view. The strobing lights appeared to be randomly positioned and acted without rythym of each other. There was a soft whining noise like the sound of a distant jet heard during some part of the observation. Once the third light was viewed, all three lights remained in sight till it was lost to view heading Nor West, indicating that the lights were under the craft. Radar confirmation of something unusual in the sky that night is pending, but don�t hold your breath. Regards Doug Moffett Thank you Doug for these reports Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch Director ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) E-Mail: tkbnetw@powerup.com.au E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw ADMINISTRATION: THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) PO Box 805 Springwood Qld 4127 Australia ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number 1800 77 22 88 Freecall ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Disclaimer: The Keith Basterfield List Owners are not responsible for the content or misuse of this list. However, personal insults, flaming will not be tolerated. ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 31 From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:13:06 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:22:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 31 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan@aol.com> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 5, Number 31 August 3, 2000 Editor: Joseph Trainor CONCORDE CRASH: THE UFO CONNECTION On Tuesday, July 25, 2000, at 4 p.m., the Concorde, a sleek supersonic passenger jetliner, fueled up at Charles de Gaulle International Airport north of Paris, preparing for its flight to New York City. At 4:42 p.m., the tower cleared the Concorde, now Air France Flight 4590, for takeoff. The Concorde began rolling down the runway. But as the jetliner started its climb, a long trailing plume of fire poured out of the Number 2 engine. The crew apparently tried to bank to the right upon completing their climbout, and the Concorde began losing altitude. At 4:44 p.m., the jet crashed three kilometers (two miles) east of the airport, killing all 109 passengers on board. Four people on the ground were also killed when the crashing Concorde "obliterated the Hotelissimo, a three-story hotel," located at the intersection of les Autoroutes N17 and D902 in Gonesse, a town of 25,000 10 kilometers (6 miles) north of Paris. Investigators combed the wheat fields near the Hotelissimo for Concorde wreckage. One of the two cockpit data recorders was found shortly after the crash. "Investigators had known that the Concorde pilot reported problems with the No. 2 engine, the innermost engine on the left, but the flight data recorder shows that the No. 1 engine adjoining it also lost power. The engine somehow regained thrust but lost power again after being airborne for 'a bit less than a minute,'" the French Accident Investigation Bureau reported. "Shortly after reporting problems with the No. 2 engine, the crew said that the landing gear would not retract." "'The flames seen after takeoff did not come from the engine but in all likelihood from from a major fuel leak,' the Accident and Inquiry Office, part of France's transportation ministry said in a statement Sunday," July 30, 2000, "'One of the pieces found on the runway seems to come from a fuel tank,' the statement said." (Editor's Comment: A burst or ruptured tank would halt the flow of fuel to the No. 1 and No. 2 engines. But how would that cause the electrical systems failure that affected the Concorde's landing gear?) The crash took a strange twist, however, when it was revealed that the Concorde had been leased by Dellmann, the German tour company. Of the 109 people aboard, 96 were German tourists, and 13 of these came from Munchengladbach (population 260,000)m a mid-sized industrail city located 10 kilometers (6 miles) west of Dusseldorf and 320 kilometers (200 miles) southwest of Berlin. Munchengladbach was in the news six weeks ago when a UFO reportedly landed on the outskirts of the city. Over 50 German policemen hunted for the landed saucer, and some residents supposedly made contact with the saucer's occupants, which were described as "green humanoid males" on an "odyssey through the universe." (For more details, see UFO Roundup, volume 5, number 24, "German police hunt for landed UFO," page 3.) Among the crash victims from Munchengladbach were "private business school director Kurt Kahle, 51, who perished with his wife and 8-year-old son, leaving behind a daughter... Werner Tellman, head of a chain of furniture stores, and Harald Ruch, founder of a company that provides glass cleaning and security services to area businesses. Both died with their wives on the Concorde." On Thursday, July 27, 2000, a mysterious bomb explosion occurred at a commuter rail station in Dusseldorf used by Munchengladbach residents. ""An explosion rocked a Dusseldorf commuter train station, injuring nine people and sending bleeding commuters rushing from the station in panic. Two of the injured were in critical conditions, fire officials said." "Police said the blast was likely caused by a fragmentation grenade or a homemade bomb. Authorities did not believe did not believe the attack was politically motivated." (See USA Today for July 26, 2000, "Shock and grief unite Germany and France," page 3A; July 28, 2000, "Concorde was aflame during liftoff," page 13A; July 27, 2000, "In Germany, 'an entire city is in mourning' after disaster," page 6A and July 31, 2000, "Major fuel leak likely sparked flames on Concorde," page 7A.) (Editor's Comment: Suddenly it's very dangerous to be from Munchengladbach. You know, this isn't the first time a UFO incident has had a cockeyed link to a major tragedy in the news. Last year, UFOs were seen repeatedly in Rosamund, California. Then, three months later, former Aryan Nations member and longtime Rosamund resident Buford O. Furrow Jr. popped up in Los Angeles with guns blazing. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?) CIGAR-SHAPED UFO HOVERS OVER COLORADO TOWER "When Jody Messoline opened her UFO Watchtower in the San Luis Valley" on the outskirts of Hooper, Colorado (population 90), "she never expected them to come." "But they did come." "A bronze, cigar-shaped light glowed, hovered and sped away late one night in late June, Messoline said. It was about 11 p.m. nd Messoline was up on the watchtower with a few customers." "'It was there, and then it went fszkt across the sky and was gone,' said Messoline, who moved to Hooper from Golden (Colorado) about five years ago. 'At first I was reluctant to mention it. But the other people in the tower were with me at the time.'" "'It scared one gal so much, she left.'" "Despite this incident, Messoline isn't a believer--yet." "'It does make you wonder,' she said." Hooper's "UFO Watchtower is a 10-foot-high observation deck a 50-person capacity atop a geodesic dome, which opened on Memorial Day." ""Some days, only a couple of people stop by--for (soda) pop and (potato) chips. Other days more than 100 might stop for pictures, tell Messoline stories about their sightings and encounters, buy extraterrestrial=theme gifts,, camp overnight, take UFO pictures and relate abduction experiences." "Mostly they stop for a few minutes, but there are usually a few who recline on air mattresses and and view the sky for hours well past the closing time." "'Everyone has a story,' Messoline said, 'The serious ones come in the evening.'" "Some even pay the two-dollar fee she charges to go up into the tower." "'We wanted to see if the tower has had any sightings because there has been a lot of stories about UFO sightings in the area,' said Ryan Temple of Santa Fe, New Mexico, who stopped by for a look with his wife Wendy." "'I think they should mount a video camera up there and have it scanning all the time,' Temple suggested, speaking in all seriousness." "Hooper, a small town" that cherishes ideals of "family, work, church and school, isn't usually a hotbed of cosmic cowboys. Fewer than a hundred folks live in the tidy homes that surround the town center of the Hooper Elementary School and gas station, and a few of them wished they had thought of building a watchtower first." "Candace Knolan, who lives in Hooper and runs a jewelry store, said she never thought about UFOs until she moved to the San Luis Valley seven years ago and started seeing 'a lot of interesting things in the sky.'" "In early June (2000) she went to the tower because a group from the Center for Extraterrestrial Intelligence was meeting. That night, she saw a similar (cigar-shaped) object in the sky with red, white and teal lights respond to one of the observers who flashed a powerful flashlight (torch in UK or Australia--J.T.) of 250,000 candlepower." "One of the guys went 'blink, blink' with the flashlight. Then the object blinked back twice,' Knolan said. The guy with the flashlight went 'blink, blink' again, and the thing raced across the sky and went 'blink, blink,' too.'" "The double-blink exchange went on three more times before the object in the sky vanished, she said." "'It blew me away,' Knolan said." (See the Rocky Mountain News of Denver, Colorado for July 23, 2000, "UFO Watchtower gets visit from glowing light in the sky," by Deborah Frazier. Many thanks to Gerry Lovell of Far Shores for forwarding the newspaper article.) UFOs, BLACK HELICOPTERS SIGHTED IN SAN LUIS VALLEY Hooper, Colo. isn't the only town in the San Luis Valley to report UFO activity. During the past two weeks, there have been many sightings in Crestone, Mesita and on the Baca Grande Development near Alamosa. On Wednesday, July 12, 2000, between 1 a.m. and 1:45 a.m., witnesses skywatching in Crestone, Colo. "observed seven to eight blinking lights. They alternated green. red and white and were in a spherical formation, approximately 19 degrees above the western horizon. The formation of lights appeared to be hovering out over the Valley, and after approximately 20 to 30 minutes, appeared to be lights slowly moving west. Then they appeared to stop and started heading back east towards his vantage point." "The witness estimated the light formation to be about 10 miles (16 kilometers) away, when he noticed them. At one point during the sighting, a helicopter 'approached from the west, flanked the formation to the northeast, and then headed east into the Sangres (that is, the Sandre de Cristo Mountains--J.T.) The helicopter was flying at an altitude of approximately 15,000 feet (4,500 meters)." On Friday, July 14, 2000, at 3:12 p.m., another witness reported the presence of a black helicopter over Mesita, Colo. The witness described it as "a large, dark, flat- bottomed unusual military helicopter," adding, "At about 3:12 p.m., we were on our way into Alamosa and had just turned off (Costilla County) Road K in Mesita, north onto (County) Road 10 when we noticed it coming out of the north-northeast, heading for the Ute Mountain area in the south-southeast. It could not have been more than 100 feet (30 meters) above the top of my truck., and if it had been going any more slowly it would have had to land. There was no other craft in sight either in the air or on roads or in the pasture." On Wednesday, July 19, 2000, at 10:20 a.m., multiple witnesses at the Baca Grande Development in Saguache County spotted "an extremely low-flying, four-engine, jet cargo plane. One witness called it a C-17 which he thought was a NATO plane that replaced 'the old C-4.'" (Editor's Note: The C-17 has been in service with the U.S. Air Force for years.) The C-17 approached from the north, "made a dangerously low left-hand turn just above the treetops on North Crestone Creek. Plane 'seemed unusually quiet for a jet' and was between 100 and 200 feet (30 and 60 meters) in altitude." Eleven hours later, at 9 p.m., in Crestone, Colo., a witness reported, "I had stepped outside to check out the stars, not many up yet, and there was a very bright star I noticed moving in the west and not high up, like a satellite... I watched it and ran over to Dan's to get him but could hear him on the phone, came back. It had continued traveling fast, from the northwest to the southeast, and it was brilliant white, no flashing, from behind it looked the same. It was well into the southeast when I heard a rumble in the northwest like a jet would make. But I honestly don't believe it to be a jet, as there were no flashing lights. It was brilliant white like an intense star from the side and from behind it." On Thursday, July 27, 2000, a resident of Villa Grove "observed a large, night-black jet that flew low over Hayden Pass and headed southwest at treetop level over (Colorado) Highway 285. Witness called the craft ''the strangest-looking plane I've ever seen.' A couple of minutes later, two fighter jets followed the course of the first plane down the Valley." Author/investigator Christopher O'Brien commented, "The San Luis Valley appears to be experiencing an upsurge of summer reports ranging from classic UFO-type nocturnal lights to unusual military flight activity." (Many thanks to Christopher O'Brienm author of The Mysterious Valley and Enter the Valley for these reports.) CHUPACABRA STRIKES AGAIN IN NORTHERN CHILE A weird creature was sighted on the highway in Puerta Cuatro, midway between the cities of Calama and Chuquicamata in northern Chile. It is being called a Chupacabra although it is a quadruped rather than a biped. On Thursday, July 13, 2000,, at 1:30 a.m. a woman and her friend, a professor, left the Lions Club dinner and were driving south of Calama when they spotted "two strange yellow lights" on the road. "Although we originally intended to remain beyond midnight at the Lions Club transfer of power ceremonies, we both left at 1:30 a.m. Upon reaching the Chuqui checkpoint, a Carabinero (Chilean national policeman--J.T.) was inspecting a vehicle and we drove right by him," the driver reported. "More or less in the vicinity of Puerta Cuatro, the driver flashed her high beams (headlights on the driver's Ford K automobile--J.T.) at two intensely yellow 'lights' a short distance away." "'The other 'car' was about half a block from our own. We were discussing God in a Christian framework when I began to slow down because the lights remained stationary. I thought it could be a stranded automobile or a bicycle.'" the driver reported. "Nerves then got the better of the Ford K's owner who then sustained a heated dialogue with her companion in an effort to explain the figure who stood two to three feet (0.6 to 0.9 meters) away from the front bumper." "'Is it the Devil?' asked one." "Yes, it would seem so,' replied the other. The women "observed something resembling a dog but much larger, lacking ears and covered in extremely long gray hair--particularly around the neck----and having two immense slanted yellow eyes." "The women and the 'thing' exchanged looks for some five to ten seconds, after which the car drove off along the left lane. The 'animal' followed its departure with its head--an extremtiy capable of 180-degree turns.." "'I felt a terrible fear. I wanted to get out of the car, but she calmed me down. We saw the two yellow lights again, but this time they lit up the entire road before disappearing.,'" the driver said, "'I hit the accelerator and kept up speed until we reached Calama.'" Calama is 300 kilometers (180 miles) north of Santiago de Chile, the national capital. "Now feeling more calm, both women have tried to rationalize their encounter. 'It's from somewhere else,' said the driver. Her companion, the professor, still thinks it's the Devil." (See the Chilean newspaper La Estrella de Loa for July 14, 2000. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico por eso articulo.) HUNDREDS SEE UFOs ON AUSTRALIA'S NORTH COAST Hundreds of onlookers witnessed luminous orange spherical UFOs in the sky over Casuarina Beach in the Northern Territory of Australia. The sightings took place on Thursday, July 6, and Tuesday, July 11, 2000 during the evening. Eyewitness P.A. Gibbs of Karama, N.T. reported, "We were there to watch the fireworks display, as were hundreds of other people. My friends quite facetiously said the orange lights were UFOs." At first Gibbs thought the orange orbs "was sunlight reflecting off a gold=foil sheeting" of a space satellite, being so far above the horizon they would stillbe in sunlight even though we were in darkness. I smugly and authoritatively favored this explanation until the 'satellites' began doing manoeuvres and changing direction." "Apart from the amazing phenomenon of witnessing UFOs, what I found incredible was that there were hundreds of people on the beach, and nobody else at all (was) astonished by the UFOs!" (See the Northern Territory News for July 11, 2000. Many thanks to Diane Harrison of the Australian UFO Research Network for forwarding this article.) GOLFERS VIDEOTAPE A CIGAR-SHAPED UFO IN OKLAHOMA On Friday morning, July 28, 2000, businessman Mike Proctor visited the Elk City Country Club in Elk City, Oklahoma (population 10,500) "to get a few tips from golf pro Si Friedman" when something very strange happened. "We were videotaping my golf swing," Proctor reported. "After hitting several balls, we went inside to view the video, and in the background we saw a cigar-shaped object that was moving at a very high rate of speed It was at approximately a 30 to 40 degree angle moving from east to west." According to KFOR-TV in Oklahoma City, "As a teaching tool, Si *Friedman) uses a small video camera, and as he was rolling on one of Mike's swings, he captured more than just your garden-variety birdie." "In regular speed, it's just a black dot flying by, probably a bird, maybe an airplane but more likely a bird." Proctor said, "I asked him if he saw this, and he said, 'What are you talking about?' 'Well, somebody hit a golf ball behind me is why I had a bad shot on that swing.'" So the tape was run in slow motion, and the cigar- shaped UFO appeared, flying from east to west at an estimated speed pf Mach 2, twice the speed of sound. Proctor and Friedman have copyrighted the videotape and have contacted the National UFO Reporting Center, according to KFOR-TV Elk City is on Interstate Highway I-40 approximately 113 miles (294 kilometers) west of Oklahoma City. (Many thanks to Jim Hickman and KFOR-TV for this report.) (Editor's Comment: I'll have to ask our president, the golfer, what kind of handicap you get if a UFO spoils your shot.) CIGAR-SHAPED UFO SEEN BY COMMUTERS IN TEXAS The same UFO videotaped in Elk City, Okla. may have been seen a few hours earlier just east of Dallas, Texas. On Friday, July 28, 2000, at 6:30 a.m., Anthony S. and his friend "were driving (south) to work early in the morning" when "the object approahed from the southwest." "At first glance I thought it was a commercial plane, but it was moving too slow and too low," he reported, "I pulled over and got out of the car to get a clear glimpse. Soon we were joined by some eyewitnesses who also also pulled over to witness the bizarre craft. The cigar-shaped craft was like nothing we had ever seen before. After a slow approach, it made a sudden vertical turn and sped with unimaginable speed toward the rising sun." Anthony said he pulled off the highway in Wylie, Texas (population 8,300), just east of Dallas. He described the UFO as "cigar-shaped, silverish gray, just below the low clouds *estimated altitude of 10,000 feet or 3,000 meters--J.T.)" and was "seen by 20 to 30 early-morning commuters." (Email Form Report) "BRING ME THE HEAD OF... MATA HARI!?" "Eighty-three years after she was executed, sexy spy Mata Hari has given authorities the slip again!" After her execution by a French Army firing squad on October 15, 1917, "her head was severed from her body, then mummified, then placed in the Museum of Anatomy in Paris, along with 3,000 other preserved noggins, which mostly came from criminals and killers, used for medical research." "But a recent inventory showed Mata Hari's face was missing." "'The remains are not in the museum now,' says curator Roger Saban. 'And no one knows where they could be.'" "Now museum officials have launched an all-out search for Mata Hari's gorgeous cranium, which still has her bright red tresses intact." "Officials believe the skull was stolen by a collector--or one of the beauty's modern admirers." Mata Hari was born Margaretha Gertruide Zelle in the Netherlands. After hanging around with Dr. Fritz Hartmann and other German mystics of the Theosophical Society, she traveled to India in search of the Hidden Masters. (Editor's Comment: Another one! Remind me to tell you sometime about Detlef Schmude, the world's first door-to-door psychic investigator.) Returning to Europe, Margaretha "became an exotic dancer in Paris, billing herself as Mata Hari, (Hindi for Eye of the Dawn--J.T.), the daughter of a dancing girl from India." "The sultry beauty bewitched vaudeville audiences around Europe--and secretly attended an espionage school in Germany, where she got cozy with top officials." She used her considerable charms to lure British, French and Russian officers into bed, "where they would happily spill military secrets." At her French Army court-martial in 1917, Mata Hari said, "I am a woman who enjoys herself very much. Sometimes I lose, somethimes I win." She added, "An officer in my eyes is a superior being==a man who is always ready for any adventure. It did not matter to me what country they came from. Harlot, yes. But a traitor, never!" At dawn on October 15, 1917, as the French Army squad took aim with their Lebel rifles, Mata Hari blew them a kiss. (See The Examiner for August 8, 2000, "Who stole Mata Hari's head?" page 7.) (Editor's Note: Two days before Mata Hari was shot in Paris, on October 13, 1917, there was an apparition of the Virgin Mary at Cova da Iria, near Fatima, Portugal, witnessed by 60,000 people.) from the UFO Files... 1930: UNFORGETTABLE JUDGE CRATER or "Beam me up, Bailiff!" Either this fellow was New York City's most notorious UFO abductee, or else he pulled off a disappearing act worthy of Harry Houdini. He disappeared seventy years ago this week, and this is his story... Joseph Force Crater was born in Easton, Pennsylvania in 1889, the son of Irish immigrants. He graduated from Lafayette College and then enrolled in the Columbia University Law School, making New York City his home. "In 1913, he began to practice law in New York. Ambitious and hard-working, he entered politics and soon became president of a Democratic Party club" in the city's Manhattan borough. "Because of his close ties with the city's Democratic leadership at Tammany Hall, he was appointed to the New York Supreme Court in April 1930." In 1916, Crater was retained as a lawyer by a New York socialite, Mrs. Stella Wheeler. "and the next year, after Mrs. Wheeler's divorce became final, Crater married his client. They appeared to be a devoted couple." Judge Crater "was impressive in both physical structure and dapper dress. Although he stood six feet tall and weighed 180 pounds, he walked with short mincing steps. His face was fleshy, and his iron-gray hair was parted neatly in the middle." But the judge's domestic life wasn't all that rosy. In 1930, he was seeing two or three Broadway showgirls on the side, including 22-year-old Sally Lou Ritz. When the state Supreme Court recessed in June 1930, Crater took his wife to their summer home in Belgrade Lakes, Maine. "On August 3 (1930) he received a telephone call and told his wife that he had to go" to New York City for a few days, "'to straighten those fellows out.'" On August 4, Crater "arrived at his Fifth Avenue apartment but he seems to have done nothing extraordinary that day or the next." "On the morning of August 6, however, he spent two hours going through the files in his courthouse chambers, and he had his assistant, Joseph Mara, cash two checks for him amounting to $5,150. At noon he and Mara carried two locked briefcases to his apartment, where he dismissed Mara for the day." "The same evening, August 6, 1930, "Judge Crater went to a Broadway ticket agency and bought one ticket for the night's performance of a new comedy, Dancing Partners, at the Belasco Theatre." Crater "then went to Billy Has's chophouse (cafe) on West 45th Street, where he encountered two friends," attorney William Klein and Sally Lou Ritz, who was described as "a stunning showgirl." "It was 9:10 p.m., well after the play's curtain time, that when the judge said goodbye to his friends in front of the restaurant and hailed a passing taxi." Judge Crater "hailed a taxi, stepped inside and vanished forever." "When he had not returned to Maine after ten days, Mrs. Crater inquired of her husband's whereabouts among his friends in New York. She was told that everything was all right, that the judge would eventually turn up." "Only when he failed to appear at the opening of the courts on August 25 did his fellow justices become alarmed and conduct a private search." "A grand jury began to investigate the case in October (1930), interviewed 95 witnesses, amassed 975 pages of testimony," but could not decisively conclude whether he was alive or dead." In 1937, Mrs. Stella Crater sued three insurance companies, trying to collect her husband's death benefits. Her lawyer, Emil K. Ellis, argued that the judge had been murdered by gangsters. But the court ruled in favor of the insurance companies. On June 6, 1939, the state of New York declared Joseph Force Crater legally dead. Yet, like Elvis, Judge Crater continued to pop up from time to time. In the past 70 years, thousands of people have reported seeing him. And among New York City's cabbies, there are even stranger tales-- stories of the well-dressed man with iron gray hair who vanished from the back seat of a Yellow Cab on August 6, 1930. How he suddenly went rigid in his seat, and the cabbie said, "You okay, pal?" And the passenger's eyes bulged slightly, and he began sweating. And he opened his mouth to scream, but no sound came out. He seemed to be screaming in silence. Then he turned transparent and vanished, leaving one very shaken cabbie behind the steering wheel. To the end of her life, Mrs. Crater was "convinced her husband was murdered 'because of a sinister something that was connected with politics.'" Today Judge Crater would be 111 years old and surely dead. But if he is still alive, he is "perhaps pleased at having carried off one of the most thoroughly investigated--and mysterious--vanishing acts on record." Meanwhile, aboard a large silver saucer passing by the Crab Nebula, a mellow human voice disturbs the cacophony of cheeps and whistles in the ship's galley. "Uhhh, Reptoids...uhm, I don't mean to be a pest or anything, but...ah...could I go home now? Come on, fellows, give me a break. I'm supposed to be meeting Mayor Walker for lunch today..." (See the books Strange Stories, Amazing Facts, Reader's Digest Association, Pleasantville, N.Y., May 1978, pages 363 and 364; Mysteries of the Unexplained, Reader's Digest Association, Pleasantville, N.Y., 1982, pages 127 and 128. See also the New York Daily News for September 3, 1930, page 1.) That's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more UFO and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes home-- UFO Roundup." See you then. UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2000 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. ********************************************************* IMPORTANT Please Read: ====================== The Hunger Site --------------- http://www.thehungersite.com Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site and clicking on a button you can donate free food. There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation - the food is paid for by sponsors. Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference! If you have a web site download a banner and give a link! ********************************************************* E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:50:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:25:58 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Maccabee >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:03:51 -0300 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >>>case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >>>found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >>>insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >>>unidentifieds. >The beauty of Project Blue Book Special Report 14 is that 10% >were listed as Insufficient Information and 20% as Unknowns >after consistent investigation by a small group of final report >evaluators. All 4 had to agree on Unknowns. Any 2 could list as >a known the Battelle analysts also divided the sightings into reliability groups: Poor, Doubtful, Good, Excellent., based on the quality, completeness and self-consistency of the report and upon the quality or experience of the witness. They found, out of about 3200 sightings analyzed, 525 were poor, 1298 were doubtful, 1070 were good and 308 (about 10%) were excellent. For each of these reliability groups they divided the sightings into 3 general classes: Unknown (U), Insufficient Information (II) and Known (K). The statistics went as follows: POOR : K - 62%, II - 20%, U - 18% DOUBTFUL : 73 11 16 GOOD : 71 3 26 EXCELLENT : 61 4 35 Note that as the reliability increased toward excellent the % Insufficient Information decreased. This is to be expected since completeness, wealth of detail and apparent accurary were several of the criteria that determined the reliability of a report. One would expect that th more complete reports would have more details that would lead the analyst to the explanation than would the less complete (doubtful, poor) reports. The most important result if the continual increase in the % unexplained as the reliabiliy increased. The is NOT what is to be expected if "flying saucers" are all misidentified objects (M), delusions or mental states of the witness (D) or hoaxes (H), because LOGICAL CONCLUSION FROM THESE DATA IF all saucers are M,D or H (i.e., IF there are no truly unidentifiable saucer sightings): THE Most Reliable Witnesses must be also the most likely to make mistakes (M), have delusions (D) or create hoaxes (H). Obviously this conclusion contradicts our general notion of reliability. The alternative is that the most reliable sighting reports are te least likely to have erroneous data or to be incomplete in their descriptions of the phenomena and hence should have the LARGEST percentage of Knowns, the Least percentage of Insufficient Information AND THE LEAST PERCENTAGE OF UNKNOWNS....... IF THERE ARE NO "FLYING SAUCERS." IT doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the most obvious conclusion based on these data is that Flying Saucers ARE Real (thank you, Stan). Incidently, when only the military cases were used (1226 cases) , 204 (about 20%) were rated as excellent and of these fully 37% were rated as UNKNOWN! The Better the sighting... the More Likely to Be Unexplainable in terms of known phenomena! Thank You, Battelle!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: bductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:41:21 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:27:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: bductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith Compliments to all and sundry from His Grace the Duke. >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >My dear friend Peter has missed the point -- abduction >investigators (the ones I know, anyway) talk to children to >relieve their anxiety, not to pump information from them. Whether typical or not, the scene from the NOVA TV show we've had quoted here hardly seems designed to reassure the child in question. But it does seem calculated to elicit information (albeit of a kind well infixed in the questioner's mind). One might say the same about the interviews with young John Napolitano in "Witnessed". And how, I wonder, do either Greg or B. Elliott Hopkins conjure to themselves the notion that then going on to speculate wildly and publicly about John N's parentage was going to relieve any anxiety that he may have had about anything at all? Note well, too, that the "Cortile" family's real identity was well known long before Hopkins published "Witnessed". So he knew he was placing John N in what might loosely be called a difficult position in public, let alone the private humiliation. As an aside may I note --- >Beyond that, Peter's position here reminds me of his very >curious view of Occam's Razor some time back. Occam's Razor, he >apparently believes, gives him the right to tell others that >they must hold his own opinion, in any debate about things we >don't know much about. O, absolutely. Of _course_, as anyone perusing the archive will confirm, I entirely misconstrue Occam's Razor ("Entia non sunt multiplicanda" -- how could anyone be expected to understand Latin?) and fanatically misapply its caricature in every context. This is part of a black-budget disinformation campaign for which I am handsomely rewarded. Being an individual of flawless physical beauty with a mind of incomparable power and erudition, I am never, ever wrong about anything -- no, don't say it, not even that, whatever it is. The rest of you are ugly, ignorant, evilly-garbed, illiterate vulgarians with revolting table manners, deserving only immediate incarceration in the vilest Paraguayan sewer, which will reek of rotten fish even worse than Greg's post. I trust I make myself clear? --- while waiting for Greg or anyone else to level the playing field a bit, eh what, chaps, and show us all some indisputable facts about alleged abductions before they whinge about skeptics playing fast and loose with any other purported facts. Or being derisive, or ironic, as the number of hypotheses may be. best wishes Picrochole D. Merope Cod Warrior
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? - From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:53:04 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:37:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement' CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? - >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:38:06 -0400 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >Subject: Bush 'UFO Statement' - CNN.com Hacked or Jacked? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >An intrusion into the CNN.com website has altered the transcript >of the Saturday Morning News with a correspondent speculating >that the reason Governor George W. Bush picking former >Congressman and Former Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney as >his Vice Presidential running mate was to reveal "the truth" >about UFOs. >The UFO portion of the transcript, completely out of context, >has a statement inserted into correspondent Jonathan Karl >commentary with an interruption, by an unidentified citizen and >finally statement by Governor Bush that Chaney "knows." >Offices of CNN.com in both New York and Atlanta have been >informed of this alteration as has the Media Center at the >Republican National Convention. >From the hoaxer(s) point of view this was an excellent time to >initiate this scam. The news organization moved large portions >of their operations to the convention city, and regular offices >are left with reduced staff. Likewise most of the candidates >personnel have also moved to the convention. So the chances for >detection of such a hoax are lessen. Denials from the candidates >offices are harder to get with all the confusion of the >surrounding the operations of the convention. >The other problem for the hoaxer is that he has to get the >altered transcript before the public. To accomplish this he has >to use catspaws who are credulous and will not, for a moment, >stop to examine the material or confirm its authenticity. >This should sound familar, it has been done before. >I've talked to local newsmen about this transcript. If there >was any chance that the statement were true, it would be on the >wire services already, not placed there by someone who happened >to stumble across this transcript, but as an execlusive CNN >story with a CNN byline. >Jan Aldrich >Source: CNN.com Transcripts >http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html Hi All, John Ackerman called to assure me that the CNN news program with Governor Bush was indeed true. He saw the exchange and told me that the transcript does not give the exact picture of what happened. In other words, you have to see the tape! Jonathan Karl is in a voice over of the Bush and Chaney greeting people and shaking hands. Which is exactly what I thought. But why would Karl just bring up UFOs out of the blue? Well, according to John Ackerman the unidentified citizen is the one that brought up UFOs and Jonathan Karl is only short cutting the citizen's question when the tape is shown to the public on CNN later. So what actually happened the unidentified citizen asked Bush and Chaney about UFOs and asked if Bush would tell the truth about UFOs... Bush smiled and made the statement in the transcript. Chaney said nothing. So Jonathan Karl's statement was not out of the blue, but as a voice over to short cut to the context of the question. Well, the transcript does not convey this. In the transcript it looks like Jonathan Karl just decided to bring up UFOs and this citizen was part of this... when I asked CNN.com officials did this look like a real transcript or an altered one? Would Jonathan Karl introduce the UFO question in that manner? They said no, and that there would probably be an internal investigation to find out what happened. I asked Jonathan Karl to confirm or deny the transcript via E-mail. His answer which came in late last night was not completely satisfying. He only said that Bush's statement was correct which is a far cry from confirming the transcript was correct. I asked him to clarify this and confirm that his statement in the transcript is correct. No answer yet. Again, this should have been an exclusive wire service story under Karl's or CNN's byline, but there is not a peep. John said the statement by Bush was the regular non-committal political statement of the moment and not exactly an iron clad commitment. Again, this is fine, but this is an exclusive CNN story, which one would expect to be fed to the wire services after CNN had used it. BTW I have the tape of the program on order. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: John Carpenter/Status Report Request From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:39:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: John Carpenter/Status Report Request Hello Mr. Carpenter, It has been a week since your posting where you acknowledged that notification of the witnesses/abductees involved in this sale of reports and personal files was necessary. We'd all just like to know what progress (if any) has been made in terms of actually notifying them. Several list members have volunteered information that will help you in tracking what few of the witnesses may have relocated since 1997. If you require any further assistance, feel free to let us know via this List (UFO UpDates) and I'm sure that many will be glad to pitch in and help with the notification process in any that we can. Please, do not procrastinate any longer over this issue. This needs to be done. If you are a man of true integrity and ethics none of this should be a problem. Could you please take the time to provide us with a progress report regarding the notification of the clients whose files you sold? Sincerely, John Velez, Webmaster, A.I.C. -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Bush/CNN/UFOs - "Unidentified Citizen" From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:08:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:41:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bush/CNN/UFOs - "Unidentified Citizen" Well, I wish I had this information a couple of days ago: "The unidentified citizen that posed the question to George Bush was MUFON's Charles Huffer. John Schuessler" 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:48:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:09:12 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:27:55 -0400 >>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>The sad story of engineer Paul Bennewitz also brings us some >>interesting informations on alleged personnel involved in these >>operations. To begin with, we know that, when he reported to >>Kirtland that he had recorded strange radio signals around >>Manzano, which he attributed to ufos, he was received by several >>officers, on 10 November 1980, according to Bruce Baccabee, in >>his report on the UFO landings near Kirtland (Fufor, 1985):> >>"The meeting included a Brigadier General, several Colonels, a >>Major, an instrumentation specialist, and Dr Lehman, the >>Director of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB. >>This sounds like a rather" powerfull" group to discuss a subject >>as officially uninteresting to the USAF/AFOSI as UFO reports."> >My paper on the Kirtland Landings did not discuss the Bennewitz >situation in any detail. For those who have never seen the >paper, see below. The complete paper with illustrations will >soon be posted at brumac.8k.com. >_______________________________________________________________ >This article was written in 1985, several years before the >controversy over Richard Doty's activities and MJ-12 became >public knowledge. At the time, I was not interested in the Paul >Bennewitz aspect of the Kirtland UFO activity. I was only >interested in the report of actual sightings of unidentified >objects at or near Kirtland Air However, according to Moore, the harrassment of Bennewitz by Afosi began not long after that meeting. Moore thought that Bennewitz had been fed disinformation because of his recordings. So, it is relevant to connect these events, and we are again in the middle of the question of disinformation. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:12:22 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:52:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Bourdais >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:53:54 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] - Young >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:02:38 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>Subject: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>From: Jean-Luc Rivera <JLRIV1@aol.com> >>>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:41:55 -0400 (EDT) >>>Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 05:19:42 -0400 >>>Subject: UpDate: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 2 [Waves] <snip> >>>Your remark is absolutely correct but if there was such a famous >>>correlation, the psychosociologists still have to explain why >>>there was no such wave between 1960 and 1962, when the war >>>became very nasty in Algeria, French generals tried to seize >>>power and one million people came back to France in a few days. >>>The trauma was far more important than in Indochina. >>Jean-Luc, Larry, Greg, et al.: >>Thanks, makes sense. Of course, 1952 wasn't 1962 in terms of >>public perceptions or attitudes toward UFOs. I did notice some >>smallish bulges on Larry's histograph, today, at: >>http://www.jps.net/larryhat/YDAY54.html >>from April to May (Dien Bien Phu fell on May 8) and in late July >>(the Indochina War ended on the 20th), but the big bulge later >>in the year probably is something different. >>I wonder what the French UFO sightings were like from '60 to >>'62? >Hello Bob et al: >The period 1960-1962 was slow pretty much everywhere, France is >no exception. >For the 36 month period Jan 1960 through Dec 1962 I list only 22 >sightings in France! >Compare that with the _single_ year 1954, 474 events listed in >France .. or even more outstanding, 336 in the single month of >October 1954 ( 336 in France alone ). >Comparing October 1954 ( 336 events/month ) to the average for >1960-1962 ( 22 events/36 months) I get a rate of 0.611 sightings >per month. Thus UFO sightings, as listed here, came in at a >rate 550 times as high in October 54, compared to the 1960-1962 >average. >I think we can drop the " North Africa war jitters " explanation >for the great non-waves of 1960-1962. >War-jitters, like El Nino, is a nice pat answer for anything the >experts cannot figure out properly. I am reminded of "the wind >making the stars sway" or "swamp gas". Maybe this relaxes people >so they can sleep better. >All of 1960 was a period of high sunspot activity (as defined >here), plus a couple of months in 1961. I have another explanation: In 1960-1962, the French were stressed and depressed that they could not even see UFOs. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: First UFO Sighting in North America From: Chris Pittman <Soccorro64@aol.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:02:00 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 12:05:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: First UFO Sighting in North America "A Great Light in the Night": The first UFO sighting in North America Copyright 2000 Christopher W. Pittman For the past six years, I have been conducting in-depth research on the history of UFOs in my home state, Massachusetts. In the course of this research, I have come across what I believe is an account of the very first UFO sighting in North America. Though the story originally surfaced in the UFO literature decades ago by the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon and published in a book in 1968 (Mysteries of the Skies: UFOs in Perspective), it has not received the same amount of attention given other early cases. I believe that this sighting deserves a second look, as unlike many other archaic UFO events, it contains elements often seen in modern "high strangeness" UFO cases. In addition, information gathered in recent decades seems to indicate that this sighting may have levels of mystery still unexplored after all these years. The sighting was originally reported in a book by John Winthrop, The History of New England, 1630-1639. At the time of the sighting, Winthrop was the governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The sighting was brought to his attention by the witnesses, who wanted to report the strange events to the area's dominant authority. Winthrop retold the following story: One night in March of 1638 or 1639, James Everell ("a sober, discreet man"- Winthrop) and two companions boarded a little boat and set out for a trip on the Muddy River in Boston. They had been moving downstream for about a mile when the night's mysterious events began. The three men were suddenly confronted with the appearance of a huge, bright light hovering in the sky. The light "flamed up" as it hovered and appeared to be about "three yards square." As they watched, the light "contracted into the figure of a swine" and moved "swift as an arrow" in the direction of Charlton. For two or three hours, the unidentified light moved back and forth in the sky between Everell's location and Charlton. When the light finally disappeared, the men noticed to their dismay that they had somehow been carried against the tide back to the place where they had started their trip! Governor Winthrop noted, "Divers[e] other credible persons saw the same light, after, about the same place."! Some witnesses said the light was occasionally seen shooting out flames and sparks, and indeed, two UFOs matching that description were again seen in Boston in 1644. The witnesses' account presents some perplexing aspects. What precisely is meant when the object is described as "the figure of a swine?" It is difficult to imagine anyone seriously reporting a sighting of a flying pig. Could the men have been trying to describe an oval-shaped body with four short legs, similar to the objects with landing gear reported in some modern UFO encounters? Additionally, it was reported that the object was somehow able to pull the boat against the tide for a mile. This prompts some interesting speculation. Many people who claim to have been taken from their vehicles onto a UFO have reported that at the end of their encounter, they find themselves in their vehicles far away from the place where their experience began. Also, we see that it took the men two or three hours to travel a single mile in the boat. During this entire time, the UFO remained visible, maneuvering at high speed in the sky near Boston. How could this phenomenon have appeared in the sky over a city for such a long time without dozens (if not hundreds) of people seeing it? And is it probable that the three men did not have the opportunity to alert a single other witness in all that time? Why did the group not notice they were moving in the wrong direction until the UFO had disappeared? There may be an answer to this question, but it is only speculation... Let us look at a widely publicized UFO encounter of the 1970's, the Allagash case investigated by Raymond Fowler. In this case, a group of four men on a camping trip set out in a canoe on the Allagash Waterway in Maine. They built a large bonfire to aid in finding their campsite on the return trip. When they were about a quarter of a mile away from shore, they saw a huge glowing ball of light coming over the trees on the bank. They flashed at it with a flashlight, and it came towards them, beaming light at the canoe. Frightened, the men tried to get away. Then the object suddenly flew away. The men felt that the experience only lasted fifteen or twenty minutes, but back at the camp, the men found that the bonfire had burned down to nothing but glowing coals, which should have taken two or three hours! Years later, under hypnosis, the witnesses told Fowler that they had been taken on board the UFO and been subjected to terrifying medical experiments at the hands of humanoi! d entities. The parallels between this case and Everell's sighting are obvious. A group of men in a boat witness a huge light in the night sky, are frightened, then find themselves back at their point of embarkation hours later. The Allagash witnesses reported a period of "missing time." What if Everell and the others experienced the same phenomenon without realizing it? Imagine that the three men, upon finding themselves back at the place where they started from, discovered that they had been gone two or three hours, and mistakenly concluded that they had been watching the UFO the whole time. If they had spent this time period inside the UFO and only consciously remembered the beginning of the experience, that would explain why there were apparently no other witnesses, and why the men weren't aware that the boat was going the wrong way. Though this speculation is admittedly far-fetched, James Everell and his companions may have been among the first Americans to experience being take! n aboard a UFO. The Allagash four would never have known the true extent of their encounter had they not undergone regression hypnosis. Although it will never be possible to determine if there is a hidden story behind America's first UFO report, it is interesting to wonder if perhaps, 360 years ago, a group of Boston men may have had an experience beyond their wildest dreams... http://members.aol.com/soccorro64
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: The Chupacabra Song Contest - The Winner From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:53:45 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:27:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: The Chupacabra Song Contest - The Winner Hello everybody. It is now August and the Chupi song contest has ended. I'm very proud to announce that the winner is Bruce Maccabee. He is going to receive a surprise gift package from UFOria. He had the best song entry but it does not contain enough latin topicality for our application. I hope EBK and all you wonderful UpDates folk enjoy Bruce's creation. Sing it yourselves and get in the fiesta mood. Tomorrow I will post the runner-up (gotta keep up the suspense). Bruce Maccabee wrote: ODE TO LA CHUPACABRA May he Live Long and Prosper (at someone else's expense) La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra... What a cutie guy you are. La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra, I love you more than life, by far. (end here after finishing the following verses/refrain) La Chupacabra, La Chupabra, Your eyes are such a lovely red. La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra, I love to kiss your fuzzy head. (refrain) I love you, oh my Chupacabra, You make me laugh when I am sad. But stay away from my chihuahua.. You killed the cat and that was bad! (Verse) La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra, The jaws that bite the claws that catch. La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra, You'd even scare the Bandersnatch! La Chupacabra, La Chupacabra, On Halloween you'll really shine. La Chupacabra, La Chupacarba, I can hardly wait until you're mine. (refrain) Oh, the little chupacabra, Running through the chicken yard. Looking for a chicken sandwich, The Colonel better be on guard! (repeat first verse and end)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Paul Allen and SETI - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:54:45 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:28:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Paul Allen and SETI - Goldstein >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:48:15 -0400 (EDT) >From: Steve Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com> >Subject: Paul Allen and SETI >To: updates@sympatico.ca > PRG > Paradigm Research Group >It was very painful to read the article regarding SETI and Paul >Allen. All the years the UFO/ET research has suffered without >serious funding, then when we are so close to bringing this >issue to resolution and needing funds so badly, Paul Allen >decides to throw $12 million dollars down the toilet of what is >basically a front project (granted the participants likely do >not know this) for the government cover-up. >SB Hello Steve, Can you please tell the List exactly how you make the claim that you know that the above project "is bsically a front project... for the government coverup"? Thanks, Josh
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Leah Haley Response To Carpenter/Bigelow Matter From: Katharina Wilson <kwilson@alienjigsaw.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 20:57:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:31:01 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Leah Haley Response To Carpenter/Bigelow Matter Dear Updates: Leah Haley's response is published on her web site in a section called "Leah's Corner". Here is the direct URL: http://www.greenleafpublications.com/LeahsCorner.html Thanks, K. Wilson
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:04:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:35:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >If you are indeed making this a legal case, I strongly suggest >that you seek your attorney's advice before posting any more >charges against Carpenter. If your attorney gave you the high >sign to do that - it's time for another attorney. This kind of >behavior does nothing to help abductees, ufology, MUFON or >anybody else. Ann, The post was from a colleague and posted as received. If you don't like it, don't read it. They are making observations based on their experience. I know who it is and respect their wishes in one case and removed ID where I had not gotten specific permission to include it in the other case. The form was warranted here. You may not like anonymity. Many others I talk to see it has a purpose at times. They would rather hear the message than not if from a reliable source. Ann, I can appreciate your feelings, however, the message was perhaps meant for those others listening, reading. >>Lastly, I called State Committee of Social Workers at >>573-751-0885 and inquired about Mr. Carpenter. Not _one_ >>complaint has been filed against him. I sure don't understand >>that given what you've told us about the people that you've >>spoken to about their issues with the man. Perhaps you should better understand how much work it has been and continues to be to put the evidence together. We are strengthen- ing our case. It will take one or more months. You take a case to the board only when it is ready, finished, complete. You present a complete case so their need for further investigation is minimal. 140 people is a very large number of people to even try to contact. Please leave this to those who are more informed about it and gracious accept that it is being worked on. >>This is like loud screeching background noise to the real issue >>of getting those 120 people notified. We _know_ they don't know >>their files were sold and need to learn that truth! Then talk to JC, NIDS or MUFON and make them do something. John never agreed to do anything in his last message, which is typical. Get MUFON to make a public statement, for instance. The same with NIDS. Go after the people who have all the names. We know half of the 90 and will work on the rest. This also is a several month project that has no shortcuts.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:12:54 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:05:53 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>This video, "Encounters in Australia" is being sold at UFO >>conferences in USA and through several UFO Magazines both in USA >>and England. >Hi Gary, >Is this the video which includes the Kelly Cahill case? Roy, I think so but am not completely sure. Other Australian posts mentioned the tape and that her case was on it.... Gary
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:24:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:40:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Hart >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:19:44 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >To: updates@sympatico.ca >The word I selected was "mitigate." The context was that guilt >is more than mitigated as a result of those files being >presented sanitized. The verb intransitive is defined by my >"just friend" Merriam as follows: >"to cause to become less harsh or hostile : MOLLIFY ><aggressiveness may be mitigated" >I meant exactly that. In addition, was Carpenter practicing as a >licensed social worker during these times he was researching >cases? That is a question to which I do not know the answer. Is >this too fine a point? Not from the legal perspective. The moral >one, is another matter to which I personally refuse to engage. >Like Pontius, I will not judge him. I am not God. Jim, The law I have read prevents a licensed clinical social worker from declaring (silently or otherwise) that they suddenly are not licensed clinical social workers. It this were allowed, then all kinds of fraud could be developed from this point and in the past it has because the law is written to prevent it. I'm sure that your doctor might wish he were not your doctor or a doctor at all if he makes a mistake on you but his responsi- bility as a doctor travels with him at all times everywhere. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:23:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:47:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com Hello all, I have a newsletter from Space.com in which was a very short blurb about a planet orbiting Epsilon Erandi. Curiously the home star of Vulcan - the home planet of the erstwhile Mr. Spock. Does anyone have a site to go to? I have tried NASA but have been to busy to peruse it further. Thanks, "Live long and Prosper" also! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:46:49 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:49:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Telescope Boosts Hunt for Alien Life - Mortellaro >From: ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto > >Huge New Telescope to Boost Hunt for Alien Life >netscape.com/news/TopStories/08_01_2000.rontz1536-story-bcnewsspacealiensdc.ht ml >Wednesday - 06:29 08/02/2000, EST >SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - With millions of dollars in funding >pledged by two of the men behind software giant Microsoft, the >search for intelligent life on other planets got a big boost >Tuesday as officials unveiled plans for a massive new telescope >to scan the skies. <snip> >SETI Institute officials hope to have a large-scale prototype of >the new telescope ready by 2003 and to push the project quickly >toward completion, with the full telescope scheduled to become >operational in 2005. Dear List and EBK, Thanks for the information. Looking at this from the perpective of the traditional scientist (cosmologist, astronomer, etc.), this application of funds to seek out radio signals from other life forms in our galaxy is the apparent bettermost of tools. But it always galls me to know, with a fair amount of certainty, that the lifeforms which mainstream science seeks, have likely already been here. It also galls me to see the reaction of the press and media, to such an investment, vs. their reaction to the investments of people like Bigelow, Firmage and others like them. Interesting dichotomy ain't it? We roast them for their application of funds. Not criticism, just, but a little more insidious than roast. I can't find the word. But the tongue in cheek facial modality insinuates that the poor bastard ain't got nuttin better to do with his money than invest it in some stupidly fruitless endeavor such as UFO and abduction research. But have the same people make a multimillion dollar investment in a piece of hardware such as a telescope seek out ET, well, that's quite another thing. I suppose that some day, perhaps soon if my gut instincts are correct, the truth will be known. Then we shall see who the damned fools are and who the visionaries are. Some of us insist on integrety in the process of doing our work. We want everything to be perfect. We demand truth and sometimes, we even loudly claim to have it. But speaking on a strictly personal level, I think that there are people who presently have the truth, or at least a good piece of it. And these people are sitting on it, loudly proclaiming to not even know the subject, let alone know the truth of it. Well, not a one of us is perfect. Not a one of us will ever know the truth, even if we have it. Because we will not be able to either recognize or accept the truth of alien intervention in our lives. I know a few folks like that. Then there are those who cannot accept the truth. I remember the second edition of the famous Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner comedy skit, the 2000 Year Old Man. Brooks and Reiner do a skit about truth. That even if it were known, you can't handle it. It's terribly funny. But you know, I think there are people out there who really cannot handle the truth. It would make them paranoid. It would break every rule they were brought up to believe in and then some. Every paradigm gone south forever. Nothing left for a guy to hang onto for balance. Some of us cannot even handle the truth about our own perceptions, let alone the perceptions of others. Someone said once, that UFO's and Abduction would have been proven long, long ago, if the same rules were applied to the subject as are applied in our own courts. The only problem I have with more powerful telescopes used for the purposes above, is that all that money could and should be used to greater benefit to us by science. And to those of you who think this is just sour grapes ... it is. People are hurting, suffering, in great pain, and largely because no one is looking to help them find the truth about their perceptions. Instead, they are lauding the investment of those who would either divert us from the real truth or spend large amounts of money to find nothing of value. What's the point? I knew you were going to aks that. Well, the point is that we need far fewer people looking into them telescopes and more looking into our heads. In there, is the truth. I am certain of it. Just my two cents. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Waiting for John Carpenter's Progress Report From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 05:57:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:09:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Waiting for John Carpenter's Progress Report >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:18:01 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:13:44 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:49:06 -0400 >>>From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 04:38:29 -0400 >>>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:24:48 -0400 (EDT) >>>>>From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com >>>>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>>>Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:13:36 -0400 >>>>>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>>>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter Responds >>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi Ann, hi All, >Ann wrote: >>>>>>John, >>>>>>Can you please tell this list if you intend to notify the 120 >>>>>>families who have remained ignorant for over three years that >>>>>>you have sold their abduction files? >>>>>>We all await your response. >And we wait, and we wait, and we wait,.... And we wait. Tomorrow marks the one week anniversary that I and others posted specifics on how John can utilize modern technology to obtain the information to allow him to finally inform those ~120 former clients that he sold their files to Bigelow over 3 years ago. >The fact is; John Carpenter has stated that he agrees that the >abductees should be informed but simultaneously offers the >rather 'lame' excuse that "tracking people down" would pose some >kind of major stumbling block. A few List members have informed >Mr. Carpenter of the wonders of the modern Internet. (in terms >of utilizing it to find people who may have moved.) I am waiting >to see how long it takes before he actually begins notifying >people. The problem is that John Carpenter never respected these families enough in the first place to contact them prior to the sale. I realize he has told us that he would finally do that, but since I've read no signs of humility from him thus far, his absence gives me pause to think those words may have been the grease job I spoke of to squeeze out of an uncomfortable position. >He shouldn't "hold up" the notification process because >a few people may have relocated in the interim. No he shouldn't. Then again, he never should have acted so poorly in the first place, nor continued to underestimate the intelligence of this community in his responses and/or lack of. >Notify the ones he _can_ reach _now_, and then take the time to >track down the rest. How ever much 'time' it takes to do it. If >he agrees that they should be informed then I'd like to see him >back up his words with deeds. Me too John. I really am wondering if maybe John needs to be reminded of the strength of the abductee community, and those who are affiliated in Ufology who are equally upset with his actions and his lack of actions. >Time's wasting. Been three years. How much longer? The message I'm getting is that it's up to us to remind John Carpenter of the most important rule we all learned in kindergarten: "Don't poop where you eat." Maybe he was absent that day. >>The above might be somewhat of a dramatic illustration, but I >>don't think it's too far off the mark, should the number of >>folks on this discussion list insisting that these families be >>told the truth, remain in the single digits. >Ann, there are more than just a few. I've been getting e-mail >from psychologists and social workers that are outraged at all >of this. Mr. Carpenter should move on this notification issue in >a timely manner because his peers are watching. Everybody is watching. I even received an email today from a skeptic, clearly affirming what we've said all along about this being a human decency issue. Even those dreaded skeptics [winking] agree that this stinks. >You've been _great_ throughout all of this Ann. You are a 'Class >act' all the way. Thank you for being here and for speaking up. >I bow deeply at the waist and tip my hat to you. ;) Geeeeze John. If my face is going to be red, I'm more comfortable if it's from blood pressure.<g> Besides, I'm only doing what I would hope somebody would do for me if I were on that list. The bowing and tipping are mutual. I have the highest respect for all the positive input you've offered this field. I'm sorry we ended up getting back in touch over this sad needless event. Here's to John Carpenter responding, any minute now, to report some reasonable progress on notifying those families. >Warm regards, Ditto. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 09:39:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:11:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region Dear Friends, Despite admonitions from a number of parties to "stop informing the public about the Chupacabras activity in South America", I feel that I have no choice in the matter. The phenomenon has been occuring since 1995 in the most disparate locations--Puerto Rico, Mexico, the U.S., Spain, Portugal, Brazil and now Chile and Argentina--and the physical manifestations of the creature/entity/whatever have been wildly different from one nation to another, according to eyewitness reports. The easy solution--drawn along ethnic lines--has been to dismiss the matter as a phantasm of the Iberoamerican and peninsular Spanish peoples, yet a similar solution is never posited for the Loch Ness monster as a similar phantasm of the Anglo/Celtic mindset. Any such suggestion would be met with hostility, and well it should. I have refrained from posting anything to my own list or the lists of others that smacks of FOAFtales or other secondhand information (which invariably includes some of the most fascinating information). My sources have always been from newspapers or their respective websites, and in certain cases, transcripts of radio shows furnished by sources in Chile and Argentina. I am not a scientist--merely a writer and translator, and I limit myself to these endeavors. Scientists or the science-minded would therefore be best advised to stop reading these messages in order to avoid undue mental distress to themselves. My apologies for inserting myself into the news item, but I felt (rightly or wrongly) that a clarification of my position was necessary. The following newspaper account will strain my credibility even further, I fear. Very best regards, Scott Corrales Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU) www.inexplicata.com **************************************************************** Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region Source: "La Estrella del Loa" (newspaper) Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 *** Claims indicate that a jet bombarded the area between Pedro de Valdivia and Maria Elena Last week, two students faced the creature on Galvarino Street. The animal observed them and levitated, but refrained from attacking them. The sightings are increasing as the authorities maintain their silence. A "nest" where these entities would have reproduced was discovered in an area located to the northeast of the road which joins the Maria Elena Salt Mines office (a town having a population of 8,000) and Pedro de Valdivia (which was abandoned in 1996). According to residents of Maria Elena, who claimed having witnessed the event, a large detonation accompanied by a tremor shook the houses of the commune on July 20, 2000. All area residents are accustomed to the sounds produced by the explosives operated in the Pampa, and this made them realize that something strange was afoot. This coincided with the flyover of a military aircraft over the area since early hours of the morning--an event corroborated by several inhabitants. The witnesses are employees of a contractor firm which was engaged in work at a location not far from where the events took place. According to their testimony, the jet flew past and bombarded an area which had been characterized as a "Chupacabras nest" by men working nearby. [The area] was filled with small hills and mounds which have eroded into caves suitable for use as a shelter by the animal. A BIRTHING LOCATION Researchers of the subject reported a few days ago that the absence of sightings in recent weeks were the result of a period in which the animal was in a reproductive phase, which would require a dark location not far from population centers, since it is indispensable that their source of nourishment be nearby. The explosion--which was heard at a distance of several kilometers--took place between 08:30 and 09:45 hours without anyone having produced an explanation for the event. The Chupacabras staged a reappearance after these events elapsed--not only once, but several times and in different parts of the commune. The latest case, and one of the ones which achieved greatest prominence, involved three students from the "Arturo Perez Canto" school who were returning to their homes in the early evening (1900 hours) along Galvarino Street. At that moment, they encountered one of the creatures (which had already been seen simultaneously in different locations). They explained that one of them realized there was a animal on the rooftops, which then jumped off and landed in front of the startled youngsters. According to their story, the animal did not attack, but they found it impossible to move, largely out of the fear that this event had caused in them. When they tried to react by huddling protectively against each other, the creature levitated some 30 centimeters off the ground, continuing to observe them. Only after less than ten seconds had elapsed were the children able to escape toward their homes, each of them telling their parents about the experience. The elders were unable to calm the terrified students down. Upon discussing the animal's characteristics they all agreed in that it had large yellow eyes, dense black-and-grey hair [..] of a dense textur and standing approximately 1.50 meters tall. They also recognized a penetrating odor similar to that of ammonia which the animal might employ to paralyze his prey and humans who stumble upon it. In any event, no direct attacks have been recorded on people, giving rise to the belief by researchers of the subject that it was "a genetic manipulation effected by humans and made aware that it should not harm [its creators]." MORE DEAD ANIMALS Residents of Maria Elena continue finding dead cats and dogs with perforations similar to those of the first felines apparing in different areas of the commune. Yet they claim having received "third-party" warnings urging them to conceal the information. This has caused many to have chosen to take the [dead] animals and deposit them in dump located behind the Las Piscinas sector, where there exist a number of places used as refuse pits. It is worth noting that the creature was seen here a little more than a month ago by a worker from a contractor firm, who also claims having heard the creature scream, a detail reported by this newspaper at the time. The importance of the events taking place in the Chilean Pampa are evinced by the arrival of Miami-based ufologist Dr. Virgilio Sanchez Ocejo, who is investigating the incidents transpired in Calama and Maria Elena. He indicated that the cases reported in numerous areas, as well as those reported by the residents of other sectors and mining deposits are identical to the cases known in Puerto Rico and in Central America, leading him to presume that it is the same creature or at least one having similar characteristics. Given that it has increased in strength over time, the notion that the animal reproduces over a brief period of time would explain the increase of sightings in the area, since it would no longer be a matter of one but several "critters" being seen in the area. In any event, apparitions of the Chupacabras--or whatever the creature might be--have grown apace in recent days, thus making necessary an official declaration, or at least an explanation, of what is happening in the area. # # # # Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU). Special thanks to Ms. Liliana Garcia.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 04:34:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:43:58 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 Voyager Newsletter No. 14 CONTENTS 1. 'Star Kids', or the Exploitation of Children in 'Ufology'? 2. Larry Warren and the Foibles of 'Regressive Hypnosis'. O0O~O0O~O0O~O0O 1. 'Star Kids', or the Exploitation of Children in 'Ufology'? Appreciation to Errol Bruce-Knapp and 'UFO UpDates' for highlighting concerns about the following: SUMMER CAMP FOR KID E.T. ABDUCTEES SANTA CRUZ, Calif. -- When E.T. phones home this summer, he may be calling from Santa Cruz, California. That's where a UFO researcher is holding the world's first summer school for kids of E.T. origin. Dr. Richard Boylan's space-age summer school is for children who have been genetically modified by aliens. Boylan claims these so-called "star kids" are not only brighter than other kids, they can have strange superpowers such as levitation, invisibility and teleportation. Besides reenacting their alien encounters via puppets and role- playing, students will listen to lectures including one titled, "From Fraidy-Cat To Cosmic Kid: What's It All About." The E.T. Summer School Weekend will take place August 25. CONTACT: Dr. Richard Boylan, Sacramento, CA; (916) 422-7479 [End] The full details can be found on Boylan's web site, at: http://www.jps.net/drboylan/strkidwk.htm He declares, "This Weekend Summer School is designed for those special young people, ages 4 and up, and their parents, who have been touched by heritage from the stars". "Telepathic downloading of information, often during the night in what are made to seem like 'Dreams', increases the range of knowledge and perspective with which these children operate. These children seem at home with complex devices which their parents sometimes struggle to master". Children who have dream-like dreams and can operate video remote controls are presumably relatively common. "Some of these children are what I call Star Kids. These children's very conception was due to more than mere human reproduction", claims Boylan. This does seem to transcend the 'relatively harmless' dismissal which so much UFO related nonsense merits and Boylan adds, "Saturday morning we'll start with Dr. Boylan presenting slides and pictures of the various kinds of ETs. He will tell about what each are like, and what they are interested in. Then each child will have an opportunity to express in their own way how the ETs came to them, and what took place during their encounter". Where this differs from the normal 'alien abductions' conference is of course that children are being targeted, some might even say, exploited. What happens to any potential 'Star Kid' that doesn't actually have a story about mythical monsters to tell. Will they be 'encouraged' to 'remember and believe' that they did meet aliens, or were 'specially selected' by them. Certainly sounds like it and where does this stop short of 'brainwashing' children of '4 years old and upwards'. In addition to Boylan, the 'Facilitators' of this 'Summer School' for kids are 'Daniel Creegan, Ph.D, Lucia August, MFT, and Debbie Imhoff, B.A.'. Brief biographies can be found on the 'Star Kids' web page and note that Lucia August "is an experiencer", whilst Debbie Imhoff is a "mother of 2 children, one of whom is an experiencer". A cursory Internet search provided no further information concerning Creegan and Imhoff, only confirming that Lucia August's involvement in 'lesbian and gay issues' included a contribution to a seminar at, 'The Billy DeFrank Lesbian and Gay Community Center', for 'lesbian, bisexual and transgendered women'. It's not reassuring that Creegan, August and Imhoff are declared to be suitably qualified as members of a purportedly professional body, 'the Academy of Clinical Close Encounter Therapists (ACCET)'. I wondered if this so-called 'Academy' was founded solely by Boylan and it was no surprise to find the apparent confirmation at: http://www.jps.net/drboylan/accetpg.htm Boylan's biography states: "Dr. Richard J. Boylan is a Ph.D. behavioural scientist, university lecturer, certified clinical hypnotherapist, consultant, and researcher". A slight omission here and indeed seemingly something of a oversight anywhere on his web site, is that on August 4, 1995, the 'Medical Board of California' revoked Boylan's licence to practice either as a "Psychologist, Licensed Social Worker, or Marriage, Family and Child Counsellor". For further details, see: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m22-021.shtml Coincidentally, the issue of children being used to verify that 'alien abductions' are real, is one I had recently raised following a separate matter. During ensuing public discussions, it has been confirmed that the supposedly more highly regarded 'abduction researchers', such as Dr. John E. Mack, M.D. and Budd Hopkins have interviewed young children about their possible abduction experiences. For example, Mack writes [my thanks to Chris Rutkowski for the reference]: "A two-year-old boy that I interviewed said that he was taken into the sky by a man who bit his nose. A not yet three-year-old boy said that owls with big eyes (it is common for children to remember the alien beings disguised in animal forms) take him up to a ship in the sky, and he is afraid he will not be able to get back to his mother". Source: http://www.peer-mack.org/mit92.html Yet there are numerous UFO reports where schoolchildren were the main or only witnesses, including publicised incidents at 'Broad Haven School' in Wales [February, 1977], Voronezh, Russia [September, 1989] and the 'Areal School', Ruwa, near Harare, Zimbabwe [September, 1994]. There were seemingly no concerns about these children being interviewed, sometimes by the media, and encouraged to describe their sightings. These were regarded as interesting news stories. And isn't there a comparison with many religions, where children are brought up to believe in something which those who do not share that conviction might perceive to be equally unreal. Consider also children's accounts of 'near-death' experiences and encounters with a 'being of light', 'angels', etc. Not only are these considered acceptable testimonies, they are regarded as invaluable because the experiencers might be 'untainted' by religious archetypes and knowledge of comparative, near-death accounts. So where should necessary boundaries be in place? Perhaps a significant aspect is the objectivity and professionalism of those involved. Most, if not all, 'abduction researchers' have a preconceived belief in the reality of stories recounted under apparent hypnosis. However, the majority would surely claim to impart some objectivity into their research, although I wonder what percentage of those who undergo 'analysis' do _not_ eventually believe they have been selected as a suitable specimen for attention. The 'Star Kids summer school' sends alarming signals because there evidently isn't any objectivity at all and some might conclude it comprises elements of a cult. Outlining the longer term plans, I note Boylan affirms, "It is anticipated that this Summer School Weekend will also create the foundation for an ongoing Star Kids School, to begin operation soon". It's by no means everyone who believes they may be an 'abductee' or 'experiencer' that would condone the related involvement of young children and some have expressed their objections clearly. It's also understandable why some 'ufologists' - I'm never quite sure what that encompasses these days - protest Boylan isn't 'one of us' and express an earnest desire to distance themselves from his activities. I'm sure the vast majority would agree. However, far from being an outcast, the facts prove otherwise. The Mutual UFO Network' [MUFON], although essentially American based, remains the world's largest UFO related organisation and a glance at Boylan's lecture schedule confirms he is still in demand as a speaker at local MUFON meetings. His other appearances also share the stage with speakers who frequently appear at the most prominent 'UFO' conferences - see: http://www.jps.net/drboylan/00ufocfs.htm It seems difficult to reconcile how 'ufology' can ever detach itself from Boylan and his ilk, whilst at the same time embracing them. O0O~O0O~O0O~O0O 2. Larry Warren and the Foibles of 'Regressive Hypnosis'. Meantime, in the UK, some of this year's most prominent UFO conferences will also soon be upon us, with 'UFO Magazine' inviting Larry Warren and Peter Robbins to provide an update on the Rendlesham forest case. I wonder if this will feature any of the considerable material published by myself and others in recent times and which has proven the UK's most celebrated UFO incident to have a rather more mundane foundation. In 'Rendlesham Unravelled' - see: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/rend2.htm I wrote: "Warren's tales have grown in the telling over the years, as illustrated by an early statement, not to my knowledge previously published, which he made whilst then under the pseudonym of 'Art Wallace'. He wrote: "In March of 1981, I met in the room of a Sgt. Bustina [Note: should be Bustinza] and two other people we discussed what had happened reassuring each other that we had seen what we saw... They told me about the underground facility and the UFO store down in that facility also about a number of other things I probably should not ever go into. I don't know if it's true or if it isn't true but they certainly seemed to believe it and I didn't have any reason not to believe it, seeing the high strangeness of the events that we had experienced together anything I would have believed". What was the catalyst that resulted in Warren subsequently believing it was all true? Enter Budd Hopkins... Having been placed in the requisite, apparent, hypnotic trance by Hopkins, Warren not only 'recalled' these events reportedly taking place, he was now fundamentally involved in them himself. However, that's not the full story and I can exclusively reveal in this newsletter that Warren was previously hypnotised, with significantly different results. I'm assuming it was previous to Hopkins involvement because of the content and I don't know who the hypnotist was. I do however have a copy of the full transcript which has, to my knowledge, never before been published. It's simply headed, 'Larry Warren - Regression' and this was conducted by someone identified throughout as "Pat". If anyone can confirm this person's identity and date the transcript, please let me know. One of the notable differences from this 'regression' is how Warren remains adamant he was never in the underground facility - this was merely a story he heard. For example: Pat: I want you to tell me about the underground facility you were taken to. Can you describe it to me? Larry: No. Pat: Why? Larry: There were other guys who went to that. Pat: Didn't you go too. Larry: No. Pat: You didn't go? Larry: No. Pat: How do you know they were taken and you weren't? Did anyone tell you? Larry: I don't know what happened. [End] However, Warren's participation in the alleged events underground, particularly his telepathic communication with unseen alien entities there, became a mainstay of his published story. In 'Left at East Gate', co-authored by Warren and Peter Robbins, Warren claims he was kept in this underground facility for some two days, emerging bewildered into the sunlight on 31 December, 1980. In the book, Warren mistakenly identifies the date of his adventures in Rendlesham forest as the night/early hours of the 28/29 December, 1980. There's no debate his claims relate to events which took place on 27/28 December and which involved Lt. Col. Halt and others. Warren mentions several occurrences from his alleged participation which tie in with a number of other confirmed facts from that night. I'm not sure if anyone else has spotted the connection with two messages Warren states he heard over the radio: "Then I heard a radio transmission: 'You people have to avoid these hot spots. Remember they're marked, October Number One. Over'. I knew the code October One meant first officer on site. [...] The radios were active. I could hear what sounded like pilot communications. Someone reported over the air: 'Here it comes. Here it comes. Here it comes'." [End] In fact, these are almost certainly snippets from the communications which Halt recorded on his microcassette that same night, namely: 1. HALT: The sample...you're going to mark this sample number one...have them cut it off, and include some of that sap and all...is between indentation two and three on a pine tree about five feet away, about three and a half feet off the ground. [...] HALT: Same place where the spot is, we're getting a heat... [...] HALT: This is strange. Here, someone wanna look at the spots on the ground? Whoops, watch you don't step...you're walking all over 'em. OK, let's step back and not walk all over 'em. 2. HALT: 03:15. Now we've got an object about 10 degrees directly south, 10 degrees off the horizon. And the ones to the north are moving. One's moving away from us. VOICE: Moving out fast. VOICE: This one on the right's heading away, too. HALT: They're both heading north. Hey, here he comes from the south, he's coming toward us now. [End] Not 'October Number One', it was 'sample number one' and not pilots, but Halt and company in the forest. Warren does mention the presence of Halt and others, the light-alls which wouldn't work (they were notoriously unreliable) and officers who seemed to have come straight from a function (Halt had been called away from the officer's belated Christmas party). In the aforementioned statement made under the pseudonym of 'Art Wallace', Warren dates the UFO incident as 29 December. In the 'regression', Pat seems to think it was the 30th and tells Warren: "Your mind is very sharp. [...] Now I am going to count from five to one. On each descending number you are going deeper. You are going further back in time. When you hear the number one it will be December 30, 1980. Your memory will be very sharp. Your images and visions will be very clear... It is December 30, 1980 and I want you to give me detailed descriptions of today's events...". [End] Warren then describes his UFO encounter which actually took place, if at all, two days previous. This does seems to prove how unreliable 'memories' recalled under hypnosis can be. Whilst Warren should have been recounting an unrelated event, he's clearly focused on telling the UFO anecdote. Perhaps most interesting of all is that when Warren is similarly asked to detail the events of December 29th, he states, "I have the day off. I went to see a football game. Not too much to do". Yet according to 'Left at East Gate', Warren would actually have had his traumatic UFO encounter by this time and apparently spent the 29th in that underground tunnel, the drugged captive of a nefarious 'cover up'. Instead, he may well have been watching Ipswich Town, his favourite local football team. On Saturday 29th December, 1980, Ipswich Town did indeed play at home, beating Wolverhampton Wanderers 1-0. It's a pity that Pat didn't ask him who was playing and what the score was - it would have been interesting to see if Warren could remember this accurately! Pat's 'regression' is expansive and in his account of the UFO incident Warren mentions some intriguing details which I've never seen him refer to elsewhere. I'll have to leave it aside for now, this requires further thought and the study of a local Ordnance Survey map. It's frustrating not knowing if any of this particular account is reliable. It's highly detailed and certainly different in some respects from that published in Warren's book. Pat also 'regresses' Warren to the 27th December, the factual night of any involvement he had. Extraordinarily, Warren tells Pat that on the 27th he went to a club called 'The Loft', near Wickham Market, some "five miles from the base". Asked what happened afterwards, Warren, apparently in the company of "Steve" and "the new kid, Dean", recalls how their car hit some black ice and skidded off the road and eventually they "went back to base". The transcript then reads: Pat: What time is all this happening? Larry: 2:30. Pat: What happened now? Larry: We went to bed. [End] A fascinating insight and perhaps offering a notable case study into the reliability of 'regressive hypnosis'. O0O~O0O~O0O~O0O The 'UFO Research List' (UFORL) is a moderated discussion forum for related topics which can be evidenced to have a _scientific_ foundation, encompassing 'black projects'. There are currently around 100 subscribers. To join UFORL, you can sign up from UFO World's home page or by sending a blank e-mail, with a blank subject line, to: UFORL-subscribe@listbot.com You will then be sent a verification message and a copy of the list 'housekeeping rules'. O0O~O0O~O0O~O0O James Easton, Editor. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.co.uk (c) James Easton August 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 4 UpDate: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:40:31 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:14:06 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.co.uk __________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: John Lundberg <john@circlemakers.org> To: <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 3:21 PM Subject: <<< Advance Warning >>> http://www.circlemakers.org The Crop Circle Makers of England _________________ Advance Warning For the first time ever we are giving advance notice of the design of a crop formation before we put it on the ground . It will be constructed in the next 48 hrs somewhere in the UK. The formation will be made at night without any artificial lighting by a small three man team: Rod Dickinson, John Lundberg, and Wil Russell. We estimate it will take about three hours to create. The construction of the formation will be filmed using thermal imaging cameras and will appear on a TV screen near you shortly. Once completed the formation will be open to the public to visit. To see diagrams of the formation go to: http://www.circlemakers.org/advancewarning.html _________________ Later, John -- -- john lundberg: circlemakers: mailto:john@circlemakers.org http://www.circlemakers.org [ there is no art without risk ::: jean cocteau ]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:49:54 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:36:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:41:21 -0400 >From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Compliments to all and sundry from His Grace the Duke. >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>My dear friend Peter has missed the point -- abduction >>investigators (the ones I know, anyway) talk to children to >>relieve their anxiety, not to pump information from them. >Whether typical or not, the scene from the NOVA TV show we've >had quoted here hardly seems designed to reassure the child in >question. But it does seem calculated to elicit information >(albeit of a kind well infixed in the questioner's mind). One >might say the same about the interviews with young John >Napolitano in "Witnessed". >And how, I wonder, do either Greg or B. Elliott Hopkins conjure >to themselves the notion that then going on to speculate wildly >and publicly about John N's parentage was going to relieve any >anxiety that he may have had about anything at all? Note well, >too, that the "Cortile" family's real identity was well known >long before Hopkins published "Witnessed". So he knew he was >placing John N in what might loosely be called a difficult >position in public, let alone the private humiliation. >As an aside may I note --- >>Beyond that, Peter's position here reminds me of his very >>curious view of Occam's Razor some time back. Occam's Razor, he >>apparently believes, gives him the right to tell others that >>they must hold his own opinion, in any debate about things we >>don't know much about. >O, absolutely. Of _course_, as anyone perusing the archive will >confirm, I entirely misconstrue Occam's Razor ("Entia non sunt >multiplicanda" -- how could anyone be expected to understand >Latin?) and fanatically misapply its caricature in every >context. This is part of a black-budget disinformation campaign >for which I am handsomely rewarded. Being an individual of >flawless physical beauty with a mind of incomparable power and >erudition, I am never, ever wrong about anything -- no, don't >say it, not even that, whatever it is. The rest of you are ugly, >ignorant, evilly-garbed, illiterate vulgarians with revolting >table manners, deserving only immediate incarceration in the >vilest Paraguayan sewer, which will reek of rotten fish even >worse than Greg's post. I trust I make myself clear? >--- while waiting for Greg or anyone else to level the playing >field a bit, eh what, chaps, and show us all some indisputable >facts about alleged abductions before they whinge about skeptics >playing fast and loose with any other purported facts. Or being >derisive, or ironic, as the number of hypotheses may be. >best wishes >Picrochole D. Merope >Cod Warrior Uh, make that "cold" warrior. Anudda ting. Yous could probally make more sense widout all dat hyper bowling ... And the word you selected above was "derisive." Unless I am mistaken, it is "divisive." As for the Latino, translate this... Lucit bene derdego hunnert busis enero honomo demis trux. A bottle of my newest mind medley for the full, accurate and complete translation. Show off. J. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:35:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:39:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Kaeser >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:33:16 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Rimmer >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:56:46 +0100 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Bush 'Statement'On CNN? - Hale >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>This assumes that: >>a) Any significant proportion of the US population is motivated >>enough to change the way they vote because of a candidate's >>views on releasing UFO documents. Which I doubt. >Please inform the List of the cost of your survey of the US >population on this question - or is this just your opinion? >Roy.. I think that John's final sentence acknowledged that this was an opinion, but that's a point that shouldn't be overlooked. That being said, I think that the opinion expressed is a valid one. For many this is known as the "Silly" season, when politicans are willing to say just about anything (and make unusual decisions) based solely on their desire to attract support in the election. Politicans will rarely take an extreme position, but when asked will attempt to show sympathy and concern for the issue. The issue of UFOs is one that impacts a very small slice of the population. Most Americans are more concerned about bread and butter issues, such as "social security", "taxes", "abortion rights", and "gun control". These are better concepts to campaign on, as opposed to "excessive government secrecy" or the "UFO coverup by Government". It should be noted that Bill Clinton received a lot of correspondence from the public on the issue of UFOs, and actually requested that the matter be investigated by one of his trusted advisors (Webster Hubbel). That investigation is mentioned in Hubbel's book, and he acknowledged that he learned nothing of interest from the Federal agencies he had contacted. The next President will also have to deal with this issue when they take the helm.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 18:34:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:21:07 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hubbell >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:34:01 -0500 >>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca >>List, >>This communication came to me from a colleague in Australia. >>Gary ________________________________ >Greetings Australian Researchers, <snip> >This is like loud screeching background noise to the real issue >of getting those 120 people notified. We _know_ they don't know >their files were sold and need to learn that truth! >Ann Hi Ann, Mr. Carpenter is a slick individual who managed to keep one aspect of his "research" hidden for three years. Is it that far of a reach to believe that files from the United States are not the only ones he compromised? As this saga continues, I think we'll learn that his actions here are only the tip of the iceberg. Mr. Carpenter's apparent reluctance to notify the individuals involved reflects badly not only on himself, but the entire UFO community and has far reaching ramifications. Abductees who are finally starting to come to grips with their experiences will be driven back into the closet because of this incident. Trust, always a difficult issue, is fast becoming null and void. So if Mr. Carpenter is reading this - be a stand-up guy and do the right thing by those individuals whose files you sold and tell them. NOW! Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:10:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:44:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium Comprehensive Report On The MUFON July 2000 Symposium Copyright 2000, by Bob Soetebier The July 14-16, 2000, MUFON (www.mufon.com or www.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/MUFON/index.html) Symposium was held at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in St. Louis County, Missouri. As we had never before attended one of the annual MUFON symposiums, my wife, Dawn, and I bit the bullet and swallowed the symposium�s admission co$t. (We�ve obviously been spoiled by Lou Farish�s excellent, and bargain priced, Ozark UFO Conference which is held annually in April at the Best Western Inn of the Ozarks in Eureka Springs, Arkansas!) We also attended the (extra-co$t) Friday evening buffet dinner at the Sheraton Chalet. Our good friend Beverly Trout, Iowa MUFON (www.mufon.com/iowa.html) State Director, joined us at our chosen table. Bev showed us a recent issue of a Des Moines weekly newspaper � with a full-page photo of her on it�s cover � that contained an excellent article about recent UFO sightings and her Iowa MUFON investigative efforts. Michael Bryan (sp?) � who, in addition to being the honorary MUFON International �Ambassador-at-Large�, has self-published a series of travel books � along with his friends Andy Abercrombie and Joe Juliano (sp?), a blind physician and author of books on diabetes, also asked to join us at our Friday evening dinner table. All three are fun guys. (Even though I have seen Michael � almost always in the company of his good friend, George Wingfield � every year since our first 1994 attendance at the Ozark UFO Conference, I had never had the chance to really talk with him.) Missouri MUFON (www.mufon.org or www.mufon.com/missouri.html) Assistant State Director Dave Rapp was in charge of the audio-visual setup. Before the symposium started, Dave told me that the Sheraton staff had not set up the symposium room as he had requested. Instead they set it up seating catty-corner, instead of dead-on. This put the single slide-viewing screen in the far-left corner, with screen right under a bright light! (The Sheraton staff told Dave they could not turn off that particular overhead light because of the �fire code� as that light was in the immediate vicinity of a Fire Exit, which the screen was blocking!) Dave was able to get them to move the screen out a few feet from the light -- but still blocking the Fire Exit -- during the Sat. lunch break. Additionally, when slides were being displayed on the one-and-only screen, the general room lighting had to be turned down in such a manner that there was almost no light upon the speaker at all. Because of the catty-corner seating, and the relatively low ceiling, a LOT of symposium attendees could not see the screen well, if at all! However, thanks to our front-row seats, my wife and I had a good view of the screen. Before the start of the symposium, the Sheraton staff had also gone ahead and already set up the long, raised speakers� panel table platform, which they were not supposed to do until later Sunday afternoon. This apparently prevented elevating the individual speaker �s podium. Also a couple of wide, mid-room pillars also completely blocked the views of not too few of those seated beyond half-way back, too! Because of the resultant room set-up limitations, the maximum-capacity seating ended up being 400 instead of the 500 that Dave Rapp had told me was in the original plan. My guess is that symposium�s total attendance was around 350 people. One of the people in the audience was none other than late-night radio �Coast-to-Coast� talk-show host, Mike Siegel. (Retiring Art Bell had recently chosen Siegel as his replacement.) I had a chance to briefly (not on-air!) talk with Siegel who seemed like a very nice, personable fellow. Siegel did do some interviews with some of the symposium�s featured speakers. He has placed about a 30-minute �MUFON 2000� audio clip on his web site, www.coasttocoastam.com) After Missouri MUFON State Director Bruce Widaman�s short welcome-to-the-symposium intro, out-going MUFON International Director Walter H. Andrus, Jr., gave a brief address in which noted his pending semi-retirement due to his need to attend to his wife Jean�s failing health. Andrus praised his wife�s long-standing help in his UFO-related efforts. He then turned the podium over to John F. Schuessler, M.S., who was to assume the MUFON International Directorship on the Sunday afternoon of the symposium. John Schuessler noted that Andrus had literally spent the last 30 years spending all his �free� time (including his and Jean�s yearly vacations) promoting UFOlogy and MUFON. Schuessler noted MUFON�s beginnings � at first as an adjunct to APRO, then about a year later as a separate entity -- via Walt Andrus� efforts, for which Andrus enlisted Schuessler�s additional assistance. After more praise for Andrus, Schuessler moved on to publicly laud Las Vegas-based billionaire real estate magnate Robert T. Bigelow�s, National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS). Schuessler said he hoped to promote �sharing� info/efforts with NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition with NIDS and other UFO organizations. (From a few comments I heard from other MUFONites, apparently not all share Schuessler�s enthusiasm for NIDS.) He went on to note that in the next year or two MUFON hopes to have its entire case database on-line via its web site. (Apparently only general case synopses will be available on-line for access by the general public; specific case details will be accessible only to registered MUFON members.) Linda G. Corley, Ph.D., of Houma, Louisiana, recounted her one-day interview with Jesse Marcel, Sr, and his wife, at Marcel�s Louisiana home in her hometown at that time. Marcel originally had apparently had no qualms of �going on the record� for Corley about his having handled the Roswell crash material for the audio-taped interview (which Corley was only intending for a college project/report.) But, only a couple days after he did the interview with her, Corley said Marcel frantically called her and said he had told her all lies and demanded that she not reveal the interview info to anyone! (Now that both Marcel and his wife have passed on, Corely said she felt it was time to completely bring forth what Marcel had told her in the audio-taped interview.) After the lunch break, the first Saturday afternoon speaker was a NIDS (www.accessnv.com/nids) representative, Colm A. Kelleher, Ph.D. As was anticipated, Kelleher�s talk was mostly a gloss-over promo for NIDS. (Kelleher was conspicuously absent from the late Sunday afternoon symposium Speakers� Panel �Q&A� session.) Springfield, Missouri, abduction researcher John S. Carpenter, MSW, touted a video (previously shown on the now-defunct �Paranormal Borderline� TV show) showing an anonymous security guard missing-time� incident. Another (also anonymous) security guard was supposed to be the one who originally sent the security camera video to the P.B. TV show. Apparently he claimed to have witnessed (while monitoring the camera video) the other guard�s over-one-hour disappearance after a bright flash of light, and his subsequent tossing-his-cookies �return� after another flash of light. (Exactly why the video-monitoring security guard did not go and close the left-open gate, that the other over-an-hour �missing� security guard had opened, remains a question to me. Such laxity sure would seem like an obvious breach of security!) Louisiana MUFON State Director Gregory J. Avery, a practicing lawyer, showed some video clips that he had taken outside his office, his home and a home of a friend in Metairie, LA. Who knows about the �chemtrails��BUT, he DID have some VERY interesting UFO video (taken with his $3500.00 3CCD digital video camera) that showed up on more than one occasion in the immediate vicinity of the �chemtrails.� One of the UFOs which looked like a revolving black trash can came right out of a small cloud and then made an abrupt turn and followed the �chemtrail� edge. He also showed some �swarms� of black, gnat-like UFOs that went in and out of the nearby clouds. (Avery noted that video �pixel drop-out� could be eliminated by the smooth, continuous movements exhibited by the numerous objects.) For more info (according to Avery�s business card), check out: www.louisianamufon.com (or via the general MUFON web site, at: www.mufon.com/louisiana.html) California Physicist Robert M. Wood, Ph.D., literally sped through his slide presentation of the update on �new� purported �MJ-12� documents. Moot point, though, as you really couldn�t read them on the screen! That�s too bad because if they had been readable, at least there might have been the option of getting a copy of the video of his talk to review them. The saving grace is the fact that there is plenty of �MJ-12� material on his related web site at: www.majesticdocuments.com/ Bev Trout again joined us, and about a dozen of our other friends, for Saturday evening dinner. We did so much talking that I didn�t even have time to finish my food during the two-hour break! Beginning the Saturday evening symposium session was book author, and Maryland MUFON (www.mufon.com/maryland.html) State Director, Dr. Bruce S. Maccabee. In addition to his being an optical physicist, and a consultant for the U.S. Navy, Maccabee has authored such books as, UFOs Are Real: Here�s The Proof, and, The UFO-FBI Connection. He did a very good job of debunking the debunkers. He started off by exposing Dr. Robert L. Park, author of the recent book, Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud. Maccabee�s enumeration of Park�s numerous misrepresentations of the Roswell case alone made it crystal clear that it is Dr. Park himself who is both the fool and fraud! (Maccabee�s detailed comments about Park�s Voodoo Science and be found at: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m27-014.shtml Another UFO-book author (Crash At Corona, and, TOP SECRET/MAJIC), and nuclear physicist, Stanton T. Friedman was rehashing (again) the Roswell case, my wife and I bugged-out after we sat through about half of his talk. Friedman is a very good, and entertaining, speaker. But, we�d already heard his Roswell talk twice before in our area in 1996 and 1998. (Oh well, at least that gave us a chance to get home early that night.) Ted R. Phillips, a long-time physical-trace-case investigator, mentioned in his Sunday morning talk that he had finally finished his report on the Delphos (Ron Johnson) Kansas case. (Unfortunately, Ted had to leave for California that afternoon, so he was absent from the Speakers� Panel Q&A later that afternoon.) For more info, you can check out Ted Phillips� �Center for Physical Trace Research� web site at: www.angelfire.com/mo/cptr A 19-year-old Californian, John Greenewald, Jr., is an obviously an up-and-coming �star� whose 5-year FOIA-investigative effort has definitely shined a LOT of light for others to follow! John has garnered thousands of UFO-related official government documents via the Freedom of Information Act. He utilized his laptop�s presentation software to illuminate some of the results. John noted that he has posted approximately 80,000 pages of those FOIA documents at his web site: The Black Vault (www.blackvault.com). He also announced that he will soon be starting another FOIA-docs web site (www.jfksecrets.com) that will deal with the conspiracy issues surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. During the lunch break I got to spend a bit of time talking with our friend, �MUFON Journal� (www.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/MUFON/journal/index.html) editor, Dwight Connelly. We first met Dwight a few years ago when my wife and I joined Dwight, Lou Farish and �FATE� magazine UFO columnist Antonio Huneeus for breakfast at the Ozark UFO Conference in Eureka Springs, Arkansas. Dwight and his very nice wife, Carolyn (along with others), were spending much of their time helping out at the symposium. Having previously heard his excellent talk, I skipped Stan Gordon�s reprise of the Kecksburg, PA, UFO crash. He really does a very good/thorough job in his presentation. Stan did tell me on the Saturday of the symposium that he was excited because he had located a new Kecksburg witness with whom he would be meeting in the next few months. Stay tuned! In the meantime, for more info about the Kecksburg UFO incident, be sure to check out Stan�s UFO Anomalies Zone web site at: http://www.westol.com/~paufo/ Having previously heard his discussion of the Aviano, Italy, UFO case (which has also been published in a past issue of the �MUFON ournal�), I also passed on Washington State MUFON (www.mufon.com/washington.html) Director Gerald E. Rolwes� presentation. (By the way, from scuttlebutt heard at the symposium, Rolwes also is a strong NIDS proponent.) I better spent the hour-plus talking to Dr. Roger K. Leir while he had a late lunch at the hotel dining room. Dr. Leir is a California-based podiatric physician and surgeon, and the author of the 1998 book, the Aliens and the Scapel � Scientific Proof of Extraterrestrial Implants in Humans. (It notes in Dr. Leir�s book that it was sponsored by Bigelow�s NIDS. However, Dr. Leir made it a point to tell me right up front that he insisted on being free to publish his material.) We covered a lot of interesting bases (both above and below ground) during that interlude. An author, and recent Ph.D., from Iowa, Kevin D. Randle was the last featured speaker. His talk was about an 1962 Las Vegas purported UFO crash. His on-screen slides were a faded brownish color and were extremely hard to see. (Thankfully, Randle mostly stuck to discussing that old case, and generally refrained from taunting the audience with his most recent extremely controversial abduction hypothesis!) After the symposium was over, Bruce Widaman asked my wife and I to join him and Dave Rapp, and about 20 others, for a limited (invitation-only) and in-the-round, brainstorming session with Greg Avery and Dr. Roger Leir. No definitive conclusions were arrived upon, but many helpful suggestions for further consideration were well aired during the 2-hour session. . I had already invited a few folks to join us for dinner Sunday evening after the symposium. After the �brainstorming� session, Roger Leir, Greg Avery, John Greenewald, Linda Corley, Bev Trout and a couple others joined us after 9:00 p.m. for Mexican food at a favorite West Port Plaza restaurant. Greg Avery had his digital video camera with him and spent about 5 minutes filming outside the restaurant. He came back in and sat back down next to me at the dinner table and said, �Wait until you see what I think I may have just now captured on video!� Greg sat the video camera (with its short tripod) on the table and flipped out the digital screen. While filming, he had aimed the camera at an area of nearby roof and sky. I watched the (infrared) video as a white, narrow, �rod-like� streamer (an estimated one-foot to 18-inches long) shot by�doing a fast mid-streamer double ninety-degree angle bend! All at the table (including our amazed waitress!) got a chance to see what he had captured moments before just outside the clear-glass restaurant atrium where we were seated. To say the least, that was a very interesting way to top off the weekend! As an added note: I did manage to put a bug (not literally, nor electronically!) in John Greenewald�s ear in regards to California-based Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). SAIC is headed by none other than Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, who is the former director of the NSA, Deputy Director of the CIA, Vice Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and former Director of Naval Intelligence. Some contend that SAIC may very well be the repository of anti-gravity research! (Others, apparently, even speculate that there may even possibly be some sort of connection between SAIC and NIDS.) Keep watching Greenewald�s www.blackvault.com web site for possible further developments. A final note: Be sure to read the April 4, 2000, �Who's Really Running NASA ..?� article by Richard C. Hoagland. The article contains direct quotes from NASA-head Dan Goldin�s public statement regarding Admiral Bobby Ray Inman as the head of the JPL Oversight Committee at Cal Tech. (Sounds like the possibility may exist that if Bobby Ray says �No!��It don�t go! Or, maybe, �I spy, or it don�t fly!�) You can check out the article at this URL: www.enterprisemission.com/whosnasa.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:38:30 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:46:01 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Deardorff >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:00:37 -0300 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:31:49 -0400 >>From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:15:05 -0300 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:36:13 -0400 >>>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>>>To: 'UFO Updates' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Stan wrote:- >>>There has been an enormous amount of effort put in to the Hill >>>Case. I met with Betty and Barney and John Fuller and Marjorie >>>Fish and spoke with Dr. Simon. I reviewed Marjorie's work with >>>Terence Dickinson then editor of ASTRONOMY and with Dr. George >>>Mitchell an astronomer at OSU as well as with Allen Hynek. >>>It stands up very well, despite false attacks by the likes of >>>Sagan, Vallee and many others who misrepresented what MF did. >>Stan, >>Correct me if I am wrong, but surely MF only 'identified' 15 out >>of the 28 stars on Betty Hill's map. What about the remainder ? >She focused on the stars connected with lines, trade routes, >occasional expeditions, etc. Turns out that they were all >sun-like stars and also all the sunlike stars in the volume of >the map. As it happens they were all in a plane as well Actually >there were 16 including the sun. Hardly a coincidence as >investigated by several astronomers and described in the Zeta >Reticuli Incident. Stan, Would you amplify on the bit about all 16 lying within a plane? I don't recall hearing that before. What orientation did the plane have, relative to a plane we would see looking at the stars or the plane of the map? Presumably these stars don't all lie exactly in the same plane. By roughly how many light years, rms, do their positions deviate from the best-fitting plane, and how does this compare to their average distance from us? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:37:42 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:47:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:51:33 -0700 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:46:08 -0700 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>, >>>That said, I read the text of each report looking for strong and >>>weak points, alternative explanations and what not. Its mental >>>legwork really. How many witnesses? Who were they? Did they go >>>_out_looking_ for UFOs? >>I'm quite leery of the assumption behind this last criterion -- >>Did they go out _looking_ for UFOs? I presume you are implying >>that if they did, you'd be more likely to filter out their >>reports. >> >>During the long period of sightings before his abduction, Ed >>Walters is a key example of what I'm talking about, in terms of >>being a UFO witness with multiple sightings. >Jim, List: >Your argument is only valid if one's purpose was to just make >sure to "pad the data pile". How would you propose filtering >the sightings made by the 40% of adult Americans who believe >that alien spaceships are flying above, but who have never seen >one, themselves? (52% of believers - 12% of witnesses). >What would your criteria be? That's pretty simple. The adult Americans who have never seen a UFO have therefore never reported a UFO. There's nothing there to filter. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:20:15 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:48:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 02:50:56 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:51:33 -0700 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello Jim: >If EBK doesn't mind, I will try to respond to your questions >in-line for better clarity. >>I'm quite leery of the assumption behind this last criterion -- >>Did they go out _looking_ for UFOs? >I'm immediately leery of groups going out specifically to " look >for UFOs ". The Gulf Breeze "gatherings" made the news for a >while. Every passing night-light brought raves. There is a >really great account about some guys in a car in Canada that got >attacked by an octopus alien. This critter attached itself to >the roof of the car, tentacles probing around like it wanted to >get in. Fortunately it loosed it grip and went away just before >they reached town (and independent witnesses). Larry, Whether the critter in Canada was real or not doesn't have anything to do with the Gulf Breeze sightings, does it? So I couldn't follow you here. Those in Gulf Breeze who have had multiple sightings should be fair game for inclusion of their reports, especially if they're accompanied by photo evidence. >>However, those who have had a definite sighting are much >>more likely afterwards to keep their vision directed >>upwards and outwards than before, in the chance of seeing >>another UFO. So such a person may spend occasional >>periods gazing at the sky, and may even convince a >>few friends to join him in a UFO watch. >Sure! No problem, but that's _not_ random any more!! That was my main point. The UFO phenomenon should not be expected to be random, if it involves alien intelligences that can identify persons remotely and read their minds, etc. We need to reveal the data coming from the non-random side of the phenomenon as well as the data that may seem random. >>These persons then stand a better chance of sighting a UFO, >>even with the assumption of randomness, than those who have >>never witnessed one and who are much less likely to be open >>to the reality of the UFO phenomenon; these latter aren't >>looking for UFOs. >Agreed: but now the dice are heavily loaded, with more eyes, >over long hours etc. Subsequent sightings, perhaps genuine ones, >are indeed more likely. In many cases, I suspect that second and >subsequent sightings might fall into the Gulf Breeze mold >however. That's fine. That's the "mold" where the non-randomness is evident. And when it involves photos and videos, you have all the more to go on, as in one of Ed Walters' later videos in which the shadow of the UFO is seen moving along the top of the vegetation on the other side of the body of water. Another, even more recent case of this type, is that of Jennifer Jarvis and her co-witnesses of the lit-up orbs, blobs and columns seen and video-taped from the north shore of one of the Great Lakes. In her website, http://orbwatch.com , she shows scores of frames of the UFOs taken on different days in 1997-98. As evidence, one can see the reflections of the orbs on the water surface in multiple frames as the UFOs hover over the water and on a couple occasions disappear into the water. In one instance a sea gull is seen to partially eclipse the orb in one frame. The fact that others with her witnessed them, that the video shots are quite spectacular, that she had multiple sightings and video opportunities, and has presented that evidence for all to view should not logically be used as reasons for filtering out her data. (Or have you included it?) I'm sure ebk is well aware of this case, and may wish to say something about it. Let's keep the non-random nature of the UFO phenomenon in mind. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 01:45:22 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:26:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Goldstein >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:12:24 -0400 (EDT) >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:09:12 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:27:55 -0400 >>>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >>>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >><snip> >>>The sad story of engineer Paul Bennewitz also brings us some >>>interesting informations on alleged personnel involved in these >>>operations. To begin with, we know that, when he reported to >>>Kirtland that he had recorded strange radio signals around >>>Manzano, which he attributed to ufos, he was received by several >>>officers, on 10 November 1980, according to Bruce Baccabee, in >>>his report on the UFO landings near Kirtland (Fufor, 1985):> >>>"The meeting included a Brigadier General, several Colonels, a >>>Major, an instrumentation specialist, and Dr Lehman, the >>>Director of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB. >>>This sounds like a rather" powerfull" group to discuss a subject >>>as officially uninteresting to the USAF/AFOSI as UFO reports."> >>My paper on the Kirtland Landings did not discuss the Bennewitz >>situation in any detail. For those who have never seen the >>paper, see below. The complete paper with illustrations will >>soon be posted at brumac.8k.com. >>_______________________________________________________________ >>This article was written in 1985, several years before the >>controversy over Richard Doty's activities and MJ-12 became >>public knowledge. At the time, I was not interested in the Paul >>Bennewitz aspect of the Kirtland UFO activity. I was only >>interested in the report of actual sightings of unidentified >>objects at or near Kirtland Air >However, according to Moore, the harrassment of Bennewitz by >Afosi began not long after that meeting. Moore thought that >Bennewitz had been fed disinformation because of his recordings. >So, it is relevant to connect these events, and we are again in >the middle of the question of disinformation. Gildas, Thanks for posting the above. I agree with you. Bruce Maccabee, proud contest winning songwriter, thanks for posting those sighting and landing reports at Manzano. I have not dug them out of my files in many a year. But I sure remember my excitement at that time. I followed this from California in PI (pre-internet time). Poor Paul Bennewitz. He carried his great evidence down the hill to the lions' den of the AFOSI. They pounced on him like he walked in with a steak. They sure did a number on him. At the time I had no idea the feds started to twist his mind. His Project Beta report seemed rather deranged. What exactly did the Feds do to him besides giving him disinformation? In 1989 I was as shocked as everyone when Bill Moore made his confession of his sins of working for AFOSI. I remember him talking about being part of one of their missions to sneak into Bennewitz's house while he was out and rearrange all the furniture. When Paul would get home he would think he was going crazy. They brought Paul to breakdown. I'd like to know what other kinds of dirty tricks were played. Moore, a researcher I believed in, had a few really good chats with. How he let the lions use him because he foolishly thought if he did what they wanted him to do he could learn who were at higher levels in the military intelligence UFO hive. Moore burned his credibility at the stake. And who was that who taught Bennewitz about the human pickle vats in the alien underground pickle plant beneath Dulce Canyon? Was that Christa Tilton? Where is my Ginko? Where's my memory going? What was the origin of that fable? And Bennewitz's descriptions of what he would see when he flew his plane over Dulce Canyon, a regular alien base. I was sure itching to get out there and look for myself. A lot of people did and nothing was found - strange. How did New Mexico State policeman Gabe Valdez come into the picture? At the time his reports and interviews excited me. He also saw amazing alien ships and structures in the canyon. Was he on the level? Was he psycho? Did the AFOSI set him up with a story to confirm the disinformation they fed Bennewitz? As you can see, I still have many questions from that case. And the perennial MJ12 dilemma keeps the fires burning in me that would like to know the full story of the Doty gang. Of course, I always wanted to see Bennewitz's original video and hear his alleged alien communications. If only he had thought to contact a UFO organiztion before being a good citizen and reporting it to AFOSI. I wonder how he feels about what was done to him. Oh, and one more question. What was Bennewitz's Thunder Scientific Company accomplishing at that time. Did he have government contracts? If so, what were they? Happy trails, Josh Goldstein PS - I hope those abductees have already been informed.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 18:23:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:14:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello Mr. Carpenter, >It has been a week since your posting where you acknowledged >that notification of the witnesses/abductees involved in this >sale of reports and personal files was necessary. We'd all just >like to know what progress (if any) has been made in terms of >actually notifying them. <snip> >Please, do not procrastinate any longer over this issue. This >needs to be done. If you are a man of true integrity and ethics >none of this should be a problem. >Could you please take the time to provide us with a progress >report regarding the notification of the clients whose files you >sold? >Sincerely, >John Velez, Webmaster, A.I.C. Dear John, Given the reluctance of all the principals involved to treat this issue with the gravity it deserves, I think it's unlikely Mr. Carpenter plans - or ever planned - on notifying the individuals involved in this scandal. It is simply outrageous that a LCSW would ever behave in such a manner. Perhaps it's time Mr. Carpenter find a new profession. His actions are hardly the actions of a professional LCSW. - Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: La Chupacabra! - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 02:06:47 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:29:47 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: La Chupacabra! - Goldstein Hi everybody. I am pleased to honor Roger Evan as the runner-up in the Chupi contest. It's a great topical LA industry song (I lived there) but not topical enough to be tropical. Are you ready to sing along to the tune of La Cucaracha (picture Mitch Miller waving his hands)? I know you all want to sing along with this. >Okay. Here goes. >(I know this is supposed to be in Spanish, but my lyrics are >more fun if you use a Jamaican accent. Just humor me.) >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Dat's da' name dey gave da' beast. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Dey say say he smell like stinky feet. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >He suckin' all da' chicken blood. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >I guess der goes da' neighborhood! >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Is he real or is he fake? >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >So many Pesos are at stake. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >What Bill Curtis gonna do? >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Now he got an agent, too. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >No longer time to kill de' goats. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >His secretary take a note. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Man, dis L.A. life is fine. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >He got Mel Gibson on the line. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >He really fits da' L.A. bunch. >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Just beware when you "do lunch"! >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >Who would have really ever thought... >La Chupacabra! La Chupacabra! >this stupid story would be bought? >Cha - Cha - Cha. >Roger Thanks Roger, you will receive a surprise present.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:23:57 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:31:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mortellaro >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:24:02 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:19:44 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>The word I selected was "mitigate." The context was that guilt >>is more than mitigated as a result of those files being >>presented sanitized. The verb intransitive is defined by my >>"just friend" Merriam as follows: >>"to cause to become less harsh or hostile : MOLLIFY >><aggressiveness may be mitigated" >>I meant exactly that. In addition, was Carpenter practicing as a >>licensed social worker during these times he was researching >>cases? That is a question to which I do not know the answer. Is >>this too fine a point? Not from the legal perspective. The moral >>one, is another matter to which I personally refuse to engage. >>Like Pontius, I will not judge him. I am not God. >Jim, >The law I have read prevents a licensed clinical social worker >from declaring (silently or otherwise) that they suddenly are >not licensed clinical social workers. It this were allowed, then >all kinds of fraud could be developed from this point and in the >past it has because the law is written to prevent it. >I'm sure that your doctor might wish he were not your doctor or >a doctor at all if he makes a mistake on you but his responsi- >bility as a doctor travels with him at all times everywhere. Dear Gary, Listers and Errol, A doctor made a mistake on my wife in 1993. It caused her permanent disability. He paid dearly for that mistake. In fact he no longer practices medicine. When we got thru with our law suit, there was nothing left of his practice or his ability to continue to earn a living. I understand you completely, and do not disagree with you on this point. My point was simply that I will not judge anyone and neither should anyone else. My point was that this case now belongs in the courts. And I am trying to find an attorney who will consider taking the case, on behalf of those genuinely injured. As opposed to those who merely suffered injury to their sense of right and wrong. Which is why I chose the word "mitigate" in defining any guilt in this matter. All along, I have been arguing & arguing (if you reread my posts) _for_ a proper treatment of the guilty party(s) in our legal system. I know nothing about Mr. Carpenter or you or even NIDS for that matter, relative to guilt in this sordid matter. What I _do_ know is that sooner or later, this matter must really go to the courts. I shall continue to seek assistance from an attorney because I really believe this is the only way in which the parties involved can be properly compensated and relieved that it will not likely happen again. Jim Mortellaro - still not god - still waiting for the truth - still not hearing 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Hart To Carpenter From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:40:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:34:22 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Hart To Carpenter John, I have not received your answer to my last message. If you do not respond to any of my messages in 48-hr., I can only assume that you do not intend to respond unless you state otherwise. Perhaps your Director of Public Relations, Robert Bletchman, could transmit your responses if you would feel more comfortable with this arrangement. Can MUFON please help me and several colleagues find nearly one hundred people, abductees whose files were sold by John Carpenter? My group knows of 36 or so. MUFON resources controlled by state directors in AR, IA, MO could possibly find the rest. We need a mutual agreement that will ensure these contacts will remain appropriately confidential. I do agree, however, that these people have a basic human right to know their files and records were sold by Carpenter to a private individual by the name of Robert Bigelow. Consider this an official request for information from MUFON concerning the Carpenter abductee file-sale issue. I'm sure you can respect my desire to move forward on this as there has been much encouragement from my colleagues to do so. Sincerely, Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:06:45 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:36:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:40:31 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >James Easton. >E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk >www.ufoworld.co.uk >----- Original Message ----- >From: John Lundberg <john@circlemakers.org> >To: <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 3:21 PM >Subject: <<< Advance Warning >>> >http://www.circlemakers.org >The Crop Circle Makers of England >_________________ >Advance Warning >For the first time ever we are giving advance notice of the >design of a crop formation before we put it on the ground . It >will be constructed in the next 48 hrs somewhere in the UK. >The formation will be made at night without any artificial >lighting by a small three man team: Rod Dickinson, John >Lundberg, and Wil Russell. >We estimate it will take about three hours to create. The >construction of the formation will be filmed using thermal >imaging cameras and will appear on a TV screen near you shortly. >Once completed the formation will be open to the public to >visit. >To see diagrams of the formation go to: >http://www.circlemakers.org/advancewarning.html I'm afraid this won't be at all convincing in terms of persuading people that the very intricate CC's this summer were made by this team. According to their diagram, this CC will consist of 2 overlapping sets of 8 or 9 circular rings, each set of rings having a common center, and each ring being of the same width. In contrast, the recent (genuine) formation called the Moire contained nearly 400 angular diamond-shaped figures, each of different size, aspect ratio and orientation than the ones adjacent to it. There's no comparison between the different degrees of difficulty here for a would-be hoaxing team. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:08:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:38:16 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:04:35 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>If you are indeed making this a legal case, I strongly suggest >>that you seek your attorney's advice before posting any more >>charges against Carpenter. If your attorney gave you the high >>sign to do that - it's time for another attorney. This kind of >>behavior does nothing to help abductees, ufology, MUFON or >>anybody else. >Ann, >The post was from a colleague and posted as received. If you >don't like it, don't read it. They are making observations based >on their experience. I know who it is and respect their wishes >in one case and removed ID where I had not gotten specific >permission to include it in the other case. The form was >warranted here. >You may not like anonymity. Many others I talk to see it has a >purpose at times. They would rather hear the message than not if >from a reliable source. Ann, I can appreciate your feelings, >however, the message was perhaps meant for those others >listening, reading. Hang on to that podium.... I tracked down your source Gary. Mike Farrell gave me permission - without my asking - to post our email exchange here on the list. However, it is my choice to not get into this aspect of this horrific saga any more than to make my point about validating sources, so I declined, thanked him, and gave him instructions on how to join this list. He's a regular archive reader. My point was and is, that allegations tossed out into public should have a source attached to them - especially now. That's common sense and the most responsible approach toward this community. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:55:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:40:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 - Felder >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 04:34:10 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Voyager Newsletter No. 14 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >It's also understandable why some 'ufologists' - I'm never quite >sure what that encompasses these days - protest Boylan isn't >'one of us' and express an earnest desire to distance themselves >from his activities. I'm sure the vast majority would agree. >However, far from being an outcast, the facts prove otherwise. >The Mutual UFO Network' [MUFON], although essentially American >based, remains the world's largest UFO related organisation and >a glance at Boylan's lecture schedule confirms he is still in >demand as a speaker at local MUFON meetings. >His other appearances also share the stage with speakers who >frequently appear at the most prominent 'UFO' conferences - see: >http://www.jps.net/drboylan/00ufocfs.htm >It seems difficult to reconcile how 'ufology' can ever detach >itself from Boylan and his ilk, whilst at the same time >embracing them. It would seem that I am not the only one wondering these things. How can the field of ufology ever be taken seriously when it pays no attention to the company it keeps? As I said in my last post to this List, the name of the game is "guilt by association" in the mind of your basic Average Joe on the Street. Like it or not, right or wrong, welcome to the reality exhibited by most of your basic Man on the Street types. I personally am tired of the study of UFOs being considered a "fringe" subject. I happen to take it seriously, and think it is a topic that all should be considering seriously. But how is anyone going to take it seriously when the supposed "experts" are willingly sharing the speaker podium with the likes of the defrocked "Dr. B", Bossack, Shulman, etc.? Is "air time" more important than credibility, reputation, and moving the field of ufology out of the "lunatic fringe" category? To hell with truth... let's just move those books and videos off the shelves! Us folks what actually go to the stores and actually plop down the cash for those books and videos are getting mixed messages here, people..... Frustrated over the self-perpetuating industry that ufology seems to have become..... Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Scientists Strengthen Prospects For Life On Mars From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:54:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:49:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Scientists Strengthen Prospects For Life On Mars Below is the latest press release from Dr. Gil Levin, who for years has been defending his claim that his Labeled Release experiment on the Viking Mars landers discovered life despite NASA proclamations to the contrary. What's interesting about this release is not only that there is another scientist involved with Viking backing up some of Levin's arguments, but that his press release was actually released at all -- and by JPL's Public Information guy, Ron Baalke, no less. I had assumed that Levin's press release wouldn't get any farther than his own web page, and JPL is the organization I'd least expect to see this coming from. Maybe there's been a shift in the political winds in Pasadena. ================================================================ From: Ron Baalke <baalke@zagami.jpl.nasa.gov> Subject: New Information Supports Claim Viking Discovered Life in 1976 To: astro-l@uwwvax.uww.edu (Astronomy List) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:10:33 -0700 (PDT) Biospherics Incorporated Beltsville, Maryland Media Contact: Mark Hopkinson, 561-750-9800 x14 Email: mhopkinson@transmediagroup.com Science Contact: Gilbert V. Levin, Ph.D. 619-234-1500 (8/1-8/3), 301-419-3900 (after 8/4) Email: gillevin@biospherics.com FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 1st, 2000 SCIENTISTS STRENGTHEN PROSPECTS FOR LIFE ON MARS New Information Supports Claim Viking Discovered Life in 1976 SAN DIEGO, CA -- On the heels of NASA's decision to land new rovers on Mars, the debate over the existence of life on the red planet is heating up. Dr. Gilbert V. Levin, a chief proponent, today advanced his claim to finding living microorganisms on the elusive planet 25 years ago. Dr. Levin, one of a trio of scientists, including himself and another who participated in NASA's Viking Mission, was presenting a paper at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Optical Engineering refuting the mainstay arguments against life on Mars. He contends that those arguments -- the presumed absence of organic matter and of liquid water -- are no longer tenable. Levin, senior author of the paper and President of Biospherics Incorporated (NASDAQ/BINC), Beltsville, Maryland, was Experimenter on the Viking Labeled Release (LR) life detection instrument that landed on Mars in 1976. His tests produced evidence for life that sparked a continuing controversy. The consensus of interested scientists has been that the Viking LR results on Mars, though positive, were chemical in origin and not biological. However, in a 1997 publication, following two decades of study, Levin finally concluded that Viking had, indeed, detected living microorganisms on Mars. Acknowledging that many scientists may remain unconvinced, he now proposes a new test to settle the issue once and for all, and urges that it be sent on the next lander mission to Mars. Co-author Dr. Arthur Lafleur, Assistant Director of MIT's Environmental Health Science Center, provided information that refutes the most often cited argument against the LR life detection experiment -- the lack of organic matter, the stuff of life, on Mars, as reported by the Viking organic analysis gas chromatograph mass-spectrometer (GCMS). Lafleur, who helped develop the Viking GCMS instrument, and a co-author of the original report of no organic matter on Mars, revealed unpublished results of pre-mission tests. They showed that the instrument sent to Mars could easily have missed biologically significant amounts of organic matter in the soil, as it had in a number of tests on Earth. Thus, the Mars GCMS results no longer can be considered proof that the LR failed to detect living microorganisms. [Note: the GCMS failure to detect organic compounds is usually cited as the conclusive evidence that Levin's experiment did not detect life. The support of Levin's position by one of the developers of the GCMS is therefore highly significant -- LF] Co-author Dr. Lawrence Kuznetz, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Planetary Sciences, has put to rest the second prevailing argument against the possibility of life on Mars, that the atmosphere of the planet is too thin to support the existence of life -- essential liquid water. Results of a laboratory study by a team of researchers led by Kuznetz showed that liquid water does exist under Martian environmental conditions. In addition, Kuznetz found results from 1960's tests of cooling systems of astronaut space suits showed that water exists in liquid form under atmospheric pressure as low as that on Mars. The findings lend credence to a model for Martian water published in 1998 by Levin and his son, Ron, a Ph.D. physicist at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. Based on Viking and Pathfinder data, the model predicted amounts of moisture in the Martian soil equal to that found to nourish microbial life in the sand dunes of Death Valley, California. Corroborated by the new NASA announcement of evidence for recent or current liquid water on Mars, these reports dispel the no-liquid-water issue against the Viking LR results. The authors support Levin's "chiral LR" experiment and propose that it be sent to Mars at the next opportunity. The experiment would apply the proven LR technology to test Martian soil for a unique characteristic found in all known forms of life, but not in chemical reactions. This characteristic is the biological preference for one of two possible configurations of certain organic molecules. The scientists state that the experiment can return an unambiguous answer to the major scientific question of life on Mars that would be acceptable to virtually all scientists. Dr. Levin was an Experimenter on NASA's Viking Mission to Mars, a Co-Investigator on NASA's Mariner 9 Mars mission, and was a Team Member of NASA's MOx instrument placed on the ill-fated Russian 1996 Mars Lander. He received NASA's Public Service Award "In recognition of his achievements in designing, perfecting, and conducting the Viking Labeled Release Experiment." Since his Viking experience, Levin has led the biotechnology efforts at Biospherics, the publicly held Maryland Company he founded in 1967. His developments include a full-bulk, low-calorie sweetener, tagatose, soon to come on the market, and the safe-for-humans, environmentally friendly pesticide, FlyCrackerTM, introduced into the market this year. The Company also provides information services to government agencies and private industry. Certain statements contained herein are "forward looking" statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Because such statements include risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ from those expressed or implied. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied include, but are not limited to, those discussed in filings by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the filing on Form 8-K made on March 3, 1999. Under its motto, "Technologies for Information and Health," Biospherics' mission is to provide guidance and products to improve the quality of life. Biospherics offers biotechnology innovations, information technology solutions, and information center services. Biospherics Incorporated's Internet address is: http://www.biospherics.com . # # # # # # BACKGROUND SCIENTISTS STRENGTHEN PROSPECTS FOR LIFE ON MARS New Information Counters Long-Held Opposition The 1976 Viking Mission LR results met all the pre-mission criteria established for the experiment by NASA and its scientific review committees for proof of life on Mars. However, the failure of the GCMS to find organic matter in the Martian surface material led to caution. Accordingly, Levin did not claim the LR experiment had detected life, but merely stated that the results were consistent with biology. Other scientists stated that, without organic matter, there could be no life. They quickly advanced theories attributing the LR response to the putative presence in the soil of the strong oxidant, hydrogen peroxide, or its derivatives. It was also contended that liquid water could not exist on the surface of Mars, because of the low atmospheric pressure, in itself precluding any possibility of life. Levin spent considerable time over the 20 years following Viking poring over the issue of life on Mars, including three years of laboratory efforts vainly seeking a non-biological explanation of the Mars LR results. Over the years since Viking, he followed relevant discoveries such as: the finding of life in many extreme environments on Earth, evidence of microbial fossils in meteorites from Mars (with NASA now explaining that the Viking GCMS may not have been sensitive enough to detect the small amount of organic matter constituting such organisms), the physics of water on Mars, and other physical, chemical and biological findings impinging on the Mars life issue. His continuing analysis finally reached a point where, in 1997, Levin published a paper in which he concluded that his Viking experiment had indeed detected living microorganisms in the soil of Mars. Despite the fact that the 1997 paper cited recently published work by NASA scientists disproving the presence of hydrogen peroxide on Mars, and made a strong case by Levin confirming NASA's suggestion that the Viking GCMS may overlooked organic matter on Mars, considerable criticism was evoked. It now concentrated on the liquid water issue as the principal remaining argument against the LR results. In 1998, Levin and his physicist son, Ron, published a paper outlining a model for the existence of liquid water on Mars. They claimed that atmospheric physics and thermal conditions on Mars provided moisture to the top layer of soil in amounts sufficient to sustain life. Dr. Lafleur read Levin's papers on the Viking LR experiment and, impressed by them, in 1999 contacted Levin to tell him of unpublished problems that he found as an engineer in developing the Viking GCMS at MIT. He thought the GCMS results might be explained without impairing the LR results. Dr. Kuznetz, teaching planetary science at UC Berkeley, invited Levin to give a talk about his Viking experiment. Intrigued with the liquid water issue, Kuznetz searched and found evidence for liquid water existing under low-pressure conditions during tests made on cooling systems developed for astronaut space suits. He then undertook laboratory experiments proving that liquid water exists under Martian pressure and temperature. While the present paper was in preparation, NASA announced the finding of strong evidence for current-era liquid water on Mars, confirming the theory and the experimental data reported by the Levins and Kuznetz. Levin now believes that the biosphere will soon be acknowledged to include Mars. He thinks that, in a few years, people will wonder at the difficulty that delayed acceptance of the discovery of life on Mars in the face of the accumulating facts. All the links necessary for life on Mars have been forged: terrestrial microorganisms can live under Martian conditions; there is liquid water available to microorganisms on Mars; contrary to the GCMS results, organic matter seems certain to be on Mars (photo-chemically synthesized from the atmospheric gases and also deposited by meteorites); Earth and Mars have traded materials that could readily have contained bacteria; bacteria can be preserved for up to millions of years under the vacuum and low temperature of space travel; bacteria transported in meteorites can survive entry temperatures into the Mars or Earth atmospheres and the thermal and mechanical shock of landing; and freeze-dried bacteria are known to establish full metabolism very shortly upon entering a favorable environment. These facts relieve scientists from the difficulty of accepting separate origins of life on Mars and Earth, an extremely unlikely happenstance. Now, it is possible that life on either planet may have come from the other -- or from a third source. Levin believes that NASA's one billion dollar Viking Mission to find life on Mars was successful, and that the answer has been staring scientists in the face for nearly a quarter of a century. The simple, relatively low-cost and easiest way to finally settle the issue is to send the chiral LR experiment on the next Mars mission. NOTE: Additional info is available at http://www.biospherics.com/Mars/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - McCoy From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:32:20 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:04:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - McCoy Hello, all, myself. >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:23:01 -0700 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >Subject: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello all, >I have a newsletter from Space.com in which was a very short >blurb about a planet orbiting Epsilon Erandi. Curiously the home >star of Vulcan - the home planet of the erstwhile Mr. Spock. >Does anyone have a site to go to? I have tried NASA but have >been to busy to peruse it further. >Thanks, "Live long and Prosper" also! Well, I found it on the BBC's website-no referece to Vulcans of course, as the Space.com website reffered to in their newsletter. but what we may have here is a Hubble target. and it is in the right place for a large gas giant type planet. As a _Comet Sweeper_ gee, and I thought those were rare as in "Rare Earth". Oh, one more thing: I'm not a real devotee of "Star Treck" at least I delete anything that isn't important to the basic story, okay I, don't go to the conventions, but I can tell the difference between Patrick Stewart and Bill Shatner: you see Shatner's the one with the wig, Stewart knows the proper coffure' for a Starship Captian. Anyway, what was the name of the Fellow who supposedly invented "Warp Drive"? in the "Treck " Saga Wasn't it Cochrane? The guy who found this panet's orbit was named Dr. William Cochran just an interesting, fascinating, coincidence, if you believe in coincience. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 08:53:59 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:03:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth Source: Detroit Free Press, http://www.freep.com/news/metro/des4_20000804.htm Stig *** Desiree Cooper: UFO question pulls politics back to Earth August 4, 2000 * IT'S A SHAME that our interest in the presidential race centers more on what damage each candidate can do rather than on how they can move the country forward. "What will happen to Roe vs. Wade?" some ask of a George W. Bush presidency. "What will happen to business under a president who's a nut about the environment?" others ask of Al Gore. "What will happen to the supposedly classified documents about UFOs?" others ask of both. Huh? That's the burning question Peter Robbins, a 53-year-old UFOlogist, former art instructor and theater manager is asking of the presidential candidates. To date, none has dignified his question, save a short acknowledgement from the Libertarian candidate for president and a terse letter from the now-defunct Bill Bradley campaign. Undaunted, Robbins followed up his Dec. 8 communication with more letters to the Gore campaign this spring, challenging him to declassify government documents relating to UFOs should he become president. You're wondering whether Robbins is serious. It turns out, he's serious as a Mars attack. UFOs and eroding democracy Robbins claims there are classified papers verifying military encounters with mysterious flying objects. He's documented one such encounter in "Left at East Gate" (Marlowe & Co., $15.95), a book that details an alleged government cover-up (including U.S. intelligence) of a UFO incident in rural England. That kind of secrecy, Robbins said, is destructive to democracy -- an issue that extends beyond the question of UFOs. "But," I protested, "do you really expect the presidential candidates to address UFOs instead of education and health insurance?" "This isn't just about UFOs," Robbins explained. "People are sick of being told that their feelings, their experiences are not valid -- or that information regarding what they intuitively know to be true is 'classified.' " Robbins said that UFOs are a metaphor for things most politicians won't talk about, from sex to death. And it's a metaphor for less tangible, but widely held, beliefs in things like near-death experiences. According to a report from the National Science Foundation, about half of all Americans believe in extrasensory perception, up to one-half believe in UFOs and 20 percent to 50 percent believe in ghosts. But politicians separate themselves from life as everyday people experience it, Robbins said. And that, coupled with excessive secrecy and hypocrisy, erodes the electorate's faith in democracy. Close encounters with truth Hmm ...If politicians were willing to get to the bottom of the existence of UFOs, what other issues would they be willing to entertain? Could they explore why so many Americans still feel nervous about their economic futures in this era of unprecedented prosperity? Why Congress is battling over the estate tax when most parents can't afford to give their kids a college education? Why more American children and teens were killed by gunfire in the last 20 years than the total number of American soldiers killed in Vietnam? Why many voters could not care less about cyberspace, because in their virtual reality they have no transportation, affordable housing, health care or a job making a living wage? Perhaps if politicians could stifle their giggles long enough to answer Robbins' questions, they might find the time to answer mine, too. And wouldn't that be out of this world? * Contact DESIREE COOPER at 313-222-6625 or cooper@freepress.com. All content � copyright 2000 Detroit Free Press and may not be republished without permission.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: UFO Report: Jasonville, Indiana - 7/24/00 From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 23:56:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:08:01 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFO Report: Jasonville, Indiana - 7/24/00 Subject: UFO Sighting Location: Jasonville, Indiana Date: July 24, 20000 - 11:10 p.m. Two Indiana residents have informed of a suspected July, 2000 UFO sighting. In response to their initial E-mail message, several questions were posed to them. They responded to the questions and requested that their names and E-mail address [on-file] not be released for privacy purposes. From a vantage point Southwest of the Jasonville, Indiana city limits, the two claimants were seated on a front porch talking when an object was noticed in the western sky. The soundless object was first thought to be a falling star until the two observers realized that it wasn't moving. The motionless object, estimated to be in the vicinity of a county road a quarter of a mile away from their house, was said to first appear as a dim, gold light that increased in size and brightness. The two witnesses reportedly walked in the direction of the object for a better view and it then began to move horizontally before dimming again. The bright gold light disappeared and in its place were reportedly several small red and green lights that appeared to be 'circling' the space where the gold light had been. The object continued to move horizontally and in a northeasterly direction and was observed for about five minutes until it disappeared from view behind a treeline. The two witnesses waited for the object to reappear behind the trees, but it was not seen again. "I am not a good judge of distance," the claimant stated in response to questions about estimated distance and elevation. "It was not up as high in the sky as the stars were until it took off." "We kept watching it because if we had not seen that bright, gold light in the first place, we would have never seen these lights in the sky amongst the stars. This did not move or look like an airplane, which we had seen in the sky this same night." No unusual electrical effects were noted, and no animals were present in their area. No other witnesses to the sighting are known, and the claimants inform that weather conditions were clear skies at the time. Comment: Many suspected UFO sightings have been explained as Iridium Flares, softly glaring lights briefly seen in the night sky which are actually orbiting satellites that briefly reflect sunlight from their solar panels. This report, while first sounding like an Iridium Flare sighting because of the 'dimming' description, is complicated by the five-minute observation and report of other 'red and green lights' circling the space where the gold light was reportedly seen. Filed, August 4, 2000 Kenny Young -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/ufo/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Carpenter From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:03:14 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:10:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Responds - Carpenter Sorry I have not responded sooner. I do not get to my e-mail every day like many of you -- maybe 1-2 times a week. I am working on the problem with locating people and shall do my best. Thanks. John
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Cuthbertson From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 23:04:53 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:12:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Cuthbertson >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:23:01 -0700 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >Subject: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello all, >I have a newsletter from Space.com in which was a very short >blurb about a planet orbiting Epsilon Erandi. Curiously the home >star of Vulcan - the home planet of the erstwhile Mr. Spock. >Does anyone have a site to go to? I have tried NASA but have >been to busy to peruse it further. There was a note posted to our local astronomical society email list about this. The report referenced there was on the CNN website: http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/08/04/new.planet.reut/index.html By the way, the correct name of the star is Epsilon Eridani. Eridanus ("the River") is a southern constellation. -Brian Cuthbertson Austin Astronomical 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: ABC's Nightline on Bush UFO Word (Sure) From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:30:09 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:13:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: ABC's Nightline on Bush UFO Word (Sure) http://abcnews.go.com/onair/nightline/transcripts/ nl000728_trans.html <snip> TED KOPPEL (VO) The only thing that is predictable on a presidential campaign is that nothing is predictable. As for example, the odd question that can happen at anytime at any subject, from UFOs.... 5TH MAN Half of the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell's going on? GEORGE W. BUSH Sure. ********* Wow! Bush is going to release UFO information! Yeah right. Next you're going to tell me he's going to stop taking money from special interest groups. If you want to see a decent answer to the UFO question, look for my next post regarding presidential candidate and quantum physicist John Hagelin. I also interviewed Ralph Nader and asked him about UFOs but it was a disappointing answer. Joe in Tampa
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Carpenter From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:16:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Carpenter >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >From: John <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter/status report request >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello Mr. Carpenter, >It has been a week since your posting where you acknowledged >that notification of the witnesses/abductees involved in this >sale of reports and personal files was necessary. We'd all just >like to know what progress (if any) has been made in terms of >actually notifying them. >Several list members have volunteered information that will >help you in tracking what few of the witnesses may have >relocated since 1997. If you require any further assistance, >feel free to let us know via this List (UFO UpDates) and I'm >sure that many will be glad to pitch in and help with the >notification process in any that we can. >Please, do not procrastinate any longer over this issue. This >needs to be done. If you are a man of true integrity and ethics >none of this should be a problem. >Could you please take the time to provide us with a progress >report regarding the notification of the clients whose files you >sold? >Sincerely, >John Velez, Webmaster, A.I.C. Dear John, Please understand that I only get time to get to my e-mail about twice a week with my long work hours and watching the kids while my wife works. I am not ignoring anyone or dragging my feet. Others are forwarding me notes sent between you and Ann, and I do not appreciate some of the comments made behind my back. People are sending me everything that is being said, okay? A real problem I am having with a number of cases is that many of the females have married, divorced, or remarried -- and the name changes are giving me fits along with address changes. If Cathy Brown becomes Cathy ?? and moves to ??, how do I begin to find her? I never collected Social Security numbers on anybody. Again, I do not have any problem with notifying people with an explanation regarding this project for Bigelow's esteemed Science Board. Bigelow's staff can do nothing to help because they do not have any identifying data to begin with. What would also help is if someone could provide me a list of who already knows about this so I do not have to spend time trying to locate them. Leah Haley is the only person who has contacted me in three years! I am presently writing a statement of explanation for the MUFON Journal so that the entire membership of MUFON worldwide can judge for themselves. By the way, none of my cases were ever logged as MUFON cases. Please be patient. John PS: There is some new rumor that I never obtained releases for my interviews that I obtained in Australia for my videotape on Australian encounters. I have these signed consent forms in my office and can dig them up for proof. JC
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Ralph Nader & John Hagelin on UFOs From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:48:40 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:19:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Ralph Nader & John Hagelin on UFOs Open Mind News is dedicated to reporting on all topics, including paranormal, that most of the mainstream press ignore or don't cover in depth. To subscribe to Open Mind News write to: ufojoe1@aol.com --------------- Green Party candidate Ralph Nader was in Tampa recently to testify in a civil trial. I took the opportunity to ask Nader about UFOs. I felt that when I asked the dreaded UFO question, Nader would ignore any of my other questions. So I saved it for last! I was standing two feet away from him when I finally dropped the bomb. I was surrounded by other reporters who looked on in horror as the three letter word left my lips. Joe Murgia: Can I ask you a totally non-related, off topic question? Nader: Um huh. Joe Murgia: A lot of my readers have interest in UFOs and paranormal stuff. And recently the Boston Globe was one of the few newspapers that ran an article on the French COMETA Report. And it was a report by a four star General currently, a current Air Force pilot, and from the former head of French's version of NASA. Nader: Right Joe Murgia: And they did a three year study on UFOs and they said their most likely explanation was extraterrestrial. And these are also former government workers. Nader: Right Joe Murgia: There's actually a regulation in the United States Air Force that prohibits the government from releasing anything to the public or media on any data about objects that are unexplainable. Which is in the public interest in my view since a lot of these objects are sighted over nuclear installations. Nader: Um huh. Joe Murgia: So, the French government got on our case and said that our government is repressing these stories. Nader: Right Joe Murgia: If you got to be president, what would you as far as opening up any files related to that. Because right now it's classified. Nader: Oh, I don't know. I'm a big supporter of freedom of information. Joe Murgia: That all? (Nader then ignored me and looked to the other reporters to ask him another question so he could be bailed out.) Joe Murgia: Thanks. Good luck in the election. Nader: Thank you. All of the local reporters smirked and smiled at me because they thought my question was a joke. It was tough to ask Nader the UFO question because I knew he would not like it but I had to do it. The other reporters are just ignorant about the facts regarding UFOs. Here's a reminder of what Natural Law Party nominee and Reform Party candidate John Hagelin had to say recently about UFOs at an appearance in Sarasota, Florida. If Hagelin wins the Reform Party nomination, he will receive over 12 million dollars in matching federal funds. Recently, USA Today reported that the race between Hagelin and Pat Buchanan is too close to call. Buchanan has been voted off of the ballot. http://www.hagelin.org/news/2000_07_31.html But that can be overturned at the Reform Party National Convention with a two thirds vote of the delegates. Here is a paraphrased summary of my questions and Hagelin's responses. Joe Murgia: What is your opinion on UFOs? John Hagelin: I have to approach the question from the standpoint of a physicist. The universe is so vast that intelligent life may very well be out there. But whether or not "they" have visited or are visiting our planet is another story. They would have to travel faster than the speed of light because of the vast distances involved. As a physicist, faster than light travel is hard for me to buy into. Most physicists don't think it is possible. I'm not so sure. The door is open. If they are not coming here in physical form, there is still the possibility of life in other realms. Joe Murgia: Does quantum physics open the door further? John Hagelin: Yes, quantum physics opens the door a tiny bit. Joe Murgia: I don't want to keep harping about UFOs but if you get to the White House, will you promise to try and open any classified UFO documents if they exist? John Hagelin: Yes. ***** This was the kind of answer I was hoping for and Hagelin didn't disappoint! Hagelin's Website: http://www.hagelin.org Nader's Website: http://www.votenader.org Think a vote for Nader or Hagelin is a wasted vote? Please read this and make sure you vote. Bush and Gore Make Me Want to Ralph! http://www.michaelmoore.com/07192000.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 05:28:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:24:43 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mulvey >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:04:35 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Gary, I'm responding to this portion of your previous message to me separately as I do not want to mix up our topics, in spite of their similar themes. >Perhaps you should better understand how much work it has been >and continues to be to put the evidence together. We are >strengthen- ing our case. It will take one or more months. You >take a case to the board only when it is ready, finished, >complete. You present a complete case so their need for further >investigation is minimal. I don't care about taking any cases to any boards right now. I care about those families being notified. I also care that if even one abductee is reading UpDates, wondering if their files were sold, they are presented with facts by the people who claim to be their advocates. >140 people is a very large number of people to even try to >contact. Please leave this to those who are more informed about >it and gracious accept that it is being worked on. More informed? More informed about what? What gives one group of strangers the designation of being more informed than the other? Is being kicked in the ass by John Carpenter some right of passage into the 'land of being more informed'? <snip> >Then talk to JC, NIDS or MUFON and make them do something. John >never agreed to do anything in his last message, which is >typical. Get MUFON to make a public statement, for instance. The >same with NIDS. Go after the people who have all the names. If NIDS/Bigelow have all the names then this would mean that _all_ of the abductee files were sold unsanitized. How do you know this? Is this a fact? >We know half of the 90 and will work on the rest. This also is a >several month project that has no shortcuts. Who is we and them and why should any of those be trusted over another stranger? I wouldn't accept "it's a several month project that has no shortcuts" crap from John Carpenter. I doubt many would. I doubt _you_ would. My gracious days regarding this mess have been short lived Gary. It seems I can't go for even one week without reading either a colorful stretch of facts, outright BS or a show of just plain lousy judgement. God help those abductees if this is the best their so called advocates have to offer. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: UFOs Photographed in South Carolina 3/9/00 From: Chris Pttman <Soccorro64@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 02:55:21 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:22:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFOs Photographed in South Carolina 3/9/00 UFO Sighting Report March 9, 2000 South Carolina copyright 2000 Christopher W. Pittman Near the beginning of March, 2000, my friend Sam Hussein told me that while traveling on Interstate 26 in South Carolina, returning from a trip to New Orleans, he and 3 friends had seen and photographed a series of triangular UFOs. I was intrigued by the story and it was agreed that I would investigate the sighting report. I next saw Sam on April 1, 2000. At that time I was able to interview him along with his girlfriend, Alison Reeves, who was also a witness. I was also shown a photograph taken by one of the other two witnesses that appeared to show a triangular craft. I had decided that interviewing Sam and Alison together would not be problematic because they had already had ample time to discuss the events and they were both very honest when their recollections differed. I interviewed the other two witnesses separately. The event took place on March 9, 2000 between 8:15 and 8:45 PM. Sam was driving on I-26 near the exit sign for an Air Force base (Alison believes it was called Shaw AFB). There were three other people in the car: Alison, Sam's college roommate Peter, and their friend Cass Hunter. The first person to see anything unusual was Sam. While heading northwest, he spotted a large object slowly moving from right to left across his field of vision, apparently crossing over the highway. The "cross-shaped" aircraft appeared to stop and hover in midair when it had crossed over the road. Sam pointed the lighted UFO out to Peter, who said he thought the lights were attached to a tower. To settle the issue, after they had driven past the object, Sam turned the car around and they drove back down the interstate going southeast. When they came to the place where the lights had been seen, they were gone. Five minutes later, either the same or an identical object was seen further away. The car was still traveling south at this point. The UFO appeared to move parallel to the highway, and it was moving very slowly. The group lost sight of the object below the tree line. Sam and Alison had definite ideas about the shape of this "cross-shaped" object. I had them both sketch the craft for me. Though there were differences in the two drawings, both witnesses emphasized that the wings and fuselage appeared oval in cross-section. Sam compared the object's appearance to that of two crossed bananas. Sam drove off the highway and turned the car around. He got back on I-26 going North. Then he saw a triangular object emerge from below the tree line. The trees were about 100 yards away, and the craft was far beyond the trees. At first it moved very slowly, but then it accelerated very quickly and swooped across the highway behind the car. It was soon lost to view in the distance. Excited, the group pulled over. There were trees about 50 feet away, and the witnesses could not see through the trees. They got out of the car and watched as a UFO became visible over the tree line in the area where the last object was last seen. It came very close to the witnesses at an estimated altitude of only 2000 feet. Sam felt that it was a triangular craft but Alison described it as cross-shaped. The craft rapidly approached the witnesses, then slowed down and crossed over the highway very slowly. Alison did not feel that she was able to get a very good look at the object. The location of the witnesses was near mile marker 205, very close to the site of the first sighting Sam had. At this time, the witnesses started taking photographs. Sam and Alison were unsure exactly how this object was lost from view. While the object was close, they could barely hear a quiet engine- like humming sound. Further up the highway, relatively far away, the UFO was again seen above the trees. This UFO was definitely triangular. When first spotted, it was moving perpendicular to the highway, but it then turned and began moving towards the witnesses. Sam was certain that the craft banked as it turned. It passed the group on the other side of the highway traveling very slowly. Sam roughly estimated that the UFO was 1-2 miles distant. After passing the witnesses, the UFO turned without banking, crossed back over the highway, and sped up. It began moving faster than a conventional airplane at the same altitude and was soon lost to view. Sam noticed something interesting about the way the triangle turned. The first time it changed direction, the body of the craft turned so that the "point" was always in front (the way a conventional aircraft turns.). However, the second time, the craft remained facing the same direction, but the direction of movement changed. When the UFO crossed back over the highway, one of the triangle's sides was in front. After that triangular object was no longer in view, another object appeared on the right, coming from the same area where the previous object was first spotted. This UFO crossed the highway almost directly over the witnesses' position. It was moving so slowly that Alison was able to easily catch up with the UFO by running and she got directly beneath it. The craft was at an incredibly low altitude. It was huge. At the time of the sighting, Sam guessed that the altitude was only 300 or 400 feet above the ground, but on reconsidering it later, decided it was probably closer too 1000 feet. Sam thought that this craft was probably triangular, but Alison believed that it was cross-shaped, with a compact body and round (cylindrical) wings. The underside looked gray. Sam stated that the UFO's apparent size was as big as his hand held at arm's length, but Alison felt it was much bigger, perhaps as big as a piece of poster board. Sam said that the object made a "quiet hum- no loud engine sound." The sound was more similar to a car motor than to a jet engine. As they watched, the object actually appeared to descend and lose altitude, and it disappeared behind the trees. Then, no objects were seen for 5 minutes. At this point a police cruiser came. The officer told them that they had to leave. They got going, with Sam driving. Alison does not remember the following incidents very clearly, so Sam related the details of the following incidents. Off to the right, Sam saw a light that flew across the highway in front of the car. Then, an object, described as a large, low-flying triangular craft, was seen coming towards the car. It then crossed immediately over the highway. Sam noticed some details on the underside of the triangle. It was a silhouette, but he could barely make out lines that seemed to define cylindrical "fuselages" on the undersurfaces of the wings. Sam felt that this craft did not look extraterrestrial. The underside had a texture- it was not smooth. Immediately after that UFO was lost to view, Sam spotted another one. It was triangular, similar to the others, but this one had a small tail in the back, like an airplane. It flew across the highway. That was the last sighting, and the end of the event. During the incident, Sam took about 5 photos, which are still undeveloped. Cass Hunter had taken photographs with 2 cameras, and I was able to speak with her briefly after my interview with Sam and Alison. She had developed one of the UFO films, and it had a single UFO photo. She gave me the print and the negative and agreed to an interview at a future date. The photo is somewhat ambiguous, but it appears to show a dark triangle with a bright white light in front. I was able to interview Sam' roommate Peter and Cass Hunter on April 4, 2000. I spoke with them separately in Cass' dormitory room at Boston University, where all the witnesses go to school. I talked to Cass first, and I had her fill out a MUFON Form 1. This is her account. Cass was sleeping in the car as they drove away from Charleston, where they had picked up Alison. Suddenly, she awoke to hear Sam excitedly yelling about what he was seeing. At this time she saw a bright light in the sky. They turned the car around to have another look at the craft. At first, Cass thought it was an airplane, but then she realized how slowly it was moving- she estimated the speed at only 5 miles per hour. There was a very bright light visible on the front of the object visible at this point. There also appeared to be two other white lights and one yellow light. It was over the trees on the horizon, moving parallel to the car. Cass did not remember the sequence of events as clearly as Sam had. She remembered that the UFO had passed overhead 3 or 4 times but it was hard for her to remember how the object looked each time. The first time she saw it, she said, it looked like an airplane. The next time, it looked round, like a "saucer." The members of the group were arguing about the craft's shape, as it was difficult to see a silhouette. Every time Cass saw the object, she became more confused as to its actual shape. She could see that it was a dark color- possibly dark gray. Cass remembered pulling over and taking pictures. She was unsure precisely when the photo she had given me was taken, and she was not even sure that she was the one using the camera when the picture was taken. She told me that she had taken other pictures using her Pentax auto-focus camera, and she gave me an exposed roll of Kodak Gold 200 film, which she said had UFO pictures on it. Cass stated that the UFO appeared to be moving in wavy lines, as if it had a "drunken pilot." It was "really, really big" and she was especially impressed by how quickly the object was able to accelerate. She estimated that while flying quickly, the UFO took only 5 seconds to go from being enormous to just a dot in the sky. Cass stated that once or twice, she got the impression that there were actually two separate objects. They were "triangular or boomerang" in shape, without wings or a tail. The apparent size of the UFO, she said, was an enormous two feet at arm's length! The object appeared to be flat, and she felt that she had seen it "flip." Strangely, when I asked her if the craft had made any sound, Cass told me that the first time she saw the UFO after they had stopped on the highway, she heard absolute silence- "I didn't even hear the highway for a little while." This appears to be an example of the so-called "Oz Factor". Afterwards, the UFO did seem to emit a "whoosh" sound, but "not very loud." Cass did recall seeing the UFO twice after they had been asked to leave. I asked Cass to draw the UFO for me. She drew a delta wing-shaped aeroform with a long central fuselage and two shorter fuselage-like forms under the wing areas. I also had Cass fill out the MUFON Form 1. Some of her written responses differed slightly from what she had told me. Cass indicated that at its closest approach, the UFO was two miles away and at an altitude of 300 feet. This distance estimate is different from that given by the other witnesses, who remembered the UFO as being virtually overhead. She estimated that the UFO flew as slow as 20 and as fast as 200 miles per hour, which was different from the speed she indicated when I interviewed her. She also estimated that the apparent size of the thing was about 6 times the size of a full moon, which is much smaller than her earlier estimate of 2 feet (I believe that the more conservative guess is likely closer to the truth). The form reflects Cass' belief that there were actually two objects, and that the UFO was able to change shape. I also interviewed the fourth witness, Peter, that same day. Peter told me that they were driving northwest from Charleston on I-26 when the sighting began. They had gotten about 20 miles away from the city, and there was still a fair amount of light pollution, when Sam first saw the UFO. Of this particular object, Peter said, "All I saw were whitish lights that moved very slowly." He was struck by the UFO's "really slow speed" and stated that the craft's altitude was "definitely less than 1,000 feet." It was moving parallel to the highway in the direction of the city. The group then lost sight of the object. They turned around and saw the UFO again. Peter said that at times the UFO would lose altitude and descend below 100 feet. Interested, they turned the car around again and stopped. They saw the lights again, to the southeast, on the east side of the road. Peter found it difficult to recall the exact sequence of events after this point. He believed that there had been at least two objects, and the presence of more than one UFO confused his memory of the events. He described the objects as "boomerang-shaped", or like a Stealth airplane, black in color, with 3 white "landing lights." He was unsure if there had been any other lights on the UFO. The craft made a "very faint jet-engine type sound." And it had "really great maneuverability- like a fighter plane." Peter described the object's maneuvers at length. He narrated how it banked when it turned, and "you could see the banking because of the lights." Sometimes, the craft appeared to hover, and it could lose altitude quickly without covering much ground. The object's speed was "very slow for a plane"- about 50 miles per hour, down to zero when turning. Even when the craft was seen to move rapidly, Peter said that it was moving slowly, up to about 100 miles per hour. The craft appeared "thin", with a length to height ratio comparable to that of a hand. While they were stopped, Peter remembered taking at lease ten pictures. He gave me a disposable camera, a Jazz model DZ50 with 27 exposures of 400 speed film. Peter got his best view of the UFO after the encounter with the police. He saw the craft low in the southeastern sky and watched as it flew overhead, no more than 200 feet over the road's surface. The apparent size of the thing was about that of a hand at arm's length. He drew this object as an acute boomerang with 3 white lights on the corners. Peter believed that he had seen some kind of secret military aircraft. He emphatically stated, "It definitely was an airplane, but like no other airplane I have seen in person or on television." Cass and Peter had given me 3 films, the two UFO films as well as a third roll of vacation photos I pledged to develop. I was disappointed on May 4 when I had the negatives developed to find no UFO photos at all! Both rolls that were supposed to have UFO photos ended before the leg of the trip when the sightings took place. Cass' photos ended in New Orleans, and the disposable camera ended near the start of the trip. There are four possible reasons for this. Firstly, the witnesses made a mistake and somehow lost the UFO films. Secondly, the witnesses may have been taking pictures with no film in the camera, or the film may already have been used up. Thirdly, the light entering the camera may have been insufficient to make any image at all on the negative. The final possibility is that some weird paranormal UFO-related phenomena caused both cameras to mysteriously malfunction. I personally feel that the second and third possibilities are most likely. On May 22, I finally developed Sam's roll of film. Five UFO photos were apparent on the negatives. The camera was a Minolta Maxxum with a Power Zoom 35-80 lens, and the film used was Kodak 400 speed. The photos are all ambiguous, showing mostly streaks of light. The images appear very distorted due to motion either of the UFO or the camera while the shutter was open. I plan on having the photos looked at by a MUFON analyst to see what if any value they might have. All four witnesses are highly credible college students with no motive for hoaxing. I have known Sam Hussein for about seven years and I know him to be very reliable and intelligent. The phenomena reported and photographed cannot be ascribed to any known aircraft. My honest evaluation is that this sighting cannot be explained. Christopher W. Pittman
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:37:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:30:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Hatch >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:02:00 -0400 (EDT) >From: Chris Pittman <Soccorro64@aol.com> >Subject: First UFO Sighting in North America >To: updates@sympatico.ca >"A Great Light in the Night": >The first UFO sighting in North America >Copyright 2000 Christopher W. Pittman <snip> Dear Chris: I suppose it is too late to ask, perhaps hundreds of years too late. Is there any chance of firming up the date: "One night in March of 1638 or 1639" If I average out the two alternatives, I wind up with something like September 1638, and that will never do. Best wishes - Larry Hatch PS: I suppose a precise time of day, night actually, is out of the question. Darn good story regardless.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 07:46:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:31:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - Hatch >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:40:31 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >James Easton. >E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk >www.ufoworld.co.uk <snip> Dear James: Should you not at least warn the poor farmer? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 03:38:52 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:27:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Hatch >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:41:21 -0400 >From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Compliments to all and sundry from His Grace the Duke. >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>My dear friend Peter has missed the point -- abduction >>investigators (the ones I know, anyway) talk to children to >>relieve their anxiety, not to pump information from them. <snip> >Whether typical or not, the scene from the NOVA TV show we've >had quoted here hardly seems designed to reassure the child in >question. But it does seem calculated to elicit information >(albeit of a kind well infixed in the questioner's mind). One >might say the same about the interviews with young John >Napolitano in "Witnessed". <snip> >O, absolutely. Of _course_, as anyone perusing the archive will >confirm, I entirely misconstrue Occam's Razor ("Entia non sunt >multiplicanda" -- how could anyone be expected to understand >Latin?) and fanatically misapply its caricature in every >context. This is part of a black-budget disinformation campaign >for which I am handsomely rewarded. Being an individual of >flawless physical beauty with a mind of incomparable power and >erudition, I am never, ever wrong about anything -- no, don't >say it, not even that, whatever it is. The rest of you are ugly, >ignorant, evilly-garbed, illiterate vulgarians with revolting >table manners, deserving only immediate incarceration in the >vilest Paraguayan sewer, which will reek of rotten fish even >worse than Greg's post. I trust I make myself clear? >--- while waiting for Greg or anyone else to level the playing >field a bit, eh what, chaps, and show us all some indisputable >facts about alleged abductions before they whinge about skeptics >playing fast and loose with any other purported facts. Or being >derisive, or ironic, as the number of hypotheses may be. >best wishes >Picrochole D. Merope >Cod Warrior - - - - - Dear Fish and Chips: I thought Occam's razor simply indicated a preference for simpler, less expensive hypotheses. I can personally guarantee it works in electronics, _most_ of the time.. The latin quote "Entia non sunt multiplicand " sounds more like "Alien entities have difficulty reproducing", a theory I would rather not touch upon now. What I have difficulty with, is the idea of thousands (million?) of abductions taking place annually. Even if one takes the position that humans are "tagged" like polar bears to monitor their behavior, a relative handful would suffice. If I had endless time, and the means, I would try to prove that UFOs are "alien" in the sense of ET, or somehow outside the realm of the mundane. I see strong indications, "evidence" or a sort, but no real proof yet. If and when that non-trivial matter is put to rest, then I would try to nail down the verity of human abductions, and not before. Its a little like leprechauns I guess. Some people like to argue their "pots of gold" are made of iron, while others prefer clay. Shouldn't we concentrate on the little men first? That seems more to the point. NB: Archeologists have indeed found small earthen pots full of Roman coins, copper silver and gold. None of them suggested leprechauns. Likewise, the best proof imaginable of a truly anomalous human abduction might not prove an alien origin for UFOs. Maybe the two studies should be not "divorced", but sort of legally separated. I humbly apologize [ burp ] if I offended anyone. Best wishes regardless - Larry Hatch PS: Don't get me started on Chupacabras.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Sudden Impacts, The Comic Book's Future & Bush's UFOs From: Diana Botsford <diana@destinationspace.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 10:57:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:34:11 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Sudden Impacts, The Comic Book's Future & Bush's UFOs D E S T I N A T I O N: S P A C E http://www.destinationspace.net THIS WEEK'S CHATS: The Politics of UFOS Chat with UFO Lobbyist Stephen Bassett Sunday, August 6th @ 6pm, PT George W. Bush's latest campaign promises include revealing the truth about UFOs (according to a CNN transcript). Is this an empty promise, a hoax or the geniune article? Join political activist Stephen Bassett this Sunday at 6pm, PT and get the latest news & views from Capitol Hill and beyond. http://www.destinationspace.net/ufo/bassetchat.asp ******* To Fear or Not to Fear? The Threat of Impacts Astronomy & Space Chat Monday, August 7th @ 6pm, PT By now you've seen the movies and the documentaries and heard the tales of gloom and doom. But what are the facts about asteroid and comet impacts? Are they a real threat? Join Final Frontiers Editor, Jim Erjavec, on Monday, August 7th at 9pm ET (6pm PT) for a lively discussion of impacts and their consequences. The mega-ton force of this discussion is guaranteed! http://www.destinationspace.net/frontier/ffchat.asp ********************** New on Destination: Space: >From Escape Velocity: Transmetropolitan Illustrator Darick Robertson on science fiction, inking as an art and the future of the comic book post The X-Men's latest success. http://www.destinationspace.net/escape/transmetro.asp Captain Kirk & William Shatner Who is Writing Who? William Shatner's much loved Star Trek book series gets another chapter with Preserver. Will the real author please stand up? Join the discussion at http://www.destinationspace.net/escape/evmb.asp ++++++++++++ >From UFO Enigma: Carpenter's Files Do We Need a Code of Conduct? UFO Historian Jan Aldrich (Project 1947) comments on the sale of abductions files to a 3rd party. Is Ufology a science . . . or a form of entertainment? http://www.destinationspace.net/ufo/conduct.asp UFOS, Lies & Videotape? According to a CNN transcript, Presidential nominee George Bush, jr promises to tell the truth about UFOS. Is the transcript a hoax? Or does Bush have something else up his sleeve? Is the proof in the video? Join the discussion at http://www.destinationspace.net/ufo/ufomesages.asp Tales from the Sanctuary of the Birds: Wernher Von Braun's FBI File, 1948. Was this ex-Nazi involved in more than rocket science? http://www.destinationspace.net/ufo/birds.asp World Wide Watch We are pleased to announce that Darren Dinks from the UK is the winner of our World Wide Watch contest. Congratulations, Darren and thanks to everyone for submitting your reports. The finalized results will be available shortly. ++++++++++++++ We look forward to seeing you online. Diana Botsford Producer/Host Destination: Space http://www.destinationspace.net - - - - - - "To follow knowledge like a sinking star, Beyond the utmost bound of human thought . . . To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield." Tennyson's Ulysses ************************ The Destination: Space newsletter is a free service. To subscribe, visit our site at http://www.destinationspace.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: 300 Top US UFO Hotspots From: Jim Klotz <jklotz77@foxinternet.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 09:19:47 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:35:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: 300 Top US UFO Hotspots Hi folks, Just a note to let you know that Dr. Donald Johnson has created and provided to CUFON two reports produced from data in the UFOCAT 2000 Database. These reports list the 300 top US UFO hotspots; one report is ordered by state, the other by rate of unexplained reports per 10,000 population in 1990. We are making these reports available in HTML, PDF and (zipped) Excel formats. Look in the "What's New" column on the CUFON main page for a link to these reports: http://www.cufon.org/ - Jim Klotz
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:48:08 -0300 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:40:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:50:37 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data - Friedman >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:03:51 -0300 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:30:14 -0500 (CDT) >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:42:19 -0700 >>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>>>Subject: Re: Sunspots and UFOs: Part 1 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>This is exactly what should be expected from a sample of raw UFO >>>>case data. Since our own studies have confirmed others which >>>>found only about 3 to 5% "true unknowns", the "noise" of >>>>insufficient data cases and IFOs completely drowns out the >>>>unidentifieds. >>The beauty of Project Blue Book Special Report 14 is that 10% >>were listed as Insufficient Information and 20% as Unknowns >>after consistent investigation by a small group of final report >>evaluators. All 4 had to agree on Unknowns. Any 2 could list as >>a known >the Battelle analysts also divided the sightings into >reliability groups: Poor, Doubtful, Good, Excellent., based on >the quality, completeness and self-consistency of the report and >upon the quality or experience of the witness. They found, out >of about 3200 sightings analyzed, 525 were poor, 1298 were >doubtful, 1070 were good and 308 (about 10%) were excellent. For >each of these reliability groups they divided the sightings into >3 general classes: Unknown (U), Insufficient Information (II) >and Known (K). >The statistics went as follows: >POOR : K - 62%, II - 20%, U - 18% >DOUBTFUL : 73 11 16 >GOOD : 71 3 26 >EXCELLENT : 61 4 35 >Note that as the reliability increased toward excellent the % >Insufficient Information decreased. This is to be expected >since completeness, wealth of detail and apparent accurary were >several of the criteria that determined the reliability of a >report. One would expect that th more complete reports would >have more details that would lead the analyst to the explanation >than would the less complete (doubtful, poor) reports. >The most important result if the continual increase in the % >unexplained as the reliabiliy increased. The is NOT what is to >be expected if "flying saucers" are all misidentified objects (M), >delusions or mental states of the witness (D) or hoaxes (H), because >LOGICAL CONCLUSION FROM THESE DATA IF all saucers >are M,D or H >(i.e., IF there are no truly unidentifiable saucer sightings): >THE Most Reliable Witnesses must be also the most likely to make >mistakes (M), have delusions (D) or create hoaxes (H). >Obviously this conclusion contradicts our general notion of >reliability. The alternative is that the most reliable sighting >reports are te least likely to have erroneous data or to be >incomplete in their descriptions of the phenomena and hence >should have the LARGEST percentage of Knowns, the Least >percentage of Insufficient Information AND THE LEAST PERCENTAGE >OF UNKNOWNS....... IF THERE ARE NO "FLYING SAUCERS." >IT doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the most >obvious conclusion based on these data is that Flying Saucers >ARE Real (thank you, Stan). >Incidently, when only the military cases were used (1226 >cases) , 204 (about 20%) were rated as excellent and of these >fully 37% were rated as UNKNOWN! >The Better the sighting... the More Likely to Be Unexplainable >in terms of known phenomena! Thank You, Battelle! Two more important items from Project Blue Book Special Report 14 and its 240+ charts, Tables, maps, graphs: l. A statistical cross comparison (Chi-Square analysis) was done to see if there was really any difference between the UNKNOWNS and the KNOWNS, based on six different observable characteristics such as color, size, shape, duration of observation, etc. It was determined , despite many attempts to soften the results, that the probability that the UNKNOWNS were just missed KNOWNS was less than1%. Maneuverability, a key feature was not even included. Those who say there is no difference obviously haven't studied the data. 2. Average duration of observation was greater for UNKNOWNS than for KNOWNS. Furthermore, none of the data presented by Bruce and myself was included in the "summary" given very wide distribution on October 25,1955, by the Air Force with a totally misleading press release which also did _not_ include the title of the report, the names of the authors, nor the name of the originating contractor, Battelle Memorial Institute. Apparently no press people went after any of these important pieces of data. Things haven't changed much in 45 years, have they? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Military Disputes Strangeness of Maryland Silver Balls From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 14:48:36 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:42:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Military Disputes Strangeness of Maryland Silver Balls "In Sky Over City, Multiple Mysteries" By Steve Vogel Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 4, 2000; Page B01 OCEAN CITY, Md., Aug. 3��The mysterious silvery balls came first--pretty, 12-inch-diameter spheres that floated down from the sky in and around this resort town, amid rumors that they had been dropped by black helicopters. This was followed by widespread alarm when word spread that the City Council--meeting behind closed doors--had granted the military permission to test the Patriot missile's radar at the municipal airport. Toss in a few sonic booms from military jets in recent days, and some Ocean City residents are up in arms. "They have no business putting this on in a resort community," said Hollis Martin, a homeowner in nearby South Point. "Go out to the desert and do your testing." Even Maryland's Democratic senators, Barbara A. Mikulski and Paul S. Sarbanes, have weighed in, sending a letter last week to Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen asking for information about the radar testing. "We are also requesting that the report include information on any . . . helicopters in the West Ocean City area and the launching of 32-ounce spheres," the letter said. Margaret Pillas, a City Council candidate helping spearhead the resistance, puts it more simply: "Just tell us what's happening to us, not 30 years from now, when we learn they've done God knows what to us." What's happening is: Next week, at the height of the beach season, the military will start a series of tests designed to improve the performance of the Patriot antimissile system, known for its decidedly mixed results 10 years ago in the Persian Gulf War. No missiles will be fired--or even brought to Ocean City. Instead, jets will fly in circles far offshore, and technicians will assess how well the Patriot's radar system tracks them, in conjunction with radars on nearby Wallops Island and a Navy cruiser at sea. Ocean City makes a convenient spot for testing because of the possibilities for triangulation and integration among the three radar sources. "We surveyed north and south, and the bottom line is, the best geometry was the Ocean City airport area," said an official from the Ballistic Missile Defense Office. The military wants to do the tests now, during the peak summer season, to avoid delaying missile firing tests scheduled elsewhere this fall. Of course, none of that explains the silvery balls. They do, in fact, exist. Pillas has one hidden in a secret location. "It's the only actual evidence we have so far," she said. "We don't have a helicopter yet. This is the first thing we've had that everybody said we didn't see." A resident named Wendy Garliss first spotted one of the silvery balls during the winter in a field off Route 50 near the new Wal-Mart. She kept it in her back yard, where her dog and children played with it. She gave it little thought until the radar controversy erupted, when she turned it over to Pillas. Pillas drove it around town in her Jaguar for several days, trying to get someone to identify it. "Source of Mysterious Balls Unknown," read a headline in a local paper. Last week, the Patuxent River Naval Air Station identified the balls, saying they are harmless aluminum spheres routinely released from P-3 aircraft to calibrate radar at the Southern Maryland installation. They have nothing to do with the planned Patriot radar testing, according to military officials. Phillas remains skeptical about the explanation, and today she took a reporter and photographer to see her sphere on condition they keep its location confidential. "I have it buried until we know exactly what it is," Pillas said of the ball. "I want it to be analyzed by a group independent of the government." The Navy has no problem with that. "Anyone who finds a sphere is welcome to keep it or put it in with other aluminum recyclables," read a statement released by the naval air station. The source of the sonic booms remained unclear. Spokesmen for several East Coast installations said they knew nothing about them. As for the black helicopters, no one is claiming them, either. City officials acknowledge that residents are not imagining things, or at least not everything. "I'm not going to say that the silver balls, black helicopters and sonic booms don't exist," Mayor James N. Mathias Jr., clad in a golf shirt and shorts, said in an interview today in his office. But the mayor said he is convinced that the radar tests do not pose a danger to residents or wildlife and are important for the national defense. "Who knows when the next time our sons and daughters will need these weapons for protection," he said. "This is the least the town can do." A book-length environmental assessment conducted by the military--released Wednesday and rushed to Ocean City by courier early this morning--concludes that there would be "either no impacts at all or minimal impacts that could be readily mitigated." "People who are at the beach or in a residential area a half-mile away will be more hazardously affected by the sun or a cell phone than from this radar," said the official at the Ballistic Missile Defense Office. The radar operation is scheduled to start Friday, though the radar equipment probably will not arrive at the airport until Monday and actual testing is not expected to start until Thursday. "All systems are go," said Jennifer Canaff, a spokeswoman for the ballistic missile office. Officials say that the radar emits no hazard beyond a 400-foot zone, which will be restricted, and that the testing will not interfere with airport flights. The testing proposal got off to a bad start May 30 when military officials briefed the City Council on the plan behind closed doors, which angered residents once they found out. The council approved the proposal unanimously. "To be quite frank, and no pun intended, I thought it would be the patriotic thing to do," said council member Vincent Gisriel. "Little did I realize how this would fester in the public." Military officials said the closed meeting was the city's idea. At a July 17 public meeting called to quell the controversy, military officers were bombarded with questions from residents, who also raised the issue of the silvery balls and black helicopters. "It's not like I'm a Greenpeace person or anything," Garliss, a former commercial fisher, said in an interview this week. "I don't want to see military. We're not at war. For Ocean City to decide this whole thing without consulting the public is really rotten." End of article -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/ufo/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Carpenter/Bigelow & Abductee Tapes From: Marc Davenport <leahmarc@ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:56:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:46:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Carpenter/Bigelow & Abductee Tapes To all interested in UFOs/aliens: Many of you have asked for a TRUE statement about the unauthorized sale (by licensed clinical social worker and former Director of Abduction Studies for MUFON John Carpenter) of confidential tapes of hypnosis sessions of a great many abductees to Las Vegas millionaire Robert Bigelow. That is now available at the "Leah's Corner" section of our website http://www.greenleafpublications.com Thanks to the magic of the internet and our wonderful web host Dave Kauble, my humble opinions are also being published now, on the "Marc's Corner" section of the same web site http://www.greenleafpublications.com For those of you who have been asking for the posting of the latest UFO book listings, at long last, those have now been posted at the same web site. -- Cordially, Marc Davenport marc@greenleafpublications.com Visit http://www.greenleafpublications.com to see books and tapes on UFOs, extraterrestrials, OOBEs, and other mysteries of the universe. We now offer an across-the-board 10% discount on all orders placed through our web site, and there is no sales tax outside the state of Tennessee!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Re: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region - From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:03:18 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:50:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region - >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 09:39:08 -0400 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> >Subject: Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dear Friends, >Despite admonitions from a number of parties to "stop informing >the public about the Chupacabras activity in South America", I >feel that I have no choice in the matter. The phenomenon has >been occuring since 1995 in the most disparate locations--Puerto >Rico, Mexico, the U.S., Spain, Portugal, Brazil and now Chile >and Argentina--and the physical manifestations of the >creature/entity/whatever have been wildly different from one >nation to another, according to eyewitness reports. The easy >solution--drawn along ethnic lines--has been to dismiss the >matter as a phantasm of the Iberoamerican and peninsular >Spanish peoples, yet a similar solution is never posited for the >Loch Ness monster as a similar phantasm of the Anglo/Celtic >mindset. Any such suggestion would be met with hostility, and >well it should. >I have refrained from posting anything to my own list or the >lists of others that smacks of FOAFtales or other secondhand >information (which invariably includes some of the most >fascinating information). My sources have always been from >newspapers or their respective websites, and in certain cases, >transcripts of radio shows furnished by sources in Chile and >Argentina. I am not a scientist--merely a writer and translator, >and I limit myself to these endeavors. Scientists or the >science-minded would therefore be best advised to stop reading >these messages in order to avoid undue mental distress to >themselves. >My apologies for inserting myself into the news item, but I felt >(rightly or wrongly) that a clarification of my position was >necessary. >The following newspaper account will strain my credibility even >further, I fear. >Very best regards, >Scott Corrales >Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU) >www.inexplicata.com >**************************************************************** >Bombardment Takes Place in Chile's 2nd Region >Source: "La Estrella del Loa" (newspaper) >Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 >*** Claims indicate that a jet bombarded the area between Pedro >de Valdivia and Maria Elena <snip> Hello Scott, Since I am the person who started the Chupacabra song contest, I hope you don't think I was racist in my attempt. I just like to occasionally inject a little humor on the List. My humor was topical, not poking fun at a particular race. I take all topics on this List seriously and I occasionally like to lighten things up. I certainly don't doubt the validity of your reporting. I am glad that Dr. Ocejo is willing to investigate on-site and I anxiously await his report. When I read the profusion of UFO sighting reports and Chupacabra incidents in South American newspapers I am not familiar with, I wonder if these are serious press or tabloid types. I am hoping that this is all investigated in a professional manner. Is it possible to get police or military reports? What kinds of investigations are taking place? Has the Chupacabra become a commercial factor in songs, TV shows, etc? How strong was the Chupacabra as a cultural legend before these incidents? Can you obtain any investigative materials (beyond newspapers and TV) that support the claims of Chupi nests and possible NASA involvement? I honestly wish I could get down there and investigate myself but it is not possible. The original Puerto Rican episodes fascinated me. Many sighting reports, military activities, the alleged El Yunque UFO crash and quarantine preceeded the Chupacabra sightings. Much of my information came from the reports of Jorge Martin. I also saw videos covering things like a police detective's Chupacabra sighting, etc. The reports fascinated me but I could not get down there to dig into them in an investigation and try to determine what really was going om there. I am still pretty confused by it all. Did the Chupacabras mostly leave the island or did the stories just fade out? Did some Chupacabras swim to Miami, Texas, and Mexico? There were also some strange MUFON activities regarding their handling of the state (or territory) director of Puerto Rico position. Can you point me to the most serious investigations of Chupacabras so far? It is hard to investigate reports from thousands of miles away. Thank you, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 5 UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-05-00 From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:42:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:52:23 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-05-00 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Week Ahead 8-6-00 thru 8-12-00 Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories From sightings.com Jeff Rense E-News is distributed exclusively by Free Subscription. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * GUEST CORNER * RIGGING THE '96 ELECTIONS by Barry Chamish How complacent we acted after Peres was defeated in the presidential vote. One victory and people think the "peace" process is over. So, let's face reality. Peres will be back, probably as Foreign Minister and a terrified Barak must obey his Council On Foreign Relations masters and push through their war plan at any cost. As he told CNN, "If the Israeli people turn down our referendum, we'll find another way." On the plus side, our strategy is having an effect, even if the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge it. Yesterday, I was at the butcher shop when the personal aide of a religious Knesset member walked in. With a huge smile he said, "You don't know the balagan you caused." A month before the presidential vote, the unsung heroes of the Goldberg Family of Tel Aviv and Tsfat faxed my article "Peres Must Never Become Israel's President" to all 120 Knesset members. Within I listed Peres's crimes, ending with his organization of the Rabin murder with the operational cooperation of the French intelligence services. I was reliably informed that the faxes helped turn the vote. Now we close in on the kill. We prove Peres's role in the murder and there is a way. So far, I have documented Peres's ties to the main assassination conspirators: Shabak chief Carmi Gillon, who Peres appointed to chair his peace center; Yoram Rubin, Rabin's bodyguard and shooter, who Peres appointed to head his bodyguard unit on the assassination eve, no doubt because of the fine job he did protecting Rabin; Peres's personal chauffeur Menachem Damti, who took Rabin on his last drive; and Jean Frydman, who paid for Rabin's final rally and helped organize its security. This is very heady circumstantial evidence but there exists solid proof of Peres's hand in the murder...and it cost him the 1996 elections. The Rigger Gets Rigged In the March 14, 1994 edition of the National Review is a three page article by Joel Bainerman and me called, The Peres Gambit. In it, we prove that Peres rigged the 1992 elections and here's how we found out. A number of months earlier, Yehoshua Meiri, a journalist for the left wing newspaper Chadashot, had an article printed within called Beilin's Secret Journeys. Meiri claimed that in June, 1992, Yossi Beilin, then Shimon Peres's deputy, flew to Cairo to deliver a letter from Peres to Arafat. Peres offered the PLO a state if it would use its influence to shift Israeli Arab votes to the Labour Party or its allies in the next national elections. After three more Beilin trips to Cairo and the personal intervention of Secretary of State James Baker, Arafat agreed. The Arab parties won only four seats, compared to ten today, the rest of the Arab vote went to Labor and the Zionist far left. The PLO provided the difference in the vote which put Labour in power and the Oslo process was put in motion. Joel and I met Meiri several times and he provided solid documentation, including powerful tapes he secretly recorded. The National Review checked our sources and we passed their scrutiny. Several months later, reporter Steve Rodan followed our lead and interviewed Meiri at length. Like us, he found Meiri entirely credible and his evidence airtight. The result was a series of scoops in the Jerusalem Post which verified Joel's and my findings. Peres had indeed rigged the 1992 elections and the PLO was allowed to determine the future of the Jewish state. But in 1996, the tables were turned on Peres. Natan Gefen in his book Fatal Sting recounts how he took the smoking gun Rabin murder document, the surgeon's report proving Rabin was not shot twice in the back as our government insisted, but three times and once frontaly, to Likud MKs Ehud Olmert and Dov Shilansky. Neither was interested and Shilansky told him, "We don't need the report, we've already fixed things up." Gefen concluded that the Likud had the proof and had already blackmailed Peres into throwing the upcoming elections. Independently, I received confirmation of this seemingly fantastic claim. In April 1997, our internal security force, the Shabak organized a violent protest outside a speech I was to give about the Rabin murder at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. A few days later, I received a call from Yaacov Mor, a self-admitted Shabak graduate who told me, "If the guys were willing to do that to you, you must be on to something serious. I'd like to see what you've got." Mor was the financial advisor for the Minister of Social Affairs, Eli Suissa. He came to my home and I gave him a stack of documents to peruse. After a half hour, he put his index finger on his mouth and with his other hand directed me outside. When we left my property he said, "I'm not talking in your house. Do you know your documents are authentic?" I replied that I did. "And do you know how high up this must go?" I answered that I had an idea. "Why don't you have a job in Nepal or Uganda? That's what they usually do to troublemakers? I'll report my findings to my minister and we'll see what he decides." A few days later, Suissa's secretary called. She invited me to the minister's office and asked that I bring my documents for them to photocopy. In return, I would receive the most sensitive information of the whole Rabin affair. How could I refuse? I was driven to Suissa's bureau, handed over my documents and was seated in his chief aide's office. I heard an energetic discussion in the corridor and then the young aide, Yitzhak Sudri, today the Shas Party spokesman, entered with Mor. He said, "The minister cannot attend this meeting but he has authorized me to inform you that the following information is accurate." This was Sudri's exposition. In February 1996, four months before the elections, disgruntled Shabak officers passed the documents I had acquired plus many more to the "top" of the Likud leadership, which must have included Netanyahu and Sharon. They organized a meeting with the"tzameret" or top of Labour's leadership, which must have included Peres and his campaign managers Ehud Barak and Haim Ramon. After presenting the proofs, the Likud proceeded to blackmail Labour over Peres's role in the Rabin assassination. If the name Rabin was used in Labour's campaign, the Likud chiefs would release certain damning documents to the public. If Peres defeated Netanyahu in their television debate, other documents would be released. And if Peres won the elections, everything would be released. Labour did not bring Rabin's memory into the contest, Peres gave a miserable performance in the television debate and Netanyahu won the elections though he really didn't. Recall the election night. The declared winner, Peres, did not show up at the Tel Aviv Cinemateque to thank his supporters. However, the declared loser, Netanyahu, all smiles, addressed his followers with the prophetic words, "Don't worry. There's plenty of time until the morning when the government will change." And he was right. That day someone leaked the results of one polling station to Meretz MK Ran Cohen. He discovered 1500 spoiled Labor votes and many forged Likud votes. Based on this one station, he estimated that at least 120,000 were stolen from Labour. He submitted a petition to the Supreme Court to recount the votes but his own party ordered him to withdraw it. Even Peres prevented a recount though he publicly was dismayed that, "Labour supervisors weren't properly represented in the polling stations." Sudri gave me the name and phone number of a graduate student at Tel Aviv University's Faculty Of Law, who was writing his thesis on this scam based, in part, on the Likud's own reports of their blackmail of Peres.. We met in a deserted cafe and he informed me, "I was warned yesterday not to supply you with any documentation. The best I can do for now is confirm that the elections were tainted. Peres actually won by 2%, just like the polls predicted." A month ago, at my lecture in Bet Shemesh, an election supervisor stood and before 90 people, confirmed the election rigging. "A colleague of mine told me he was ordered to destroy piles of Labour votes in 1996." And that is why in three and a half years, the Netanyahu government did not pursue the Rabin truth. They were now soiled by blackmail and election tampering. The only reason Peres and Labour would have taken the dive is if the blackmail against Peres worked. And it only could have worked if he had knocked off Rabin. An investigation into the 1996 elections would require interrogating Suissa, Mor and Sudry. Let them deny the meeting with me took place. Who knows, perhaps they will do the honorable thing and not perjure themselves. I also have the names of the law student and election supervisor. I'll supply those as well. It is the ideal way to nail Peres for good. All that's missing is a responsible body willing to investigate these charges. Book Briefs: Allow me to recommend two books sent my way. Gideon's Spies by Gordon Thomas - This Hebrew edition of this expose of the Mossad was overly trashed by Yediot Ahronot. That's a fine recommendation. In his first edition Thomas relied on two main sources; Ari Ben Menashe and David Kimche. Ben Menashe did more to break the Iran Contra scandal than anyone. Over time, we see that he embellished his role in the Mossad's hanky panky but much of his information has not been disproved. David Kimche was a mere Oxford student in 1968 when he flew to Israel to a ready made executive position in the Mossad. He was initially considered an infiltrator and he was. Within a decade he founded the Israeli branch of the Council On Foreign Relations, and he still heads it today, and he became the longterm office manager of the Foreign Ministry. In short, he was the CFR's mole in the Israeli government. By over-relying on these sources, Thomas's first edition was flawed. But in the past year he has come to see that Joel Bainerman's and my information tells a truer story and in the new Hebrew, English and Spanish editions, he quotes our work at length. Thomas is now doing more than any foreign author to expose the truth of the Rabin assassination and the deceitful peace process. He deserves more Hebrew readers. Gideon's Spies is published in Israel by Or-Am Publishing of Tel Aviv and is in most bookstores. For more information, contact the author at gordon@gordonthomas.ie In The Teeth Of The Banks (B'Meltaot Habankim) by the Documentary Collage - A recent French financial report lists Israel as one of the world's shadiest banking centers, a welcome home to black money. This communally written book exposes the inner corridors of this banking system in almost a light-hearted but very angry way. The result is an invaluable step by step guide to one of the planet's most corrupt banking communities with logical explanations of how they fleece us. In Hebrew Only. For copies call 02 5326806 Finally, my new book, The Last Days Of Israel is being prepared by the Zionist Book Club and should be out around August 20. If you want to be the first one on the block with a copy, write perkins@netvision.net.il Please visit http://www.webseers.com/rabin ------------------- Opinions presented in Jeff Rense E-News are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent those of Jeff Rense, Sightings, sightings.com or the newsletter editors. Past and present guests: to be showcased in "The Guest Corner", please email mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=Guest_Corner --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- "Information is the free right of the people. We must be vigilant and keep it so." - Day Williams --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- THE RULERS OF EVIL By Tupper Saussy Reader reviews: "My mind is reeling! Rulers of Evil puts the whole history of the world into perspective with its treatment of the Mark of Cain." -- "The first reading shook me up and it frightened me. It beat me down, but then it gently helped me back up and redirected my steps and focus..." http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index48.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * TOP STORIES * Just a few of last week's most intriguing! http://sightings.com * Strange "Top Hat" UFO Photo Captured By Chemtrail Photographer * Disappearing Aircraft - The Answer * Adenovirus Epidemic Strikes US Military Training Centers * Human Mad Cow Deaths In UK Now Rising 33% Per Year * Motorola, Others, Sued - Cell Phone/Cancer Link Claimed * Wipe On Pheromones And Attract Opposite Sex For Up To 12 Hours * FBI Debunks Spontaneous Human Combustion * Fires Continue To Ravage Western US * CA High Court Says Unknowing Owners Of Illegal Guns Face 3 Yrs In Prison * Bohemian Grove Photos Of Rituals -1906-1909 * Deadly West Nile Virus For Profit - Vaccine Award Announced * Another Rodent-Oriented 'Emerging Virus' Kills Three Californians * Another New Virus Found In Bird-Biting Mosquitoes * De Gaulle Consulted An Astrologer For 25 Years * Hitchhiker Accused Of Attacking, Sucking Blood Of Driver * Scientists Discover How Plants Talk To Each Other * Shays Shocker: Clinton Raped Broaddrick Twice * EU Says Germany, Spain, Italy May Have Mad Cow Disease * UPDATE 12' Tall Bigfoot Seen By Four Workers And Officer In Maryland * Giant Trap Set For Monster In Norway Lake * Child Abuse Scars Hormones For Life * Scientists Strengthen Prospects For Life On Mars - New Information * Chemical Weapon Workers Allege Nerve Gas Leaks At Oregon Facility * Byron Bay Chemtrails - Australians Are Doing Something About It! * Holy Smoke & Mirrors - The Vatican Conspiracy Read these stories and more at http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- The Immortal By J. J. Dewey Is John, the author of the Apocalypse, the Apostle, the Beloved, still walking the earth as a teacher of mysteries? This is a book about one man's encounter with a Master of Wisdom. http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index24.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS * 8-6-00 thru 8-10-00 (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can change due to late breaking stories, etc). SUN 8-6 Nick Begich: Cell Phones And Cancer MON 8-7 Patricia Doyle: West Nile Virus Spreading From South Africa - Jan Lamprecht TUE 8-8 Peter Davenport: NUFORC UFO Eyewitness Recordings WED 8-9 Carl Limbacher: www.newsmax.com Encore - Alex Jones: Bohemian Grove Secretly Videotaped THU 8-10 Lonnie Wolf - Death Of The Democrat Party? From Australia - Harry Mason: Chemtrails In Oz FRI 8-11 Brad Steiger: A Paranormal Evening Alex Jones: Videotaped Secret Bohemian Grove Rituals Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- The Indo-Sumerian Seals Deciphered By L.A. Waddell Subtitled: Discovering Sumerians of Indus Valley as Phoenicians, Barats, Goths & Famous Vedic Aryans, 3100-2300 B.C.; L.A. Waddell is incomparable in these subjects. http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index91.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * PROGRAM INFORMATION * Program Show Times Live Coast-To-Coast-now broadcast nationally over the Talk Radio Network a total of over 200 hours a month. Monday-Friday 7-10 pm Live 10-1 am Immediate Rebroadcast 1-3 am First 2 hours of prior night's show Saturday 9p-3 am Best Of Rense - 2 shows Sunday 8-11 pm Live Call in Line: 800 TRN 4123 Sightings Artwork/Digital Illustration & Webdesign http://www.anc.net/~neff/ Program Audio Tapes 888 456-4340 Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives http://www.sightings.com Advertising-Over 3 MILLION visitors to sightings.com each month Cost effective exposure for YOUR product or service http://www.sightings.com/adv.htm Sightings.com info/email center http://www.sightings.com/1.mail/infocenter.html Free Greeting Cards featuring the artwork of James Neff: http://www.immunotex.com/rense/cards/cards.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Share with your friends! Please feel free to forward this issue of the Jeff Rense Weekly E-News to any and all who are interested... but please forward in its entirety and do not modify it in any fashion without permission. Thank you! Past issues are archived at http://www.egroups.com ------------------------- To subscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-unsubscribe@egroups.com -------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News is independently produced by TGS in cooperation with Jeff Rense. The material and views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Jeff Rense, sightings.com, or the Jeff Rense - Sightings Radio Program, except for the *Jeff's Desk* segment. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:11:10 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:48:01 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Mortellaro >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:08:23 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Hart >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:04:35 -0500 >>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 >>>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dear Ann and all, and of course, the famous EBK, May I add a comment of my own to your eloquent last paragraph? Ann Mulvey wrote: >My point was and is, that allegations tossed out into public >should have a source attached to them - especially now. That's >common sense and the most responsible approach toward this >community. I shall add, "And it's about time." In fact, it may be passed the time. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:49:47 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:49:25 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! J D wrote: >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:06:45 -0700 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >>Subject: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>I'm afraid this won't be at all convincing in terms of >>persuading people that the very intricate CC's this summer were >>made by this team. Hi Jim, I managed to get into the Avebury Circle you mentioned, and well myself and friends were very impressed with the lay, very smooth and defined. Possibly one of the best this season. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth - Tonnies From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 19:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:53:19 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth - Tonnies >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 08:53:59 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >Subject: UFO Question Pulls Politics Back To Earth >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Source: Detroit Free Press, >http://www.freep.com/news/metro/des4_20000804.htm >Stig <snip> I just read what I thought was an impossibility: a "mainstream" editorial about UFOs that's sole purpose isn't to invite laughter. ===== Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) 239 E. Sea Independence, MO 64050 816-833-5910 Life on Mars: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html Reviews: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/bookreviews.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:22:35 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:58:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) >From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter/status report request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Others are forwarding me notes sent between you and Ann, and I >do not appreciate some of the comments made behind my back. >People are sending me everything that is being said, okay? Are you for real? You have the nerve to try to get pompous about honest communications?? This is a public email list with archives readily available for anybody to read. _Nothing_ has been said behind your back by me. It's on the record. Go read it! Meanwhile, if you can come up with some insults that you think have been behind your back, I'd be more than willing to publically post them on behalf of those 140 people who trusted you. Grow up and get a grip on the severity of your own actions. Don't waste your time or ours whining about emails, babysitting, or what's being said about you. I can _honestly_ tell you it's not good John. Now pick up that ego and get back to work. Over one hundred families are waiting to hear your personal interpretation of professional ethics and it's effect on their lives. Get pompous about that. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:34:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:00:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium - Maccabee >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:10:11 -0500 >From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net> >Subject: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Comprehensive Report On The MUFON July 2000 Symposium >Copyright 2000, by Bob Soetebier >The July 14-16, 2000, MUFON (www.mufon.com or >www.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/MUFON/index.html) Symposium was held at >the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in St. >Louis County, Missouri. As we had never before attended one of >the annual MUFON symposiums, my wife, Dawn, and I bit the bullet >and swallowed the symposium�s admission co$t. (We�ve obviously >been spoiled by Lou Farish�s excellent, and bargain priced, >Ozark UFO Conference which is held annually in April at the >Best Western Inn of the Ozarks in Eureka Springs, Arkansas!) <snip> >Beginning the Saturday evening symposium session was book >author, and Maryland MUFON (www.mufon.com/maryland.html) State >Director, Dr. Bruce S. Maccabee. In addition to his being an >optical physicist, and a consultant for the U.S. Navy, Maccabee >has authored such books as, UFOs Are Real: Here�s The Proof, >and, The UFO-FBI Connection. He did a very good job of >debunking the debunkers. He started off by exposing Dr. Robert >L. Park, author of the recent book, Voodoo Science: The Road f>rom Foolishness to Fraud. Maccabee�s enumeration of Park�s >numerous misrepresentations of the Roswell case alone made it >crystal clear that it is Dr. Park himself who is both the fool >and fraud! (Maccabee�s detailed comments about Park�s Voodoo >Science and be found at: >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m27-014.shtml I thank Beverly for mentioning my remarks about voodoo science at th symposium. However, the central theme of my speech was the failure of ufo skeptics to realize when a mundane explanation is no good! Title of the paper is Prosaic Explanations: the Failure of UFO Skeptisism. This is available in th MUFON Symp proceedings and at brumac.8k.com. Ufology needs skeptics... but skeptics who can realize when a proposed explanation is no good.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - McCoy From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:33:52 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:03:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! - McCoy >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 07:46:54 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:40:31 +0100 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>Subject: Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Advance Warning - Crop Circle Imminent! >>James Easton. >>E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk >>www.ufoworld.co.uk ><snip> >Dear James: >Should you not at least warn the poor farmer? Yes, but then you wouldn't have the Jollies of destroying a crop to prove a point, justified or not. May the farmer have many Border Collies - many (more than two) Border Collies, and a good aim with the old .12 ga. (rock salt and bacon rind we don't want to acutally kill any one,) . 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.Com - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:21:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:06:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.Com - Felder >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:32:20 -0700 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >Subject: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Anyway, what was the name of >the Fellow who supposedly invented "Warp Drive"? in the "Treck " >Saga Wasn't it Cochrane? Zephram Cochran was the guy's name in Star Trek Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:25:41 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 08:52:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) >From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter/status report request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca Mr. Carpenter, You wrote: >Others are forwarding me notes sent between you and Ann, and I >do not appreciate some of the comments made behind my back. >People are sending me everything that is being said, okay? Preposterous! If Ann and John Velez are sending notes to each other, how the hell can other "people" send you everything that's being said? You wrote: >A real problem I am having with a number of cases is that many >of the females have married, divorced, or remarried -- and the >name changes are giving me fits along with address changes. If >Cathy Brown becomes Cathy ?? and moves to ??, how do I begin to >find her? I never collected Social Security numbers on anybody. >Again, I do not have any problem with notifying people with an >explanation regarding this project for Bigelow's esteemed >Science Board. Bigelow's staff can do nothing to help because >they do not have any identifying data to begin with. <sigh> Get off your butt, stop complaining, stop waffling and just do it, for God's sake. Any first year journalism student could track those people down in a second. My guess is you don't want to. Once you do, people over and above the clients involved will find out exactly how "professional" an MSW/LCSW you really are. You'd rather stick your head in the sand and pray this mess passes you by. News Flash! It isn't going to go away. He with head in sand makes a good target. You wrote: >What would also help is if someone could provide me a list of >who already knows about this so I do not have to spend time >trying to locate them. Leah Haley is the only person who has >contacted me in three years! I am presently writing a statement >of explanation for the MUFON Journal so that the entire >membership of MUFON worldwide can judge for themselves. By the >way, none of my cases were ever logged as MUFON cases. Oh, puh-lease! I don't give a damn what you're writing or if your cases were never logged in as MUFON cases. What I do give a damn about is the fact you sold files and violated the trust and faith of the individuals in those files! It is the responsibility of no one else other than _you_ to notify those individuals. You wrote: >Please be patient. Patience went out the window a long time ago, Mr. Carpenter, along with trust. The longer you waffle, the longer you wait, the worse off you'll be. You wrote: <snip> >... new rumor that I never obtained releases for >my interviews that I obtained in Australia for my videotape on >Australian encounters. I have these signed consent forms in my >office and can dig them up for proof. JC Funny how you can find things when you really want to. - Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:14:14 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 08:56:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hart >>Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) >>From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>JC: There is some new rumor that I never obtained releases for >>my interviews that I obtained in Australia for my videotape on >>Australian encounters. I have these signed consent forms in my >>office and can dig them up for proof. JC John Carpenter, Yes, please dig these consent forms out of your files and make three scans of them available in low-res .jpg form so they can be sent to the researchers in question for verification. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:31:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:11:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) >From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter/status report request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hello Mr. Carpenter, >>It has been a week since your posting where you acknowledged >>that notification of the witnesses/abductees involved in this >>sale of reports and personal files was necessary. We'd all just >>like to know what progress (if any) has been made in terms of >>actually notifying them. (snip for brevity) >>Sincerely, >>John Velez, Webmaster, A.I.C. John Carpenter responded: >Dear John, >Please understand that I only get time to get to my e-mail about >twice a week with my long work hours and watching the kids while >my wife works. I am not ignoring anyone or dragging my feet. If waiting three + years to notify your own clients that you sold their files/reports/personal confidences, is not 'foot-dragging' then please redefine the term for me. If for no other reason than 'damage control' you should set this business straight by doing what you should have done _before_ selling those folks reports without consulting them. This is not simply going to 'go away' Mr. Carpenter. I'm an abductee. What is done to another is done to me. I'm in this to make sure that this kind of violation of trust and confidence is not repeated again anytime soon. Want it all to go away? Do the right thing, and do it yesterday. >Others are forwarding me notes sent between you and Ann, and I >do not appreciate some of the comments made behind my back. >People are sending me everything that is being said, okay? They must be notes that 'someone else' is composing and sending to you because: a. Any notes that I have sent to Ann were sent to her alone, and... b. none of those have been posted for public consumption anywhere. So I don't know how anyone could have sent you copies of any private correspondences between Ann and myself. c. Although you may think that all we do is spend tortured nights thinking and talking about you, you and your 'ego' are grossly mistaken. d. The only time _I did say_ something that you might construe as derogatory (unless you happen to be employed as a salesperson in the motor trade) is the post where I described your response to me as the kind of thing I'm used to hearing from "politicians" or "used car salesman". But I said that in a public posting not privately to Ann. I have absolutely no idea what comments made behind your back between myself and Ann Mulvey you are referring to simply because there were none. e. (And most important of all) Anything that I have had to say to you (or to anyone else) has been said to your face and not behind your back. Period. It is _all_ a matter of very public record at the UFO UpDates Archive. To tell you the truth, you should be offended at some of the things I have said publicly to you rather than any of the benign comments I may have passed to Ann. I know that I wouldn't enjoy being compared to a "used car salesman". :) >A real problem I am having with a number of cases is that many >of the females have married, divorced, or remarried -- and the >name changes are giving me fits along with address changes. If >Cathy Brown becomes Cathy ?? and moves to ??, how do I begin to >find her? I'll repeat myself as you obviously didn't retain anything I said in my original. In fact I'll just quote myself wholesale! I wrote in my last posting to you: "Several list members have volunteered information that will help you in tracking what few of the witnesses may have relocated since 1997. If you require any further assistance, feel free to let us know via this List (UFO UpDates) and I'm sure that many will be glad to pitch in and help with the notification process in any that we can." Note my choice of wording John: "what _few_ of the witnesses may have relocated." You're a therapist, I'm sure you've had clients "throw you a bone" rather than deal openly with or face squarely, an issue that they are very uncomfortable about/with. That 'excuse' (bone that you throw out) about how many of the 140 individuals may have married or moved in the last three years is just not going to go over or buy you any time. Again, it's been three+ years and you've had ample opportunity to do the right thing by your own clients. At any time you could have shown them the respect and consideration they deserved by notifying/asking them if it was okay with them if you sold their reports. (after providing them with _written_ guarantees that their files would be properly redacted of any identifying information.) Without even knowing them all I can tell you that the number of abductees that would have consented to such a thing would have been countable on a hand that already has several digits missing. >Again, I do not have any problem with notifying people with an >explanation regarding this project for Bigelow's esteemed >Science Board. Bigelow's staff can do nothing to help because >they do not have any identifying data to begin with. Then for God's sake simply _do it_ yourself. If you want to read "legitimate" private correspondences of mine (not the made up crap you are being fed) I will be most happy to post a number of e-mails I have received from your peers - therapists, social workers, and psychologists - expressing their complete outrage at your selling of client files and how it was done without the notification or consent of your clients. But then you must have known that this would blow up in your face if people ever found out or you would have told them to begin with. Correct? Some of your peers are watching with great interest Mr. Carpenter. What you refer to as "foot dragging" on this issue is coming from you, and is hurting only you. Literally thousands worldwide eventually get to read these exchanges. How many of 'em do you suspect are buying your "I can't reach many of them because so many have married and moved" excuse? You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time! >What would also help is if someone could provide me a list of >who already knows about this so I do not have to spend time >trying to locate them. John if that wasn't such a very sad comment coming from you, I'd be on the floor laughing my ass off. What are you worried about here; how many you have to notify, or how many already know? If you don't think that folks are aware that; the chances of someone initiating legal action against you increases geometrically with each person who becomes informed... then you have been missing some of the 'niceties' of this conversation. People are paying very close attention to each and every response you make to this situation. On a personal note, and while I have your attention; would you please take the time to acknowledge and answer the question I put to you in my original post? Question: What kind of assurances are you prepared to provide the other 139 clients whose files you sold, that their files were _all_ properly sanitized _before_ the sale? Or is this another situation where we are all supposed to be satisfied with your 'word' on it? >Leah Haley is the only person who has contacted me in three >years! I'm certain that reading her publicly posted comments and remarks regarding how betrayed she feels about you and your actions couldn't have made you feel very good about yourself both as a therapist or a human being. It also kind of explains why you want to know "how many of the others already know." ;) >I am presently writing a statement >of explanation for the MUFON Journal so that the entire >membership of MUFON worldwide can judge for themselves. I think you owe an answer to all witnesses/abductees, and not just keeping it "internal" to MUFON members. >By the way, none of my cases were ever logged as MUFON cases. Again, the only way to substantiate that would be to conduct a case by case comparison between the files that were sold and those contained in the databank. Your word for it, considering the circumstances, just isn't good enough. That's for MUFON and the abductees involved to investigate. >Please be patient. Been three years. Again all I have been asking is; how much longer? >PS: There is some new rumor that I never obtained releases for >my interviews that I obtained in Australia for my videotape on >Australian encounters. I have these signed consent forms in my >office and can dig them up for proof. JC Gee John, you seem to be a virtual 'bundle' of these infractions against people's privacy and right to know. Some of the folks that appear in that video are saying that they _never_ signed any releases for video presentations. Here's hoping for a _swift_ resolution (in favor of the abductees) to this gross violation of their confidence in you. Get on the stick. The excuses and inaction on your part are really wearing thin. John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Pittman From: Chris Pittman <Soccorro64@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:51:50 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:13:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America - Pittman >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:37:02 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: First UFO Sighting in North America >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:02:00 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Chris Pittman <Soccorro64@aol.com> >>Subject: First UFO Sighting in North America >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>"A Great Light in the Night": >>The first UFO sighting in North America >>Copyright 2000 Christopher W. Pittman ><snip> >Dear Chris: >I suppose it is too late to ask, perhaps hundreds of >years too >late. Is there any chance of firming up the date: >One night in March of 1638 or 1639" >If I average out the two alternatives, I wind up with something >like September 1638, and that will never do. >Best wishes >- Larry Hatch >PS: I suppose a precise time of day, night actually, >is out of >the question. Darn good story regardless. Hello Larry, I'm afraid that the exactdate for that report can't be pinned down. The original source is vague and somewhat ambiguous, with no more details than what I reported in the article. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Chris Pittman
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 05:08:30 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:17:37 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 18:23:11 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hello Mr. Carpenter, >>It has been a week since your posting where you acknowledged >>that notification of the witnesses/abductees involved in this >>sale of reports and personal files was necessary. We'd all just >>like to know what progress (if any) has been made in terms of >>actually notifying them. ><snip> >>Please, do not procrastinate any longer over this issue. This >>needs to be done. If you are a man of true integrity and ethics >>none of this should be a problem. >>Could you please take the time to provide us with a progress >>report regarding the notification of the clients whose files you >>sold? >>Sincerely, >>John Velez, Webmaster, A.I.C. Katherine writes: >Dear John, >Given the reluctance of all the principals involved to treat >this issue with the gravity it deserves, Ah see, I was wrong. Someone else other than myself has noticed it too! <LOL> The apathy over this issue on all sides has been one of the more disheartening, and for me, confusing occurances. (Or,'non-occurances' if you will.) Very few seem to be 'vocal' about their concern for the clients/abductees at any rate. >I think it's unlikely Mr. Carpenter plans - or ever planned - >on notifying the individuals involved in this scandal. No Katherine he didn't. The fact that it has taken three years and this very public exposure of the transaction to even get him to acknowledge the need for client notification speaks volumes. The only reason that makes any kind of sense in terms of why he _chose_ not to notify his clients is; because he _knew_ that they (and the public) would want to lynch him for such a gross violation of his clients' trust/confidence. I don't for a moment buy into any of his 'Oh, it was ok, it was all for science" drek. The man raked in $14,000 US for that little "bundle" of abductee files. Or maybe he just didn't want to share any moola-boola with the folks who provided him with the means to make the money in the first place. Any LCSW would have passed on even considering it on purely ethical and moral grounds. The fact that it resulted in a consumated deal tells you what Mr. Carpenter considers as acceptable conduct/behavior in his role as a social worker and confidant to many witnesses/abductees. >It is simply outrageous that a LCSW would ever behave in such a >manner. Perhaps it's time Mr. Carpenter find a new profession. >His actions are hardly the actions of a professional LCSW. You are not alone in those sentiments/opinions Katherine. Many are considering filing formal complaints with the appropriate licensing/certification authorities in the State in which his credentials originate. I have the distinct impression that Mr. Carpenter is unaware of the gravity of the situation he finds himself in. Maybe when the offers to lecture etc. begin to peter out he'll begin to get the message. You know, when it finally hits him in the pocket book. He doesn't seem to be responding to an appeal based purely on ethical and moral considerations. Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: American UFO Researchers In Darwin Oz From: John W Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 06:57:51 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:21:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: American UFO Researchers In Darwin Oz Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH Phenomena Research Australia EBK & Researchers, American UFO Researchers In Darwin Oz. Beyond Boundaries Society. Joyce Murphy, Janette Culp and Mia Adams. "Four American researchers have arrived in the Northern Territory to investigate recent reports of unidentified flying objects over Darwin and Alice Springs. They said recent reports of orange lights flying in formation over Nightcliff were similar to other reports from around the world. And they believe the US Government is working with "non-humans" at the Pine Gap joint military installation. The UFO researchers, part of America's Beyond Boundaries Society, were contacted by Australia's UFO Network after two separate sightings of orange glowing lights flying is arrow formation over Nightcliff last month. The incidents were reported in the Northern Territory News. Other residents have phoned to support the claims. Beyond Boundaries president Joyce Murphy said the group was interested in these UFO sightings because of similar reports all over the world. She said so many reports from so many different people and locations gave credibility to the theory of extraterrestrial life forms. Ms Murphy said: "The: commonalities in the stories from many people, not necessarily believers, from all over the world, must mean something." Researcher Mia Adams said she believed the Americans were "working with non-humans" at Pine Gap. She said the group believed the US Government was carrying out "reverse engineering experiments as a result of crash retrieval" at the telecommunications spy base. The group believes there are people on the inside of Pine Gap desperate to blow the whistle on the operation. Ms Adams said the group was also concerned about the image of UFO hunters. She said: "We want to rid ourselves of the image of being nutters. "But we realise we have got to have proof and that's what we're about.The four researchers have backgrounds in maths, physics and clinical and forensic psychology."" *** STORY: http://members.xoom.com/praufo/pranews/JoyceMurphy20.htm Regards, John W Auchettl - Director PRA Research DR Ron Barnett - Deputy Director THANKS TO: � Northern Territory News Tue June 27, 2000, p1. TEXT: Suellen Hinde IMAGE: � Dani Gawlik WEB: http://www.praufo.web.com * Still in development PRA LINKS: http://hometown.aol.com/praufo/pra4/pralinks.htm Phenomena Research Australia [PRA] P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170 Australian & Asia UFO 1961-2000 - 39 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Pennsylvania UFO Information Week Display - Aug 12, From: Stan Gordon <paufo@westol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:47:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:12:07 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Pennsylvania UFO Information Week Display - Aug 12, A National UFO Information Week Display will be held on August 12th at the Westmoreland Mall, Route 30 east of Greensburg, Pennsylvania. The event is being organized by UFO researcher Stan Gordon of Greensburg. Two other well known UFO researchers, Tom Carey, and Scott Corrales, will also attend. The exhibit will feature UFO photographs, government documents, books and magazines, ongoing video, and interesting artifacts that reportedly were left behind after UFO sightings in Pennsylvania. There will also be material displayed regarding the reported 1947 Roswell, New Mexico and December 9, 1965 Kecksburg, PA UFO crash events. While the event will focus on the UFO phenomena, there will be material related to Bigfoot sightings and other strange events which have also been reported in Pennsylvania. The display which is free to the public, will be ongoing all day from 10 A.M. until 9:30 P.M. For more information call 724-838-7768 or E-mail: paufo@westol.com Stan Gordon
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Crop Circle Hoaxing From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 17:44:26 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:21:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Crop Circle Hoaxing Hi all Why has a group of hoaxers decided that now is the time to announce that they are going to create a design. After another summer in the fields of Wiltshire I find it quite remarkable that we are still entertaining the hoax theory. Circles with rings are very straightforward creations. The formation Avebury Trueloe in Wiltshire is in a different class. If any UFO UpDates subscribers would like to see some of this year's designs please check out my website. easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~mark.haywood/Cosmic Alternatively check out the Crop Circle Connector www.cropcircleconnector.com Mark Haywood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Latinesque Puzzle From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:17:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:27:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Latinesque Puzzle >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:49:54 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> Dr. Gesundt's puzzle: Lucit bene derdego hunnert busis enero honomo demis trux. is properly translated thusly: Lookit, Benny, there they go! A hundred buses in a row! No, Mo, them is trucks. (And you forgot the last line... "Sum mit orsis sum mit dux." Some with horses, some with ducks. (Thank 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:33:22 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:31:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... - Bourdais >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 01:45:22 +0200 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> >Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:12:24 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:09:12 -0400 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) >>>>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >>>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:27:55 -0400 >>>>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> >>>>>Subject: Re: Corso, SDI, MJ-12 And All That... >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>><snip> >>>>The sad story of engineer Paul Bennewitz also brings us some >>>>interesting informations on alleged personnel involved in these >>>>operations. To begin with, we know that, when he reported to >>>>Kirtland that he had recorded strange radio signals around >>>>Manzano, which he attributed to ufos, he was received by several >>>>officers, on 10 November 1980, according to Bruce Baccabee, in >>>>his report on the UFO landings near Kirtland (Fufor, 1985):> <snip> >>However, according to Moore, the harrassment of Bennewitz by >>Afosi began not long after that meeting. Moore thought that >>Bennewitz had been fed disinformation because of his recordings. >>So, it is relevant to connect these events, and we are again in >>the middle of the question of disinformation. >Gildas, >Thanks for posting the above. I agree with you. >Bruce Maccabee, proud contest winning songwriter, thanks for >posting those sighting and landing reports at Manzano. >I have not dug them out of my files in many a year. But I sure >remember my excitement at that time. I followed this from >California in PI (pre-internet time). Poor Paul Bennewitz. He >carried his great evidence down the hill to the lions' den of >the AFOSI. They pounced on him like he walked in with a steak. >They sure did a number on him. At the time I had no idea the >feds started to twist his mind. His Project Beta report seemed >rather deranged. What exactly did the Feds do to him besides >giving him disinformation? >In 1989 I was as shocked as everyone when Bill Moore made his >confession of his sins of working for AFOSI. I remember him >talking about being part of one of their missions to sneak into >Bennewitz's house while he was out and rearrange all the >furniture. When Paul would get home he would think he was going >crazy. They brought Paul to breakdown. I'd like to know what >other kinds of dirty tricks were played. Moore, a researcher I >believed in, had a few really good chats with. How he let the >lions use him because he foolishly thought if he did what they >wanted him to do he could learn who were at higher levels in the >military intelligence UFO hive. Moore burned his credibility at >the stake. >And who was that who taught Bennewitz about the human pickle >vats in the alien underground pickle plant beneath Dulce Canyon? >Was that Christa Tilton? Where is my Ginko? Where's my memory >going? What was the origin of that fable? Thank you very much for your comments. I have tried to gather some information on these events, and I found it quite dificult. Very little has been published, apparently. What I found is: In 1980, Bennewitz was informed by APRO of the Judy Dotaty abduction/animal mutilation case, studied in 1978 and 1980 by Dr Sprinkle and Linda Howe. But Doraty did not describe an underground base. The first abduction witness who mentioned that would be a young woman in Cimarron, NM, on May 5, 1980. A hypnosis session was made by Sprinkle, with the presence of Bennewitz, as soon as May 11. Linda Howe presents the case and the hypnosis transcript in her book An Alien Harvest, without giving her name. The question of human body parts in vats is not so clear, it seems to me, in the text. >And Bennewitz's descriptions of what he would see when he flew >his plane over Dulce Canyon, a regular alien base. I was sure >itching to get out there and look for myself. A lot of people >did and nothing was found - strange. How did New Mexico State >policeman Gabe Valdez come into the picture? At the time his >reports and interviews excited me. He also saw amazing alien >ships and structures in the canyon. Was he on the level? Was he >psycho? Did the AFOSI set him up with a story to confirm the >disinformation they fed Bennewitz? Acording to Jim McCampbell, who interviewed Bennewitz, and whose notes were published by Thomas Adams in 1984 (Stigmata) and by William Steinman in 1986 (UFO Crash at Aztec), Bennewitz said he had been told about Dulce, and had visited the Dulce area, in helicopter, on the invitation of... people of Kirtland! He gave the names of major Edwards and Colonel Carpenter, and mentioned an agent of AFOSI (Doty?). However, in the transcript of the hypnosis session, that woman seemed to remember seeing an area between La Cruces and Roswell. Did they aim at confusing the matter and hide that location? >As you can see, I still have many questions from that case. And >the perennial MJ12 dilemma keeps the fires burning in me that >would like to know the full story of the Doty gang. Of course, I >always wanted to see Bennewitz's original video and hear his >alleged alien communications. If only he had thought to contact >a UFO organiztion before being a good citizen and reporting it >to AFOSI. I wonder how he feels about what was done to him. >Oh, and one more question. What was Bennewitz's Thunder >Scientific Company accomplishing at that time. Did he have >government contracts? If so, what were they? It seems that he was a good engineer, that his company worked well and had government contracts for electronic equipment. Yes, there are many unanswered questions in that story! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:32:11 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:53:53 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com - Mortellaro >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:32:20 -0700 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >Subject: Re: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello, all, mysel, >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:23:01 -0700 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >>Subject: Epsilon Erandi & Space.com >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Hello all, >>I have a newsletter from Space.com in which was a very short >>blurb about a planet orbiting Epsilon Erandi. Curiously the home >>star of Vulcan - the home planet of the erstwhile Mr. Spock. >>Does anyone have a site to go to? I have tried NASA but have >>been to busy to peruse it further. >>Thanks, "Live long and Prosper" also! Dear GT, Mr. Myself, Those Who Twist and EBK, May I correct your assignations regarding certain "discoveries" my good friend? Thank you. >Well, I found it on the BBC's website-no referece to Vulcans of >course, as the Space.com website reffered to in their >newsletter. but what we may have here is a Hubble target. and it >is in the right place for a large gas giant type planet. As a >_Comet Sweeper_ gee, and I thought those were rare as in "Rare >Earth". I have been privileged by being able to travel throughout our solar system and, on occasion, in certain portions of this galaxy, by my beloved customers who consume mass quantities of my elixers. I have seen, the promised land masses. "Comet Sweepers" are indeed, not rare. I have seen many out there in the void. See? You live and if you make good booz, you learn! >Oh, one more thing: I'm not a real devotee of "Star Treck" at >least I delete anything that isn't important to the basic story, >okay I, don't go to the conventions, but I can tell the >difference between Patrick Stewart and Bill Shatner: you see >Shatner's the one with the wig, Stewart knows the proper >coffure' for a Starship Captian. Anyway, what was the name of >the Fellow who supposedly invented "Warp Drive"? in the "Treck " >Saga Wasn't it Cochrane? OK, first off, I agree with you on the proper coiffer a starship capin should sport, as I am among those who are into growing large amounts of skin where there used to be large amounts of hair. And I don't wear a wig. And I stopped dying the head and beard. I tried that for years and one time, I realized that head and beard were getting so white and so thin, that I wound up staining the skin under the sparse hair. I was black under my beard and over it. And I was white all over the rest a' me. When a good friend from Kansas arrived and saw me for the first time since we were abducted together on a hunting trip (the one where he saw a family of deer and I saw a family of bunny rabbits - honest), and he started guffawing loud enough to scare the crappola out of anyone within a mile, I stopped dying them hairs... what's left of 'em. >The guy who found this panet's orbit was named Dr. William >Cochran just an interesting, fascinating, coincidence, if you >believe in coincience. >GT McCoy Uh, sorry to interject, GT. But that would be Gesundt. He has become very much like the Russians. He inwented everything. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Latinesque Puzzle - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:39:04 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:55:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Latinesque Puzzle - Mortellaro >Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:17:19 -0400 >From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com> >Subject: Latinesque Puzzle >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:49:54 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith >>To: updates@sympatico.ca ><snip> >Dr. Gesundt's puzzle: >Lucit bene derdego >hunnert busis enero >honomo demis trux. >is properly translated thusly: >Lookit, Benny, there they go! >A hundred buses in a row! >No, Mo, them is trucks. >(And you forgot the last line... >"Sum mit orsis sum mit dux." >Some with horses, some with ducks. >(Thank you...) Holy Cow! I thought _no-one_ would ever get that one. Well, I bow wow to your erudition. I lay down my port and my folio in honor of your superior knowledge of silly jokes. I shall send you a case of magnum Gripple N' Cream as a gift. Drink it in good health. Just make certain you are sitting or lying down and it's not a long way to the floor. And whilst there, you may sing the praises of the Ducks and Horses with this little ditty... No, no, no I don't drink it no more I'm tired of wakin up on the floor don't make me please it only makes me sneeze And then it makes it hard to find the door. I do believe that one must chant, "Cha, Cha, Cha" at the end of the last line. Perhaps you can elucidate. Impressed, new and improved, The Gripple Meister
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:43:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:57:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium >Date: 04 Aug 00 13:10:11-0500 >From: btufo@netins.net <Beverly Trout> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: UFO UpDates: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium >Comprehensive Report on the MUFON July 2000 Symposium >Copyright 2000, by Bob Soetebier My apologies to Bob Soetebier and the list. Bob's title was mis-stated when I forwarded it on to the List. The correct title is the following: 'A Non-Comprehensive Report on the MUFON July 2000 Symposium' Thanks Bev
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 6 UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:29:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 16:06:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones Good afternoon to all the list folk, and most especially Mr Jerome Clark. A short while ago the Marmaduke of Mendoza asked a fairly simple question of Mr Jerome Clark, (no E). >Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 21:14:30 -0400 >From: The Duke of Mendoza, Peter Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >The question, still unanswered, was why Jerome made no mention >of David Gotlib in his Encyclopaedia (among whose lauders I count >myself, as Jerome should well know because I wrote and told him >what a fine achievement I thought it, on receipt of the first >edition). Having missed a few of the finer points of diplomacy I asked; >Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:22:25 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Can anyone tell me if Jerome Clarke actually answered Peter >'God's Gift To Satire' Brookesmith's question about the lack of >an entry for Gotlib? To which the plenipotentiary of UK Ufology Peter replied; >Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 19:40:57 -0400 >From: Peter The Duke of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Yes, I can, and the answer is No. Well being that I have never learnt subtlety, and I have oodles of perseverance, so I ask again Mr Jerome Clark; Why was there not an entry in your magnum opus of "The UFO Encyclopaedia" for a certain Dr Gotlib? -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 18:07:16 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:18:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Hubbell >Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 05:08:30 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Velez >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi John, >Someone else other than myself has noticed it too! <LOL> >The apathy over this issue on all sides has been one of >the more disheartening, and for me, confusing occurances. Yes. Strangely quiet which only serves to sharpen my nose for news even more. I can only speculate here but it seems to me that this goes far deeper than anyone realizes. That surprises me since I'm not one to see conspiracies lurking in every dark corner. The silence, however, speaks volumes. Regards, Katherine
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 18:10:53 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:20:40 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Mulvey >Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:31:14 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:39:07 -0400 (EDT) >>From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:40:55 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter/status report request >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >I have absolutely no idea what comments made behind your >back between myself and Ann Mulvey you are referring to >simply because there were none. With all that's happening around him, John Carpenter is concerned about our private correspondence? He should have aimed that greasy curveball at two less outspoken people. Not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'd laugh if it weren't associated with such a disgusting state of affairs. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:03:48 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:23:09 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 04:04:25 -0500 >From: AGETI_Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc <9a4ag@clarc.org> >Subject: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Dear List Members, >Source: CNN.com Transcripts >http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html >Saturday Morning News >Bush-Cheney Take Campaign on the Road; Gore Takes a Vacation <snip> >KARL: Cheney played low key loyalist. Along the way, someone >thought Cheney's impressive resume would help Bush tell the >truth about UFOs. >UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: Half the public believes that they are >real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on? >GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Sure, I >will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a >great one. While some are interpreting this transcript as "Bush/Cheny going to blow the lid off the UFO coverup" I saw this differently. We have citizens asking or yelling questions to politicians during a political year. The unidentified citizen in essence asks Bush 'would you tells us what the hell is going on, are UFOS real or not?" Naturally Bush is not going to say "hell no I am not going to tell you" or "I don't know...", or "After I am elected, I will check into this..." What Bush says (to put a positive spin on 100s of questions he gets asked, then turns the spotlight to his new VP) is "Sure.." Then turns the spotlight to his running mate and VP cheny by saying "This man knows... he was Secretary of Defense and a great one." If somebody would have asked Bush if he was going to tell us what was going on with previous US nuclear accidents (Broken Arrows) involving planes etc, the response would have been the same "Sure", then point to cheny and say "This many knows... he was former SecDef." Point being is that people are putting to much into this comment. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:23:25 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:25:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files - Gates >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:20:18 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:30:33 -0700 (PDT) >>>From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com> >>>Subject: Re: Carpenter/Bigelow/Abductees' Files >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Has anyone ever speculated if Bigelow/NIDS is a CIA front (or >>>other gov't agency)? What better person to use as a front, >>>since he is so wealthy, no one would suspect it. >>--- >>>Roger Prokic >>>Denver, Colorado USA >Bigelow has several top-level intelligence people as employees >at NIDS. Not just one or two but a handful. I prefer to look at >things using probabilities. What is the probability that they >are more than hobbyists? >Gary Hart This discussion brings to mind the story how the CIA approached Howard Hughes to be a front for raising the sunken Russian sub. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Open Letter To John Carpenter From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:57:04 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:27:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Open Letter To John Carpenter According to Andy Warhol, everyone is entitled to the traditional fifteen minutes of fame. Time's up! In fact, some of you may be on overtime if the answers to my questions below are "yes." John Carpenter, I ask you a question which I am certain you must answer yet again. You may wish to consider using caps (capital letters) this time. I would further request that you say that you are quite certain and can prove (if it came to that) that the records you sent to NIDS in return for a fee, were indeed - sanitized ... that no names, places or other information given, could possibly lead to the identity of those those whose records you sent. If you can say that, then all the demanding I've read on UpDates is (and someone correct me if I am wrong - I just don't see it) ... all that demanding is useless and irrelevant. Because, in my opinion, it is no longer necessary to inform those whose names and records were sent to NIDS since there were no names sent. Now, if on the contrary, the files you did send were not sanitized, not a figment of your divorce proceedings and could prove injurious to said abductees, then you must be as liable as NIDS and Bigelow for such alleged bad judgment and illegal behavior. Not to mention imoral actions. In that case, you deserve everything those three or four can serve. Which by the way, is an interesting number. I am under the impression that there are thousands of listers on UpDates. And only a few post on this issue, finding it to be worth the continued harassment for action on your part. You could put an end to this by the simple expediency of a truthful reply. If I were you, I would make damned sure that you came across with the truth. Because I for one, am getting sick of reading so many posts by those focused few. Repetition is the best thing someone can do when advertising a product. But it gets a little annoying when nothing is revealed, when nothing and no one is served by the continued repetition. So I ask you to tell us the answer to the question and whether you can prove such. Cue the heavenly music, John. Do it for those of us who, like me, do not like being harassed. Unless of course, we deserve it. With all due respect, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 22:00:29 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:30:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video - Gates >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:04:35 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:00:45 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter's Australian Video >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>If you are indeed making this a legal case, I strongly suggest >>that you seek your attorney's advice before posting any more >>charges against Carpenter. If your attorney gave you the high >>sign to do that - it's time for another attorney. This kind of >>behavior does nothing to help abductees, ufology, MUFON or >>anybody else. >Ann, >The post was from a colleague and posted as received. If you >don't like it, don't read it. They are making observations based >on their experience. I know who it is and respect their wishes >in one case and removed ID where I had not gotten specific >permission to include it in the other case. The form was >warranted here. Naturally we should 'respect' all abductee claims to privacy, _But_ when we get an email where people are just dying to know who the person was who sent it, we are to instantly not respect privacy any more and disclose the name. Sounds like a double standard. >You may not like anonymity. Many others I talk to see it has a >purpose at times. They would rather hear the message than not if >from a reliable source. Ann, I can appreciate your feelings, >however, the message was perhaps meant for those others >listening, reading. >>>Lastly, I called State Committee of Social Workers at >>>573-751-0885 and inquired about Mr. Carpenter. Not _one_ >>>complaint has been filed against him. I sure don't understand >>>that given what you've told us about the people that you've >>>spoken to about their issues with the man. >Perhaps you should better understand how much work it has been >and continues to be to put the evidence together. We are >strengthen- ing our case. It will take one or more months. You >take a case to the board only when it is ready, finished, >complete. You present a complete case so their need for further >investigation is minimal. This is very true of State govt. If they need to conduct some kind of exaustive investigation, they will likely do nothing unless it is a leaking chemical plant which could cause problems with thousands of people. Bottom line is make the case as all encompassing as possible, with all evidence present, then give it to govt officials. >140 people is a very large number of people to even try to >contact. Please leave this to those who are more informed about >it and gracious accept that it is being worked on. >>>This is like loud screeching background noise to the real issue >>>of getting those 120 people notified. We _know_ they don't know >>>their files were sold and need to learn that truth! As I have observed before, the issue has been around for at least three years, perhaps 4... what's another couple of months. Apparently MUFON has known about it for quite awhile and has chosen to do nothing thus far. >Then talk to JC, NIDS or MUFON and make them do something. John >never agreed to do anything in his last message, which is >typical. Get MUFON to make a public statement, for instance. The >same with NIDS. Go after the people who have all the names. Alas, if Ann attempts to get a public statement out of MUFON, I suspect she will meet the stone wall of silence. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Abductee Files And MUFON From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 22:10:18 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:02:23 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Abductee Files And MUFON >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:10:11 -0500 >From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net> >Subject: Report on MUFON 2000 Symposium >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Comprehensive Report On The MUFON July 2000 Symposium >Copyright 2000, by Bob Soetebier <snip> >After more praise for Andrus, Schuessler moved on to publicly >laud Las Vegas-based billionaire real estate magnate Robert T. >Bigelow’s, National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS). >Schuessler said he hoped to promote “sharing” info/efforts with >NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition >with NIDS and other UFO organizations. (From a few comments I >heard from other MUFONites, apparently not all share >Schuessler’s enthusiasm for NIDS.) He went on to note that in >the next year or two MUFON hopes to have its entire case >database on-line via its web site. (Apparently only general >case synopses will be available on-line for access by the >general public; specific case details will be accessible only to >registered MUFON members.) Many people have pointed to this as to why MUFON is not going to do much with Gary Hart's complaint on JC selling files to NIDS. Also keep in mind that alot of NIDS/Bigelow money goes through the UFO community, which is supposedly why the selling of files issue will not get much of a public comment from the notables and quotables. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 03:55:24 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:13:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts Greetings, Here's a response to the "rumors" about disputes over the commercial video release by John Carpenter entitled "Encounters in Australia". It's factual to the best of my investigative efforts. ________________________________________ >From: John Carpenter <StarmanJC@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 >Subject: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >PS: There is some new rumor that I never obtained releases for >my interviews that I obtained in Australia for my videotape on >Australian encounters. I have these signed consent forms in my >office and can dig them up for proof. JC ------------------------------------- Hello John Carpenter, Let's set the record straight on your 1996 video release "Encounters in Australia" No one is contesting the fact that "consent forms" were signed. What is in dispute, however, is the verbal agreements you made with these participants about how their interviews would be used. Allow me to quote from the cover of the video in question: "Encounters in Australia" (116 minutes) 1996 Carpenter Research Copyright All Rights reserved "The Land Down Under has not been excluded from the extraordinary mystery of UFO Encounters. Despite the remote location of this island continent in the South Pacific Ocean, documented cases of skinny little grey beings with big black eyes, reptilian creatures, hybrid humanoids, and even praying mantis types all appear in the collected data. Experience the words and emotions of each witness as the encounters are revealed. Meet researchers Glennys Mackay and Keith Basterfield as they share their recent cases. Housewife Kelly Cahill suddenly found herself part of a shared abduction encounter with other people she had never met before-but who now independently correlate and confirm her account. Therapist Elizabeth Robinson had been trying to dismiss her experiences until her own daughter and mother also reported similar encounters. And much more... as John carpenter narrates-blending these interviews with charming views of the scenery and wildlife of Australia. John S. Carpenter, MSW, LCSW works as a psychiatric therapist for the Center of Neuropsychiatry in Springfield, Missouri (USA). He obtained degrees in Social Work and Psychology as well as advanced training in Clinical Hypnosis. He has appeared in national television programs and documentaries and been interviewed for national publications such as OMNI and USA Today. Speaking on National Public Radio and at countless conferences nationwide and around the world, John brings the findings of his research on UFO abductions in a "caring, professional, and sensitive manner" to help educate those with open minds. John also serves as the Director of Abduction Research for the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON)." This video features eight interviews with: Glenny Mackay-QLD (15min) David Summers-QLD (10min) Kelly Cahill-NSW (15min) B.Butler from Melbourne (20min) Elizabeth Robinson (Perth, WA) S.Whiteman from Sydney (15min) Keith Basterfield-Vic. (10min) Melissa-QLD (15min) ------------------ Of course, you have signed "consent forms" from the participants in your video interviews when you came to Australia for the First International UFO Symposium "Paradigm of Puzzles" held in Brisbane, Australia on 11-13 October, 1996. The MUFON entourage who were also invited to speak included Walt Andrus, Dr. Joe Lewels, Ademar Gevaerd and others. As far as we know, the participants in your video interviews acknowledged they signed "consent forms". Unfortunately, you also told these participants that the interviews they gave you would NOT be used for a commercial release. You TOLD them the video interviews were for your private clinical research to show to other patients and fellow researchers and therapists. So yes, Mr. Carpenter, these participants were offended and disgusted that you would not honor your verbal agreements with them to keep their interviews from being commercially exploited in the public domain. And guess what, Mr. Carpenter, these participants have experience in dealing with the media. They know about how important it is to make a good and articulate impression. However, you caught them with their "pants down" and they trusted you to keep those interviews private. These participants were very informal with you and conducted themselves in a manner that is best suited for private home movies, not a commercially released video about Australian Encounters. Do you remember assuring any of these participants that their casual performance and appearance on video wouldn't matter because it was for your private collection only and not for sale to the whole world? Perhaps these comments from a few of the participants might refresh your failing memory. I'm sorry, but these people have requested to remain anonymous. They know that what's done is done! So complaining to you or anybody else is not going to take back the embarrassment and disgust they endured by your self-proclaimed "caring, professional, and sensitive manner". ------------------------------------------- Dear Mike, When John Carpenter conducted those interviews, it is clear that he did not seek permission from them to sell those interviews. I know that several on that list were outraged to learn that a supposedly professional, private interview was being sold through UFO magazines on video format, with no permission or royalty being granted. Shame on John Carpenter for his actions I say! regards, (name withheld) Hello Mike, "Carpenter interviewed me just after the conference late into the night... I was tired and looking terrible... but John assured me this was only for private clinical use... the public would never see it. I don't even like to think that strangers are watching me like this. I was so tired, I probably didn't make much sense anyway. I was not happy to hear that John had put our casual interviews up for sale so quickly without a word to any of us that I know about"..." (name withheld) Hi Mike, "I would never have sat there smoking cigarettes and only remotely involved with discussing my case with John if he had told me that this interview would be used in a commercial video for sale across the globe. I would have greatly appreciated the chance to present myself in a more professional manner as I normally do when interviewed for the media. I'll have nothing more to do with John Carpenter..." (name withheld) ------------------------------ The other comments echoed these sentiments of disappointment and disgust with John Carpenter for taking back with him something from the Australian UFO Research Community that was not his to exploit to a public that has never met these people until now. So what made Carpenter tell all these participants that their interviews were strictly for his private research use and not for public consumption, then turn around in a few months and start selling these same video interviews at UFO Conferences and in UFO Magazines around the world? So obviously, Mr.Carpenter has not been having any "second thoughts" about the sale of this video during the last three years or so, no doubt due to the fact that only now have some of the participants in this video had reason to speak up about being "sold out" by John's self-proclaimed "caring, professional, and sensitive manner." And obviously, Mr. Carpenter feels confident that having those signed consent forms give him the right to do whatever he pleases with those interviews, just as he did what he wanted with those 100 abductee files he sold for S14,000. So this matter is not an isolated incident. It forms a disturbing pattern of behavior that is not normally tolerated in the fields of psychiatry and therapy. But it has been tolerated by MUFON and NIDS. But that's another story! The fact is, if Mr. Carpenter told those participants that he wanted to interview them for a commercial video for worldwide release, then he would not have succeeded in getting all those interviews when he wanted them. And furthermore, they would not have signed those precious "consent forms" he holds up in his defense, if they knew of his true intentions for the video. For what do we owe each other Mr. Carpenter, as fellow seekers of the Truth, if not honesty and integrity? And please spare us from any more of your "caring, professional, and sensitive manner." __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm PO Box 1344 Port Macquarie New South Wales Australia 2444 ******************************************** Contact me if you're looking for information about any particular UFO film or TV program, or if you would like to exchange UFO videos. ******************************************** "You take the blue pill and the story ends. You awake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe." "You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes." (Quotes from the movie "The Matrix") ************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Little Green Men On Film From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:31:12 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:15:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Little Green Men On Film Source: Montreal Gazette, http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/pages/000806/4542579.html Stig *** Sunday 6 August 2000 Little green men on film Martians - especially the evil, hostile ones - have made it big in Hollywood and beyond The Gazette [Image: TOUCHSTONE PICTURES / Mission to Mars posits that Earthlings are descended from Martians.] [Image: WARNER BROS. / Martians have been depicted on film as everything from little green men to comedic villains like the Martian ambassador in Mars Attacks!] * Movies about Mars date back to the American silent film Message From Mars (1921), and continue to this year's Mission to Mars. Though plots of many films are lost in the mists of time, those that still exist generally fall into one of two categories: evil Martians invading Earth or peaceful Earthlings "exploring" Mars and running into hostility. Of course, when that happens, a guy has to defend himself. And they are almost always guys. Analytical types might draw parallels with the European "discovery" of the Americas, Western imperialism in Asia and Africa, the Cold War, the Red Menace and xenophobia in general. Of course, all is not death and destruction - there are some lighthearted entries as well. Pajama Party (1964), also known as The Maid and the Martian, is the story of a Martian who comes to Earth to check out teen life here. Among those he meets: former Mouseketeer Annette Funicello. (Ask your mother.) Some fans might enjoy Santo Contra la Invasion de los Marcianos (1966), in which the silver-masked Mexican wrestler saves the world. Closer to home, there's Le Martien de Noel (1971), a Quebec-made film written by Roch Carrier of The Hockey Sweater and La Guerre, Yes Sir! fame. Parents fear that visiting Martians will harm their children, but eventually they come to accept the aliens. Some hidden federal-provincial moral here? Martians Go Home (1990). An alleged sci-fi comedy in which a guy writes an advertising jingle that Martians take as an invitation to invade Earth. Randy Quaid plays the hapless jingle writer. By all accounts, not his finest moment. Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964): Depending on whose comments you believe, this film is so bad it's hilarious or so bad you should run, not walk, if it ever comes near you. Marks the screen debut of Pia Zadora. (Ask your father, or Doug Camilli.) Interest in things Martian is not limited to North America, either. From Denmark, there's Himmelskibet (1917), also known as A Trip to Mars. Russia took the revolution into space in the silent film Aelita, Queen of Mars (1924). From Japan, there's Kasei No Waga Ya (rendered as Mars, Sweet Home in English) and a Spanish/Italian co-production is called I Marziani Hanno Dodici Mani (1964) (The Twelve-Handed Men of Mars). Being fond of things extraterrestrial, television once offered us Star Trek, Lost in Space, Mork and Mindy, the animated Jetsons and, of course, My Favorite Martian (1963). Bill Bixby played reporter Tim and Ray Walston played his "Uncle Martin," who was really a Martian who had crash-landed on Earth. Uncle Martin could read minds and levitate objects, and possessed a pair of antennae that played an integral part in the process of making himself invisible. Martin wouldn't reveal his identity to anyone but Tim, which put a damper on any possible get-rich-quick plans. There are more than 80 films with Mars or Martian in their title. In the interest of sparing your time and our forests, here are just a few: - The Ship That Was Sent off to Mars (1921) - A Trip to Mars (1924) - Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (1934) (or, An Interplanetary Battle With the Tiger Men of Mars) - Flash Gordon's Trip to Mars (1938) - Mars Attacks the World (1938) - Rocket to Mars (1946) - Flying Disc Man from Mars (1951) - Abbott and Costello Go to Mars (1953) - Devil Girl From Mars (1954) - Mars and Beyond (1957) - Round Trip to Mars (1957) - The Day Mars Invaded Earth (1962) - Robinson Crusoe on Mars (1964) - Frankenstein Meets the Space Monster (1965), also known as Mars Attacks Puerto Rico - Mars Needs Women (1967) - Invaders From Mars (1986) - Lobster Man From Mars (1989) - Alien Escape (1995), also known as Mars Assault! - Mars Attacks! (1996) - Mission to Mars (2000) * Research: Liz Ferguson of The Gazette � 2000 The contents of this website are protected by copyright. All rights are reserved and commercial use is prohibited. To make use of this material you must first obtain the permission of the owner of the copyright. For further information on reuse of Gazette material in non-electronic form, please contact P. Beaulieu in writing at The Gazette, 250 St. Antoine W., Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 3R7.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Ten More Planets Discovered From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 08:14:17 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:17:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Ten More Planets Discovered Source: USA TODAY, http://www.usatoday.com/news/ndssun02.htm Stig *** Science 08/06/00- Updated 12:13 PM ET Ten more planets discovered By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY ** Astronomers plan Monday to announce the discovery of 10 new planets orbiting nearby stars, bringing the total to more than 50 discovered since 1995. Further, researchers say the planets, which include both the smallest and the closest to our solar system yet detected, point to a starry neighborhood near Earth crowded with multiple planetary systems like our own. "The observations suggest stars often form complete hosts of planetary systems," says astronomer Debra Fischer of the University of California, Berkeley, a member of one of four teams announcing planet detections at the International Astronomical Union meeting in the United Kingdom. Mostly, the newly detected planets resemble many of those discovered already by astronomers - large gas giant planets close to Jupiter in size, but following elongated, or eccentric, orbits around stars within 200 light years of Earth. (One light year equal 5.878 trillion miles.) Such massive objects reveal themselves by the "wobble" their gravitational pull, akin to the Moon's tidal effects on Earth's oceans, causes their host star. However, both a Swiss team and Fischer's group report finding second planets in stars already known to harbor a gas giant, at stars HD 83443 and HD 38529 (in the Orion constellation) respectively. A multiple planet system was reported at the star Upsilon Andromedae in last year, but until now astronomers had been hesitant to describe solar systems as commonplace. "We have several other (planet) candidates that show a drift indicating there is something else in their system," says astronomer Stephane. Udry. of the Geneva Observatory, a member of the Swiss team. Fischer plans today to discuss an analysis suggesting that of 12 planet-harboring stars her team has observed for more than two years, five show signs of further companions. "Planets are bursting out all over," says astronomer Stephen Maran. of the American Astronomical Society. He expects more finds in coming years, as astronomers look at more nearby stars for longer periods of time. One of the newly discovered planets, the second one discovered orbiting the star HD 83443, represents the smallest planet yet detected. It's still large - over 45 times bigger than Earth - but less than half the size of Saturn. A team led by William Cochrane. of the University of Texas in Austin. will announce the discovery of the closest planet yet detected, circling the star Epsilon Eridani, only 10.5 light years from Earth. The star was one of the first that the founder of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) project started looking at three decades ago. (Fans of TV's Star Trek know the Epsilon Eridani as a possible home of the planet Vulcan, where Mr. Spock originated.) "Finding a planet a mere 10 light-years away is like finding an alligator in my back yard," says Seth Shostack of the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif. "It tells me that alligators must be a dime a dozen. They must be everywhere," he says. ---------------------------------------------------------------- � Copyright 2000 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will Do From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 09:15:18 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:22:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will Do Source: Jeff Rense, http://www.sightings.com/general3/disclosure.htm Stig *** Actual CNN Transcript Of Gov. Bush Promising UFO Disclosure From Charles Huffer <cahuffer@yahoo.com> To Randy Kitchur <kitchur@hotmail.com> 8-7-00 Randy, (Please send this to all persons who may be interested. There seems to be a great deal of confusion about what really transpired.) I am the UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN on the CNN transcript and the 5TH MAN on the Nightline transcript. The Washington Post article has my name as it appears on my card, which I gave to the reporter who interviewed me immediately after I had my first exchange with Gov.Bush. The websites are still up and running as I write this. Here they are: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A196-2000Jul28.html http://abcnews.go.com/onair/nightline/transcripts/nl000728_trans.html http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html On the CNN transcript is the following: KARL: "...Along the way, someone thought Cheney's impressive resume would help Bush tell the truth about UFOs." (This was pure speculation on Karl's part and was wrong. CAH) UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: (That is me, Charles A. Huffer, MUFON State Section Director) "Half the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on?" (The full exchange of words with Gov. Bush was evidently not recorded. I had a recorder on but it was too far away for clarity. I did get Bush's reply, however.) GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: "Sure, I will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a great one." CNN has made a serious error here. They have attributed some of my words to Gov. Bush. Here is the way it was: Bush: "Sure. I will." Charles A. Huffer: (Cheney had in the meantime walked over to us and extended his hand to me.) "This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense." Bush: "And was a great one." Several minutes later, I again saw Gov. Bush in the hall. He recognized me immediately and unsolicited said approximately the following: Gov. Bush: "It will be the first thing he (pointing to Cheney) will do. He'll get right on it." Charles A. Huffer: "Will, will you really?" Gov. Bush: "Yes Sir." I have this exchange on audio tape. As far as I am aware, no news organization recorded it. So, Bush DID promise to tell us what the hell is going on, if he gets to be president. Please pass this around so that people will know what actually was said on 28 July 2000 by Gov. George W. Bush in Springdale, AR. Now we must help Gov. Bush be elected president. Charles A. Huffer * MainPage http://www.rense.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:26:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:27:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Clark >Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:29:17 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Sean: >Why was there not an entry in your magnum opus of "The UFO >Encyclopaedia" for a certain Dr Gotlib? Simple. I was quite sparing in my use of biographical entries, as you would know if you had seen my encyclopedia (not "Encyclopaedia") -- as I infer you have not -- and I confined it to individuals who had played a larger, more enduring, and/or influential role in the history of the subject. "A certain Dr. Gotlib," whose role in the subject, however admirable, was fairly fleeting and consisted in its entirety to the editorship of a small-circulation newsletter, does not qualify by that definition. If I had it to do over again, there would again be no entry on David Gotlib -- which is to say absolutely nothing against this fine, thoughtful man. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: Former Airliner Pilot Admits to UFO Sighting - From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:07:12 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:55:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Former Airliner Pilot Admits to UFO Sighting - >Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 22:43:43 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Former Airliner Pilot Admits to UFO Sighting >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dear Bruce and List, A good Spanish researcher and friend of mine has asked me to post his comments about that Spanish pilot's UFO. Here it goes: Though I'm not subscribed to this list, I keep an eye on it from time to time by checking the archives. I thought that the following could be of interest, concerning the UFO sighting of a Spanish Airliner Pilot that was mentioned a couple of weeks ago (sorry for the delay!). I also seize this opportunity to comment on other two matters. So it's rather a three-in-one posting... >>SOURCE: La Vanguardia Digital >>DATE: 07.14.2000 > >>FORMER IBERIA COMMANDER SAYS: "I SAW A UFO" >>by Pedro Madueo > >>"I'm 65 years old and flew for 40 years in the Air Force and >t>hen for Iberia. I now run a piloting school. I was born in >>Madrid, my father was a general in the Air Force. The day I saw >>a UFO from my aircraft I wasn't able to sleep00I havent stopped >>thinking about it all this time. I've just completed [my book] >>"Destino Cielo" about all my years of piloting and my UFO >>Encounter" > >>--Juan Lorenzo Torres: "It was on a collision course" -- The UFO >>GUY > ><snip> > >>A: After reporting the sighting, Lt. Col Ugarte concluded that >>what the co-pilot, engineer, flight attendant and I had seen was >i>n fact Venus! > >>Q: Venus? > >>A: Yes, Venus. Venus was stuck to my plane's nose, I never >>realized it! > >>Q: What made them say that? > >>A: I guess that their military culture finds it very >>embarrassing not to have an explanation. Venus is as good an >>answer as any. > > >Venus. > >An example of : > >'Prosaic Explanations: the Failure of UFO Skepticism'. > >The title of my lecture at the recent MUFON symposium. You can >read the full paper with illustrations at brumac.8k.com > > For at least the last twenty years, in every interview, the pilot J. Lorenzo Torres has been telling without hesitation that the UFO, in the nearest point, was located at only ten meters of the plane. It seems obvious that the UFO could not be Venus at all... The problem is that this is not what he told to the magazine "La Actualidad Espanola" (no. 898, March 20, 1969), just a few months after the sighting. There we read that, in his opinion, it was possible that it could be "something exceptional put into space by any Power" [country] ["algo excepcional, puesto en el espacio por alguna potencia"]. But , remarkably enough, he also admitted that it could have been the "reflection of a star" ["reflejo de una estrella"]...! Moreover, the pilot said: "We realized that it couldn't be Venus, for I had read something about it, and became sure, after carefully thinking of it, that it wasn't that planet". ["Comprendimos que no poda ser Venus, pues yo haba ledo algo al respecto, y tena la seguridad, tras pensarlo detenidamente, de que no se trataba de aquel planeta"]. From this we must conclude that: - It was not so obvious for the observers that the UFO was not Venus! - Venus wasn't at sight near the UFO, or they woudn't have hesitate. But this was not indeed the case: Venus was approx. in front of the planeand at the horizon level, just where the UFO was seen. So, after all, a Venus sighting could be a worthy explanation for this incident. ___________ The following question is about a Brazilian case. It is mainly addressed to Bruce Maccabee. On Feb. 8, 1982, a VASP airliner (commander: Gerson Maciel Britto) flying from Fortaleza to Sao Paulo was "escorted" by a luminous UFO for about 80 minutes. According to a Brazilian journal, you explained away the case as a Venus misidentification. The sighting ended around 4:30 AM. If we take the last 40 minutes of the incident, it 's difficult not to agree with that explanation. Most details match well. But what has always puzzled me is the fact that Venus could not be visible during the first 40 minutes of the sighting (at least, without considering very unusual conditions -something like a "Novaya Zemlya" effect mirage-). Was there any error in the reported timing of the incident? Was there another stimulus, followed later by Venus? Did you reach any conclussion in that respect? ___________ Finally, does anyone know about UFO cases matching ALL of the following conditions (I found not even one!)?: 1) Sighting of entitie(s) related TO AN object (OR luminous phenomenon, by default); not lonely entities. 2) The object must be a flying object (if on the ground, landing and/or take off should have been observed). 3) Incident remaining unexplained so far. 4a) Multiple witnesses of the entities. 4b) Adult witnesses. 4c) Multiple testimonies are (or were) available (not just one known witness and all the others in the shade...). 5a) Not exclusively journalistic sources. 5b) First hand information. 5c) Information free of inconsistencieS. 6) Distance to the entities: 100 meters or less. 7) Sighting of the entities lasting no less than one minute. 8) Diurnal sighting (twilight conditions accepted). ________ That's all. Thank you very much for your patience. Manuel Borraz (Barcelona, Spain)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: TMP News: Weekly Briefing - 8.7.00 From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:13:59 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:58:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: TMP News: Weekly Briefing - 8.7.00 TMP NEWS The E-News Service of The Millennium Project http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews http://persweb.direct.ca/psa August 7, 2000 _____________________________ WEEKLY BRIEFING A Weekly Summary of Current and Breaking News and Reports 8.7.00 We are still less than one full year into the new millennium (although we all know the next millennium doesn't really start until 2001, right?) and already we have seen many exciting and important developments in many fields that TMP addresses, including astronomy, astrophysics/ cosmology, technology, the environment and unexplained phenomena, among others. The more progress we make it seems, though, the more we realize how little we really know about the world around us and beyond. The news release from Biospherics regarding new evidence that the biology experiments on the Martian Viking landers in 1976 may have found living microbes in those red sands after all (despite NASA's protests to the contrary ever since) is interesting, not only for the obvious implications, but also for the fact that a copy of the release was put out on NASA mailing lists by none other than Ron Baalke, public information spokesman for JPL (Jet Proplusion Laboratory). Some have speculated that NASA is now slowly "allowing" the release of more information concerning extraterrestrial life, according to its own timetable. Time will tell. Links to this report, more extrasolar planets, an update on the Bush/UFO presidential campaign controversy, chemtrail updates and much more (including some previously delayed news stories) below... Paul Anderson _____________________________ Astronomers Find New Planet in Earth's 'Backyard' http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/04/new.planet.reut/index.html Scientists Reveal Nine New Planets http://CNN.com/2000/WORLD/europe/08/07/space.planets/index.html Microsoft Funds New SETI Telescope to Search for ET http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/01/seti.telescope.reut/index.html Scientists Strengthen Prospects for Life on Mars: New Information Supports Claim Viking Discovered Life in 1976 http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/biospherics.html MOC Images Suggest Recent Sources of Liquid Water on Mars http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/june2000/index.html NASA Announces New Rover Mission for Mars in 2003 http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/07/27/mars.rover/index.html NASA, European Mars Missions to Overlap http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/02/beagle.and.rover/index.html Making a Splash on Mars http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast29jun_1m.htm Mysterious Martian Ridges http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0005/29ridgedmars Light Can Break its Own Speed Limit, Researchers Say http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/07/20/speed.of.light.ap/index.html Comet Linear Wows US Scientists With Explosive Show http://news.excite.com/news/r/000728/17/space-comet Pulsars 'Lying About Their Age', Astronomers Conclude http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/07/31/pulsar.age/ Hubble Watches Explosion of Dying Star http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/07/13/hubble.stellar.demolition/index.html Scientists Dream of Parallel Worlds http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/hotnews/stories/24/cosm os.dtl Single Atom Trapped, Presaging Whole New Technology http://unisci.com/stories/20003/0725002.htm Project Voyager: Joe Firmage/Carl Sagan Productions Joint Venture for Integrated Media Network http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/voyager.html Bush Makes Reference to UFO Disclosure on CNN - Clarification of Transcript http://www.sightings.com/general3/disclosure.htm Strange Silver Balls, Black Helicopters and Sonic Booms Over Maryland http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/silverballs.html UFOs, Is the Truth Out There? http://www.independent.ie/2000/178/d14c.shtml The UFO-Chemtrail Connection http://www.sightings.com/general3/ufochem.htm Clarifying Chemtrail Confusion http://www.sightings.com/general2/clar.htm Chemtrails - Facts, Plagiarism and Propaganda http://www.sightings.com/general2/chemps.htm Genome Announcement a Milestone, But Only the Beginning http://CNN.com/cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/06/26/human.genome.05/index.html Undersea Mountains Yield Living 'Fossils' http://CNN.com/2000/NATURE/06/26/living.fossils.enn/index.html NASA Confirms Greenland Ice Cap Melting http://CNN.com/2000/NATURE/07/20/greenland.ice/index.html Macintosh Cubed: New Design Another Revolution in Home Computing http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/computing/07/20/g4.cubed.idg/index.html _____________________________ TMP News is the e-news service of The Millennium Project, a future studies research organization, providing a Weekly Briefing of the latest news and reports relating to the most phenomenal, enigmatic and controversial issues of our time in science and technology, as well as periodic information and updates on TMP-related news and events. TMP News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by TMP, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the TMP News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews See the TMP web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa _____________________________ � The Millennium Project, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 7 UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 15:04:34 -0300 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:00:22 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:38:30 -0700 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - Friedman >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:00:37 -0300 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:31:49 -0400 >>>From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? - >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:15:05 -0300 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:36:13 -0400 >>>>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>>>>Subject: Re: UFO TV Documentaries? >>>>>To: 'UFO Updates' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Stan wrote:- >>>>There has been an enormous amount of effort put in to the Hill >>>>Case. I met with Betty and Barney and John Fuller and Marjorie >>>>Fish and spoke with Dr. Simon. I reviewed Marjorie's work with >>>>Terence Dickinson then editor of ASTRONOMY and with Dr. George >>>>Mitchell an astronomer at OSU as well as with Allen Hynek. >>>>It stands up very well, despite false attacks by the likes of >>>>Sagan, Vallee and many others who misrepresented what MF did. >>>Stan, >>>Correct me if I am wrong, but surely MF only 'identified' 15 out >>>of the 28 stars on Betty Hill's map. What about the remainder ? >>She focused on the stars connected with lines, trade routes, >>occasional expeditions, etc. Turns out that they were all >>sun-like stars and also all the sunlike stars in the volume of >>the map. As it happens they were all in a plane as well Actually >>there were 16 including the sun. Hardly a coincidence as >>investigated by several astronomers and described in the Zeta >>Reticuli Incident. >Stan, >Would you amplify on the bit about all 16 lying within a plane? >I don't recall hearing that before. What orientation did the >plane have, relative to a plane we would see looking at the >stars or the plane of the map? Presumably these stars don't all >lie exactly in the same plane. By roughly how many light years, >rms, do their positions deviate from the best-fitting plane, and >how does this compare to their average distance from us? > Jim Deardorff Marjorie noted the fact that the pattern stars were in a plane. Dr. George Mitchell, Professor of Astronomy at Ohio State University, had his students use a computer to plot the stars as they would appear from a position out beyond Zeta Reticuli. "(from page12 of The Zeta Reticuli Incident,) From this viewpoint the map patterrn obtained by Marjorie Fish was duplicated with virtually no variations. Mitchell noted an important and previously unknown fact first pointed out by Ms. Fish: The stars in the map are almost in a plane; that is they fill a wheel shaped volume of space that makes star hopping from one to another easy and the logical way to go...." I can't answer the other question, but all the position data are in ZRI. Mitchell, Fish, and Betty Hill are all in my 93 minute documentary movie "UFOs Are Real". It is only $15 including shipping and handling from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.A star model is shown. Also in the movie are Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Jesse Marcel Sr., Dr. Richard Haines, Dr. James Harder, Ted Phillips, Travis Walton.myself, etc. UFORI has ZRI for only $5. I will throw in a free copy of the Zeta Reticuli UPDATE to anyone ordering ZRI. Stanton 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:03:48 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:42:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Young >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:37:42 -0700 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >>Your argument is only valid if one's purpose was to just make >>sure to "pad the data pile". How would you propose filtering >>the sightings made by the 40% of adult Americans who believe >>that alien spaceships are flying above, but who have never seen >>one, themselves? (52% of believers - 12% of witnesses). >>What would your criteria be? >That's pretty simple. The adult Americans who have never seen a >UFO have therefore never reported a UFO. There's nothing there >to filter. Jim, List: Obviously, I was referring to _sightings_ by people who had never before seen a UFO, but who believe in ET spacecraft UFOs. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:14:16 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:44:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 09:15:18 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >Subject: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will Do >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Source: Jeff Rense, >http://www.sightings.com/general3/disclosure.htm >Please pass this around so that people will know what actually >was said on 28 July 2000 by Gov. George W. Bush in Springdale, >AR. Now we must help Gov. Bush be elected president. >Charles A. Huffer Are you kidding me? Help him get elected? You really think Bush is going to do anything? I sent out comments from Ralph Nader and more importantly, John Hagelin regarding UFOs. Not one person posted anything in response to that post. I expected at least a couple. If people think Bush or Gore are the answer to our many, many,many problems, then I give up. Oh yeah, I forgot - A vote for Nader or Hagelin is a wasted vote. I should just vote for somebody who doesn't represent anything I believe in. Except that he _might_ look into the UFO enigma. Oh thank god! The UFO question is close to the top of my list of important issues. But the environment is more pressing right now. Alternative energy sources are up there too. You think Bush will do anything about those? What about global warming and the climatic changes and wildfires? You think Bush or Gore's corporate cronies care about those things? Of course not. Gore writes a book about the environment and then turns his back on it and supports the fossil fuel industry instead. Hey, they did give him a lot of money for the campaign. Right? Voting for Bush because he said he would look into UFOs is ridiculous. Look at all the other more important issues. If Bush satisfies those for you then vote for him. If not, vote your conscience and get somebody in there that cares about us. By the way, the N.Y. Times ran an excellent article on Hagelin over the weekend. If anybody cares. Here it is. Joe in Tampa ***** The New York Times Saturday, August 5, 2000 PUBLIC LIVES Taking a Scientist's Approach to the Problems of Politics By MICHAEL JANOFSKY DENVER -- So how does a physicist who expanded on Einstein's theory of relativity with a treatise called Supersymmetric Flipped SU (5) find himself running for president? "It's a quantum leap," John Hagelin said with a deadpan expression. But then he explains the transition, and it sort of makes sense, a progression of curiosity, from science to public policy to public service, in which he has always embraced a common sense approach to problem solving. What might appear to make less sense is why someone with his academic background and soaring I.Q., 165, would seek to put his ideas in play as the presidential candidate of the Reform Party, an utterly chaotic political organization that is mounting yet another charge this year against the Republicans and Democrats. Mr. Hagelin, 46, who received his master's and doctorate from Harvard University and spent nearly 20 years as a research scientist, is immersed in a nasty primary fight with Patrick J. Buchanan, the loquacious former television commentator, to win the party nomination at its convention next week in Long Beach, Calif. Until now, the primary has focused more on arguments, conflicts and accusations of election fraud against Mr. Buchanan than any discussion of ideas or issues. Mr. Hagelin, who remains virtually unknown to voters, visited Denver this week, as part of a campaign trip from Washington to Long Beach, to call attention to his own charges, that Mr. Buchanan has corrupted the primary process by submitting the names of people ineligible to vote in the Reform primary. Insisting he has done nothing improper, Mr. Buchanan has grown so sure of winning the nomination that he has dismissed Mr. Hagelin as a minor annoyance, to the point of alerting reporters this week to the time and place of his victory party next Saturday. But his opponent's bold confidence has hardly discouraged Mr. Hagelin, a soft-spoken man who is hardly the political neophyte that his background and easy demeanor suggest. This is his third run for president, following largely symbolic campaigns in 1992 and 1996 as the nominee of a party he helped found, the Natural Law party, to apply principles a scientist uses every day through common sense, to national political problems. "I was always about solutions that work, and I was very intrigued by a party founded on the concept of natural law," said Mr. Hagelin, who was born in Pittsburgh and grew up in a succession of towns in Connecticut. After winning only 39,179 votes in 1992 and 113,668 four years later, he realized this year that by adding his base to the Reform Party, founded eight years ago and represented twice in presidential elections by Ross Perot, he could achieve a bigger platform and a stronger voice in the 2000 general election campaign. But Mr. Hagelin's ideas and positions are born less from years in politics than from years of scientific research that focused on brain development and, later, the application of scientific principles to public policy. It led him from Harvard to the European Laboratory for Particle Physics in Geneva to Stanford and finally, in 1985, to Maharishi University of Management, a private institution in Fairfield, Iowa, where he established a research institute that explores issues like health care, education, crime prevention and the environment. Early on in Fairfield, a rural town of 10,000 where he now lives, divorced from his wife of eight years, Margaret, Mr. Hagelin spent considerable time studying how to change the nation's health care system, which he calls "a disease care system" because of its emphasis on problems rather than prevention. He consulted dozens of House members and even helped write a single paragraph in the comprehensive but ill-fated plan Hillary Rodham Clinton proposed shortly after her husband became president. "It was the only paragraph in a 10,000-page document that had anything to do with health," he said, recalling its focus on cost-effective preventive care. He also favors fair trade, campaign finance reform, a flat tax, reduced American military involvement overseas, abandoning efforts to build a missile shield system, gun ownership rights and abortion rights. But years of working with Republicans and Democrats, he said, convinced him that the parties are tied too closely to corporate donors to enact fundamental changes in major areas like trade, health care and military spending. So he increased his efforts in building a third-party alternative, convinced "that we had to do what the government did with Microsoft, force competition through a vibrant third party." His task at hand is a prodigious one. Mr. Buchanan has worked aggressively to assure himself the nomination through a complex process that could include the nullification of the popular vote in favor of a vote of the convention delegates. Mr. Buchanan claims to have the two-thirds majority he would need. Complicating matters for Mr. Hagelin is Mr. Buchanan's longstanding presence in American politics and on American television. On Sunday, for example, Mr. Buchanan is scheduled to appear on four morning talk shows. Mr. Hagelin was not invited to any of them. But Mr. Hagelin said Mr. Buchanan might be surprised at the convention, and if his years at Maharishi, where meditation was part of the daily routine, taught him anything, it was patience -- Mr. Hagelin said he meditates 15 minutes every day. If he wins, he said, interest in him and the party would instantly increase. "But even if I lose, I won't lose in a key respect," he said "As long as we have reached the marketplace of ideas and the Republicans and Democrats are scrambling to co-opt them, as they always have, we've won. No question about it." Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:25:16 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:50:58 -0400 Subject: UpDate: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? This past weekend, after having briefly mentioned something to a relative about Hudson Valley/Pine Bush/New York UFO sightings, I 'accidentally' found myself listening to one man's (not my relative's) story about his sighting. Long-story-short: This person, after exhibiting a bit of surprise that I was interested, and after a bit of trepidation, told me this: The year was '76, '77 or '78. I asked him if he could recall the exact year any clearer and he couldn't. In retrospect I realize I should've asked for the time of year, but I didn't. He was in Garden City, NY, which is on Long Island, almost exactly 25 miles due East of NYC. The time was sometime between 11 pm & 1 am. At the the time, he was working for the NY Times as a truck driver and was busy loading the bundles of newspapers into his truck. He then noticed a formation of lights nearly directly over his head, or at a large angle to the horizon. He estimates that the object was within a couple hundred feet from where he stood. The lights were stationary ("hovering") and he did not hear any noise. I asked him to describe the formation of the lights, and he kept saying (he seemed to actually immerse himself in the moment and seemed to lose himself) "... they were... alternating... sort of pulsing..." I asked him again to describe the shape of the formation, if he could. He didn't seem to be giving an answer, so I then came out and asked "Were the lights in a circle, as far as you can tell?" He couldn't confirm or deny it. "Did you notice the color of the lights?" Again he wasn't sure and wasn't giving a clear answer. So I asked whether or not the lights were all white, or all some other color, or multi-colored. Again he couldn't give a definitive answer, but I had the impression that he was describing lights that were all of the same color. He did say that the lights were very, very bright. He then apparently suddenly remembered something and blurted: "The lights... they were all sort of square!... ya know?" I asked "You saw that the lights were in a square formation or that the _lights_ were square-shaped?" (in paraphrase)"Yeah... I think so...the lights...there were multiple, very bright lights... they were alternating...you know, like, only one was lit at a time... and the lights seemed to be kind of square..." I asked if it looked like an advertisement banner on the side of a blimp or on a billboard. "No," he said, "it _definitely_ wasn't a blimp." I asked if anyone else at the Times was there with him and also observed the same thing. "No, I was alone...I always thought that was weird... It was like I alone was meant to see this..." "How did your sighting end?" "I'm not sure..." So I risked "leading the witness" and asked: "Did you see the object fly away or what?" "I'm not sure..." "I mean, did you see the object slowly move away, or did it zip away, or did it suddenly disappear...what?" "I'm really not sure. I know I watched it for a few minutes, but I really can't say how I stopped being able to see it." I paraphrased for him: "So, sometime between 1976 and 1978, between 11 pm and 1 am, in Garden City, NY, you saw at a distance of within a couple hundred feet, a silently hovering formation of very bright lights that were 'alternating'. You saw them, fairly close by and nearly over head, for a few minutes... and then you didn't see them any more. Is that it?" "Correct." "You never reported this to anyone or anything?" "No... I've only told one or two people... and now you... in all these years...I don't know why..." This person appeared very sincere and reliable. I was impressed that he actually said "I'm not sure", instead of simply saying "Yeah, it was a circle!" or "Yeah, there were all white!", etc, when I provided him with those options. And again I stress that there was a certain "earnestness" in his voice, he seemed to almost relive the experience as he talked to me. I happened to have opportunity to run into him again the following day (he worked at the place where I had to be -- I'm being intentionally vague) and the first thing he asked was whether or not I had been able to find anything on the computer that night (I had told him that I'd start doing some searching on the computer to find something that sounded like his story). He very convincingly conveyed to me that he really wants to know what it is that he saw over 20 years ago. ... Ok, so that wasn't a "long-story-short", but can anyone help me search a database of Long Island/NYC sightings between the years '76 & '78? If need be, I could probably try to get him to nail down the approximate month he had his sighting. Thank you muchly. p.s. this story doesn't even compare to the ones I just heard (from people that I trust as much as I can possibly trust anyone) that took place in Pine Bush around '81-'83.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Filer's Files #31 -- 2000 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:30:05 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:54:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Filer's Files #31 -- 2000 Filer's Files #31 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern August 7, 2000, Majorstar@aol.com, Sponsored by Electronic Arts Web Site at: http://www.filersfiles.com.-Chuck Warren Webmaster. WARNINGS INDICATE ITS TIME TO COLLECT EVIDENCE Today's Headlines give an interesting picture of nationwide trouble: The Military is called into Western States to fight biggest wildfires in 50 years. West Nile Virus is spreading in NY and NJ as spraying continues. Heat Wave Continues in the South while weeks of Heavy Rains and Flood Warnings Continue in the East. Mysterious Sickness Kills Three in California. George Bush the Republican candidate for President says, "I trust people but not government. If elected I will tell about UFOs. The headlines above appear separate and unrelated, but I suggest they might be related to recent reports of disappearing aircraft. The last few months the search for Unidentified Flying Objects has taken on a new phase with dozens of reports of aircraft disappearing in front of numerous eye witnesses. Sometimes the craft appear to change color prior to disappearing, we have reports of white, gray, red, and patchy blue or white aircraft. In World War II, camouflage techniques lit up allied anti-sub aircraft using soft lights to conceal them from Nazi submariners. Numerous reports are being sent that report aircraft flying at relatively low altitude appear to be spraying contrails. Aircraft seen flying at higher altitudes often are not developing contrails, when they do these are white wispy contrails of condensed water vapor that soon disappear. The lower level contrails are darker, appear heavier and expand comparatively quickly often clouding up the entire sky. These clouds seem to later generate into storm clouds or continued hazy overcast. They appear very different from standard summer thunderstorm clouds. On July 17, Georgia State Director Tom Sheets who is also a retired Chief of Police and two other high quality witnesses driving into Tennessee noticed an aircraft spraying contrails. At the apparent end of the contrail the aircraft conducting the spraying operations suddenly disappeared. This has been reported throughout the US and in several other countries. Frequently, there are several aircraft involved in the spraying operation. Many witnesses also report seeing hockey puck-like objects or disc shaped UFOs near or inside the spraying activity. I personally have 5000 flying hours and have often seen contrails formed when we flew near or above 30,000 feet. Essentially, these contrails are condensed water vapor. On July 3, I saw an aircraft making heavy dark looking contrails that appeared quite different from standard. They may have powder or impurities in them that may come from the new jet fuels. The most amazing thing that occurred is that when the spraying stopped the aircraft disappeared. I searched the clear blue sky with binoculars but no craft could be observed. An aircraft simply does not vanish from a clear blue sky unless it has active camouflage or crashes. One possible way for an aircraft to vanish would be to use a liquid screen similar to one used on a typical lap tap computer. If hundreds of liquid screens were mounted on the underside of aircraft it could be made to seem to vanish by videotaping the sky above the aircraft and applying this same color to the liquid screens covering the aircraft. To the naked eye the craft would disappear. Many witnesses have reported seeing aircraft painted RED conducting the spraying, but seldom does anyone see a RED aircraft land. If you use a portable computer you may notice that there is often a red color that shows up on the monitor screen. After spraying, these RED aircraft also seem to disappear. An aircraft making a contrail is not an unusual sight, so why would these aircraft want to vanish? Apparently, it's the next action the aircraft take that might cause attention? Most aircraft fly comparatively straight and level, if one makes a hard 90 or 180 degree turn or some other maneuver might be noticed. Many witnesses claim they see parallel or crosshatched contrails in the sky. Assuming they are correct, some organization is spending millions to spray something from the sky and to conceal their actions in a well coordinated military type operation. The crews are unlikely to spray their families or knowingly hurt their love ones, so we can assume they are told the spraying is for a good purpose. Meanwhile, the news is reporting that helicopters and small aircraft are conducting spraying operations over New York City and the surrounding area to stop the spread of the West Nile Virus that is carried by mosquitoes. Mysterious new illnesses are being reported around the country that might be related to the spraying? Wildfires are raging out west with almost 4 million acres burnt. The fires are blamed on unusually numerous and powerful lightning strikes that may be aided by heavy dust or powder in the atmosphere. We can speculate the impurities in the atmosphere are caused by the spraying. The South is baking under a tremendous heat wave, while the East has had weeks of unusually heavy thunderstorms, flood watches and almost continuous hazy cloud coverage. For example, parts of Philadelphia had 8 inches or rain and flooding during the Republican convention. The headlines sure make you wonder how and why all these strange things are happening. There is a flood watch in New Jersey and Pennsylvania has I write this article. We need to gather evidence to make sense of these unusual occurrences. Why would continued heavy rains be desirable in the East? Why are strange illnesses spreading? Your help is needed in obtaining more evidence to unravel this mystery. There are more questions than answers. IN ARKANSAS GOVERNOR BUSH MAKES UFO PROMISE SPRINGDALE -- MUFON's Charles Huffer writes that, " I am the unidentified citizen on the CNN transcript and the 5th man on the Nightline transcript." The Washington Post article has my name as it appears on my card, which I gave to the reporter who interviewed me immediately after I had my first exchange with Governor Bush on July 28, 2000. On the CNN transcript is the following: JONATHAN KARL, CNN Correspondent: "Along the way, someone thought Cheney's impressive resume would help Bush tell the truth about UFOs." UNIDENTIFIED CITIZEN: (That is me, Charles A. Huffer, MUFON State Section Director) "Half the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on?" (The full exchange of words with Gov. Bush was evidently not recorded. I had a recorder on but it was too far away for clarity. I did get Bush's reply, however.) GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: "Sure, I will. This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense and was a great one." CNN has made a serious error here. They have attributed some of my words to Gov. Bush. Here is the way it was: GOV. BUSH: "Sure. I will." Cheney then walked over to Charles Huffer and extended his hand to him. Charles A. Huffer says: "This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense." GOV BUSH says: "And was a great one." Several minutes later I again saw Gov. Bush in the hall. He recognized me immediately and unsolicited he said approximately the following: GOV. BUSH: "It will be the first thing he (pointing to Cheney) will do. He'll get right on it. " Charles A. Huffer: "Will, will you really? GOV. BUSH: "Yes Sir." I have this exchange on audio tape. As far as I am aware, no news organization recorded it. So Bush DID promise to tell us what the hell is going on, if he gets to be president. The websites are still up and running as I write this. They are: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A196-2000Jul28.html http://abcnews.go.com/onair/nightline/transcripts/nl000728_trans.html http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0007/29/smn.01.html Thanks to: Charles A. Huffer cahuffer@yahoo.com NINE NEW PLANETS DISCOVERED BRINGING THE TOTAL TO 50 Astronomers have found nine new planets circling stars outside our solar System. This evidence indicates Earth may not be as special as we like to think. Three teams of researchers from Switzerland and the United States told a meeting of the International Astronomical Union about the discovery of the so-called exoplanets, including one known to be the second planet orbiting a single star. It was only the second time astronomers have found more than one planet orbiting a star outside our own solar system. Jim O'Donnell, a spokesman for the astronomical group says, "That makes the possibility of life in the universe is more likely.'' Astronomers based at the University of Texas at Austin's McDonald Observatory announced that they had found a Jupiter-sized planet orbiting the star Epsilon Eridani, only 10.5 light years from Earth. Multiple planet solar systems such as our own my be more common in the universe than originally believed. NEW JERSEY CIGAR SHAPED UFO On July 12, 2000, the witness was driving back home from NJ Route 280 at Exit 1 at around 11:00 PM. The witness states, "I saw a big, very bright, cigar-egg shape flying object on the top of trees. I am pretty sure there is no airplane or other commercial flying boat to match it. I have served in the army for two years and trained to identify aircraft because my job was to fire anti-craft guns. This unbelievable flying object moved slowly and quietly cross route 280 from northeast to southwest. Two of my friends were in another car and headed in the same direction as we were, but and they were a mile closer to the object. They watched the bottom of the UFO and should report it also. Thanks to NUFORC www.ufocontrol.com. NEW YORK UFOs BRONX - On July 23, 2000, I was looking out my window, eight stories high and I spotted a black or brown spot in the sky. I then knew exactly what it was so I grabbed my camcorder and ran fast to the roof. The building security guard was up there, so he had a chance to witness it with me. It seemed like a large ball holding a smaller one in one spot keeping it's balance as though it was being held by a string. It was very windy so it couldn't have been a balloon and it was definitely not a plane. They were two together very close maybe attached to each other. It seemed to be observing everything around it, turning all around but still hovering in the same spot. The security guard ran downstairs but I kept on filming. After about twenty minutes it started it's way towards one direction. When it was gone another popped up within a minute at the same spot. It seemed to be making it's way towards me giving off a tapping sound as though someone was tapping on metal. The shape then looked round like a black or charcoal gray light bulb. I got scared and started making my way towards the exit as it moved away. Five minutes later a third one appeared going around me heading towards the same direction. It was closer to the buildings than an airplane that passed right above it. It's on the film. I said, "Watch it disappear and another will pop up again." Then a fourth showed up at the same spot the first two did and left very quickly towards the same direction again. This is no surprise to me. They say you only see this stuff at farms, but I do spend a lot of time on my roof. People in the city do not look up at the skies very often. I got them on film now with four witnesses. I have witnessed UFOs for 3 years and now I have proof thanks to my camcorder. My wife and I saw three round like or football shaped objects directly above our heads at 6:00 PM They take their sweet time heading in formation straight across us. I've also seen silver objects with a little bit of black underneath with no lights during daylight. My uncle and cousin have witnessed a brown one with me. I admit when I see the silver or white ones I feel at peace, but the brown ones give off many negative vibes towards me and I'm scared of them. When they're directly above me they seem to change their shapes kind of like a blanket or liquid metal then they go back to their original round shapes. Peter Davenport spoke with the individual who submitted this report. We find him to be seemingly rational and serious-minded. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC www.ufocenter.com. GEORGIA FLYING TRIANGLE MCDONOUGH - MUFON GA Field Investigator David Brown has been contacted regarding an event that occurred on July 29, 2000. Initial contact with the witness, a leasing agent, indicated that she and two of her business associates were at her apartment when a thunder storm moved through the city between 10 and 11:00 PM. The primary witness and her associates went out onto the second story balcony to watch the lightning display. As the lightning subsided, these individuals observed what they thought to be a flying craft with three rows of hazy green lights on the side. The witness indicated that it approached from the west, and then banked to the north, flying slowly within 150 to 200 feet above them as it did so. At that time it was also noticed to have 3 green lights along the bottom rear, all lights steady and non-blinking (no red or white lights in evidence). The craft was further described as being about the size of a four door sedan, triangular and appearing to have rounded rather than pointed edges. Although there was still distant thunder in the background, the witness indicated they heard no type of motor or engine sounds. No other unusual effects were noticed, nor did there appear to be other aircraft in view. The primary witness stated that they were all surprised that any type of aircraft would be flying in close proximity to such a storm, and it's appearance and shape only added to the overall strangeness of the event. It might be noted that one of the witnesses is a former flight attendant who has experience with various aircraft types and their characteristics. David will be scheduling to meet with these individuals during the next two weeks in order to obtain statements, sketches, and a visit to the event site. David will keep us posted as to what he develops in this inquiry. Thanks to Tom Sheets OHIO UFO SEEN SPRAYING CHEMTRAILS? DAYTON -- John E. Lynch writes, "I feel that the information you have written concerning UFO's and contrails is correct." I read an article on the Jeff Rense website about this. I watched all year the activity of these contrails and have become sick because of them. I work as security officer at a major hospital located in the Dayton, Ohio area. The contrails would start and by the evening the people would start rolling into the emergency department. I work outside and watched these contrails being sprayed. I observed a very strange thing around the end of June as I was watching the planes when a silver disk appeared inside one of these trails and sprayed a small trail just like the plane. I was shocked and continued to watch as this disk stopped spraying and shot off into the distance. Thanks to John E. Lynch" lynch75@webtv.net LOUISIANA JET SPRAYING DISAPPEARS NEW ORLEANS -- Michael L. Stovall reports that while flying in a commercial jet first class seat on July 22, 2000, from Tampa to Houston, at 30,000 feet, I personally viewed our jet come up on another jet at 10:00 AM heading west over the New Orleans Delta area. The other jet was approximately 2500 feet from us when it suddenly began spraying for perhaps several miles, then stopped and disappeared out of sight. We were cruising at approx. 550 mph, so they had to have gone through sound barrier to disappear out of sight in 2-3 seconds. Thirty minutes later we viewed two UFO's over Galveston Bay/NASA Houston at 20,000 feet. They were cigar shaped flat silvery gray at maybe 5000 feet linear distance from us and south of our flight path. Thanks to Michael L. Stovall, doctrader@ev1.net LIVING TRACER ENTERPRISES Brenda Livingston writes last December, I had the rare opportunity to witness an aircraft or oblong object disappear -- along with its lengthy persistent contrail as I was intently watching it through binoculars. Greg Avery and I have been working together on solving the contrail/anomalous object mystery for several months now. Based on my own and other's photographs and observations and a year and a half of research regarding contrails, it would appear that not only aircraft are creating PCs in our skies. We just may be witnessing new evidence of UFO activity either creating and/or manipulating gases/ substances in our atmosphere. It is my hope that more researchers and MUFON members will get out and look up with binoculars, 35 mm Cameras. I have developed techniques to enlarge and enhance print film, and Greg's Canon GL1 video camera and retrieve more information about these anomalous objects in and near persistent contrails. Thank you for your coverage of this new area of research. Brenda has an excellent website at http://tracers.8m.com. Thanks to Brenda Livingston: Living- Tracer Enterprises http://tracers.8m.com/atmosphere2.htm OKLAHOMA UFO CAUGHT ON GOLF VIDEOTAPE ELK CITY -- A golf pro who takes videotape of his students captured A UFO on film. A team of MUFON investigators including Katheryn Fanning, Susan Hill, Shelly Ritter and Chuck Pine comprised the team. They met Mike Proctor and Sy Friedman the golf pro. Chuck writes, "We reviewed the tape at Sys' home." We slowed it down and most thought that the UFO was a rod, but it needs further examination. We interviewed both parties, took pictures to document the area, drove down the road and stopped at several businesses where the people work outside to see if anyone had seen anything at the 9:00 AM time period. None had seen anything. We went to the police station and airport but nothing had been reported anything. We talked with the control tower and Fixed Base Operator personnel. The object was not an insect and first appeared in the frame in the middle left edge, it was heading in an East to West direction. Each frame shows it moving, then making a turn to the NW and going down behind the trees. This places it about a mile away and 30 to 40 feet in length and approximately 3 feet in size, with large fins. It reappeared climbing from behind the trees approximately 200 yards away still heading in a northwest direction. The video further revealed an undulation pattern of the fins, a blurred pattern appears in the front and back portion of the "critter" This again is congruent with the video on the rods. The body was blurred and no definite shape would be identified. The estimated speed was 1500 mph. Thanks to Chuck Pine TEXAS CONTRAILS CENTRAL TEXAS - Ann writes, "Contrails in our skies have taken on a new twist. I noticed a chemtrail in progress from my kitchen window. When I went outside for a better look, I noticed the pilot turning the spray off and on several times. He would turn the spray on ONLY when he crossed one of the existing trails that had been laid down in an earlier spraying pass, leaving a patch of blue sky between the trails. This could have been an attempt at stealth by making the spray look patchy instead of linear. My camera was out of film, so I took no pictures. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of photo opts where Chemtrails are concerned. I'm certain that the spraying is designed to serve multiple objectives. Any operation of this magnitude would be undertaken as a joint effort to share the expense, to confound any organized opposition by creating a "Blind Men and the Elephant" situation (keep us arguing amongst ourselves as to cause and effect, thereby, missing the big picture) and to conveniently shift the blame when the eventual day of reckoning comes. I have also noticed that it takes about 7 minutes for the planes to traverse the sky from horizon to horizon. I've pointed out the spray to my neighbors. They are horrified. All report the standard illnesses that others have associated with the spray. Even our pets are ill. Please withhold my name as I am certain that names are being taken. Thanks to Ann CANADA THREE UFO SAUCERS KINGSTON -- Three campers and myself witnessed three disk or saucer shaped multicolor emitting objects hovering in the night sky on July 25, 2000. The sighting occurred after a thirty minute drive north of Kingston. Objects were saucer shaped, hovering erratically at 1:30 AM in an inclined roughly 30 degree angle. The bottom of each UFO was brightly lit with a white light. The top or back of each object was adorned with different colored lights with red dominating the center in a line, and blue at the tips accompanied by shades of yellow and green. The lights would pulse in a seemingly random order, with the red lights flashing in synchronization, or one at a time. At times, an object would assume a smooth regular flight path to commence hovering at a new location. Ascension and diving were rapid and at equal velocities. These objects were visible for two hours, and made no sound. It is probably worth mentioning that there was an unusually large meteor shower that night at 1:30 AM. Thanks to Peter Davenport, NUFORC, www.ufocenter.com. UNITED KINGDOM AIRCRAFT VANISH CARAVAN SITE BURSCOUGH -- On July 13, 2000, at 11:55 AM, Bill Eatock writes Stephen Ralph and myself were sat on a bench at a Caravan Site having a break when we noticed what appeared to be two military jet fighter aircraft very high up and quite close together in the clear sky. As we watched the aircraft we were astounded to see that the planes appeared to be jerky in their movements, as if they were moving forward then jumping back slightly. Both craft did this but independent of each other. The aircraft then entered a small cloud. We waited for the aircraft to come out from behind the cloud in order to try and make sense of the strange movement. However, to our astonishment, the aircraft did not reappear from behind the small cloud they simply disappeared! Shortly after this strange occurrence a number of small propeller driven aircraft converged on the area. The prop craft were white with black wing tips and black underbelly. Thanks to Bill Eatock Director of Inquiry ERG Investigations kcotae@viton.new.labour.org.uk AIRCRAFT SUDDENLY DISAPPEAR Dr. Bruce Coronet writes regarding Filer's Files #30. Hypothetically, if these aircraft are really becoming invisible (I have lost track of aircraft in the sky, and seen them blend in with their bright background), and represent alien craft, the reason for spraying could be in preparation for contact. As a biologist I am very aware of what foreign viruses and bacterial agents can do, and so is the government. Whole tribes of Indians were wiped out by contact with the Spanish in the Americas. If there is any possibility for cross contamination and disease, an alien species could not land and make contact, period! Unless they remained suited up in decontamination outfits. One way of building our immunity to their diseases is to inoculate us, but doing so by airborne particles is the slow way -- not as good as a shot in the arm. If these ETs are benevolent, they would not attempt contact until a significant percentage of our population is immunized against all their potential diseases. If these ETs were here to exterminate us, why not just land. Their contamination would spread like wildfire, and the confusion resulting from contact would disrupt any attempt by government to control the spread of that contamination. Large and expensive projects to inoculate populations are usually not done by diabolical leaders intent on destroying their resources. So, don't be so paranoid. Be alert and concerned, however. Keep looking. Thanks to Bruce Cornet (bcornet@monmouth.com) THE REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS Tim Cooper writes. "According to Edward Ruppelt's account preserved in his book THE REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS published in 1956, there were sightings in August, September and October of 1951." At approximately 9:00 P.M. on August 25, 1951, an employee of the Sandia Corporation's AEC subsidiary division, and his wife observed a large, triangle-shaped craft pass slowly and silently over Albuquerque, New Mexico, at a very low altitude. The object was described as a V-shaped wing with six-to-eight soft, glowing, bluish lights on the wing's leading edges. Please see, http://home.earthlink.net/~rcollins634/reports/lubbock_lights51 .htm BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT - All real estate agents are not the same? Some real estate agents or sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced. Others are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities. When you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest investments! Remember, the majority of people do not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems. Picking the right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find out, " What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs. To get a free copy of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com. We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and US. US GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO Alert at Edwards Air Force Base and studied by the Foreign Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now available for distribution. Sam Sherman's audio documentary tape called EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual voice recordings provided by the Air Force. During this event 12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down low over the runways at Edwards AFB. Tower operator Sgt. Chuck Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command. Sgt. Sorrels is heard on the original tapes where he verifies the event . The UFOs are described and a decision is made to launch F-106 fighter interceptors. You are there for important UFO history. Hear it for yourself, it's the best UFO tape ever made. Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00 for shipping - total $16.95 -- (for overseas orders-out of US - add $6.00 shipping - total -- $20.95) you can send a personal check or money order to: Independent International Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, N J 08857. PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO shots available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham Bethune.. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055 MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention I recommended you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2000 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the files on their Web Sites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item appeared. Send your letters to Majorstar@aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:00:34 -0400 Subject: UpDate: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition Greetings, By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! Please take a close look at the following statements: <begin quote> After Missouri MUFON State Director Bruce Widaman's short welcome-to-the-symposium intro, out-going MUFON International Director Walter H. Andrus, Jr., gave a brief address in which noted his pending "semi-retirement" due to his need to attend to his wife Jean's failing health. Andrus praised his wife's long-standing help in his UFO-related efforts. He then turned the podium over to John F. Schuessler, M.S., who was to assume the MUFON International Directorship on the Sunday afternoon of the symposium. After more praise for Andrus, Schuessler moved on to publicly laud Las Vegas-based billionaire real estate magnate Robert T. Bigelow's, National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS). Schuessler said he hoped to promote "sharing" info/efforts with NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition with NIDS and other UFO organizations. (From a few comments I heard from other MUFONites, apparently not all share Schuessler's enthusiasm for NIDS.) He went on to note that in the next year or two MUFON hopes to have its entire case database on-line via its web site.(Apparently only general case synopses will be available on-line for access by the general public; specific case details will be accessible only to registered MUFON members.) Washington State MUFON Director Gerald E. Rolwes: www.mufon.com/washington.html is also a strong NIDS proponent according to the "scuttlebutt" heard at the symposium <end quote> It doesn't take a "conspiracy nut" to see that there's more going on here with Carpenrter, MUFON and Bigelow/NIDS than meets the eye or the press releases! First, if the new MUFON Director, John Schuessier, says in his address speech that "he hoped to promote sharing info/efforts with NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition with NIDS", then you know the parties concerned have already engaged in lengthy discussions and planning for this "coalition". Schuessier would not have "spilled the beans" if he was not already confident of his proclamation. He's just testing the waters! Now despite allegations of government "insiders" in key positions within NIDS, this coalition with MUFON may not have roused any suspicions if not for the recently revealed professional "misconduct" of MUFON's Director of Abduction Research, Mr. John Carpenter. Let's briefly review the "Carpenter Case Time-Line", then you decide if this announcement from Schuessier to form a "coalition" between MUFON and NIDS is an innocent and productive partnership, or is this an attempt to control the flow of UFO data and to cover-up the "misconduct" of one of their own. Don't ever underestimate the "good-old-boys-network"! It works for governments and UFO organizations. 1996 or thereabouts, John Carpenter solves his personal financial problems by selling 140 "abductee files" to Robert Bigelow of NIDS at $100. each for a total of $14,000. It's not known whether John approached Bigelow first or the other way around. 1997 or thereabouts, John Carpenter releases a commercial videorelease entitled "Encounters in Australia". He films these eight interviews under the pretense that the video would be for his private research only, not for commercial gain. 1997 to 2000 - or thereabouts, deafening silence from all concerned. 2000 - in June or thereabouts, investigators in USA reveal that Walt Andrus and other top officials in MUFON had knowledge of Carpenter's "file-sale" for several years and have up to the present time done nothing to "censure" John Carpenter or publicly correct Carpenter's professional "misconduct". Subsequent investigations reveal that top MUFON representatives and certain independent researchers in other countries like Australia, South America, Europe and England also knew about Carpenter's "file-sale", but preferred to remain anonymous and let others closer to Carpenter deal with this unpleasant situation. 2000 - in July or thereabouts, the story of Carpenter's professional "misconduct' breaks on several discussion mailing lists around the world. Attempts to involve MUFON and Bigelow or NIDS in the public discussion elicit no formal responses. In fact, when this matter is posted on the NIDS bulletin board, the webpage is immediately pulled down for "repairs". At the recent MUFON Conference, a representative from NIDS, Colm A. Kelleher, Ph.D is a guest speaker. As was anticipated, Kelleher's talk was mostly a gloss-over promo for NIDS. (Kelleher was conspicuously absent from the late Sunday afternoon symposium Speakers' Panel "Q&A" session.) Obviously, Mr. Kelleher did not want to hang around the conference and be in a position to field questions about delicate matters like the Carpenter "file-sale" and alleged government "insiders" on the NIDS payroll. 2000 - in late July or thereabouts, John Carpenter finally responds publicly to allegations about his professional "misconduct". Carpenter downplays the negative effects of his abductee "file-sale" and drags his feet on correcting his "mistakes". He also downplays any involvement by MUFON or NIDS in the Carpenter case and would like us all to forgive and forget about this whole matter as soon as possible. 2000 - at MUFON Conference, new director of MUFON, John Schuessier, announces upcoming "coalition" between MUFON and NIDS, and to have its entire case database on-line via its web site within a year or two. Still no word about the "Carpenter Case" at any MUFON conference or publication. John Carpenter says he is now preparing a (very carefully worded) statement that will outline and explain his "professional misconduct" to his satisfaction, for an upcoming issue of the MUFON Journal. This amateur time-line is by no means complete or entirely correct, as I'm sure others can fill in the blank spaces and reveal more of the facts of this important case to test the validity and value of research methods and data sharing with the organizations of modern and commercial Ufology. --------------------------------- In conclusion, Certainly, the "professional misconduct" of John Carpenter takes on new meaning and implications depending on what deals have been made between MUFON and NIDS "behind closed doors". Was Carpenter the "loose cannon" that has to be white-washed with the damage control team to prevent MUFON from losing private funding from Bigelow and to insure that NIDS gets all the UFO-type data collected by MUFON? Or was Carpenter's "file-sale" somehow part of the plan to bring about the coalition between MUFON and NIDS? I find it amusing and disturbing that both MUFON and NIDS have the worldwide reputation for being the "black holes" of modern Ufology. Data and evidence goes in, but doesn't come out! So what do we get when we put two "black holes" together?:-<> __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm PO Box 1344 Port Macquarie New South Wales Australia 2444 ******************************************** Contact me if you're looking for information about any particular UFO film or TV program, or if you would like to exchange UFO videos. ******************************************** "You take the blue pill and the story ends. You awake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe." "You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes." (Quotes from the movie "The Matrix") ************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:12:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:05:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni Dear List Members I've been following the "Bush" story with interest. Before this story broke, I had been at a social dinner party in London when I received some unusual information. The following was posted in Bruni's Column at www.ufocity.com for July: Did Clinton Mess Up The Truth Being Told? At a recent social function I met a mature titled gent who claimed to be a friend of a British intelligence agent who had visited Area 51. Apparently, this agent had seen parts of extraterrestrial technology being manufactured at the infamous site. "There are spacecraft there," I was informed. "But why then are they keeping this a secret," I asked, to which my new friend reported that steps had been taken to inform the public, which was to be announced by President Clinton. However, when Clinton became involved in the sex scandals it was decided that the truth might not be taken seriously and therefore should be saved until they had a president more capable of dealing with it. The name of the president elected to enlighten the world in the new millennium, is, I am told, George W Bush! Is that foresight? We shall wait and see - but if it transpires, you read it here first! Georgina Bruni
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Nick Pope's Weird World - August 2000 From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:25:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:11:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Nick Pope's Weird World - August 2000 Weird World by Nick Pope www.hotgossip.co.uk Welcome to the August column, and the usual mix of news, views and gossip from the weird and wonderful world of UFOs, alien abductions, paranormal phenomena and anything else that grabs my attention. Summer Conference For those of you who check this column at the beginning of each month, you have time to book tickets for what promises to be the hottest conference of the Summer. The Unusual Experiences Conference is being held on Sunday 6 August between 9.30 am and 6pm, at Marlborough College in Wiltshire. The literature promises lectures on UFOs, ghosts, anomalous lights, Near Death Experiences, ancient sites, crop circles and synchronicities. A massive twenty speakers are scheduled to appear, including Robert Bauval, Lucy Pringle, Michael Roll and Peter Sorenson. Tickets are �10 in advance or �12.50 on the door. Further details can be obtained by checking out: www.paradigmshift.com/flyer.html or by telephoning the organisers on 01672 861435/539124. Enjoy yourselves. Turin Shroud Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince are the formidable writing team behind controversial titles The Templar Revelation and The Stargate Conspiracy. Now, in a long overdue move, the first book they wrote together has been published in paperback. Turin Shroud is the story of, well, you�ve guessed it, the Turin Shroud. But prepare to be shocked and amazed by what you read. You�ll join the authors on what was an extraordinary journey of discovery, where they undertake an investigation worthy of any great detective. The book suggests that the Turin Shroud was faked by none other than Leonardo da Vinci, but I won�t tell you how, or even more sensationally, why. You�ll have to read it yourselves. Well-researched, gripping, irreverent and heretical, this book comes highly recommended. It costs �6.99 and is published by Corgi Books. Turkey Conference I know I said I�d write an account of the conference I attended in Istanbul, but I�ll be writing this up for the next edition of UFO Magazine. Lesbian And Gay Abductees Randle, Estes and Cone have caused much debate over their sensational claim that 50% of abductees are lesbians and gay men. An outrageous claim designed to generate some publicity for their book, or a genuine attempt to kick-start a debate on an important new finding? There are numerous views, but this issue has certainly got people talking, and indeed an e-mail from Randle and Estes prompted a rare online offering from Budd Hopkins, no less. I�ve discussed this with both Budd Hopkins and with John Mack, in the margins of the conference we attended in Istanbul on 23-25 June. My view, for what it�s worth, is this: while 50% seems a totally outrageous claim (and at odds with my own research and investigations), I have noticed a slightly higher proportion of lesbians and gay men among the abductees than chance alone would suggest. So while there are unanswered questions about the methodology used by Randle and his colleagues, their claim does strike me as something worthy of a closer look. Now, it�s way too early to say what - if anything - this might mean. Science doesn�t yet understand homosexuality, and is undecided as to whether it�s caused by genetic or cultural factors, or a mixture of both. So if we don�t understand homosexuality, we can�t hope to understand why it might be (slightly) more prevalent among abductees than among the population as a whole. One idea that might occur to those abduction researchers who believe the alien agenda involves the removal of genetic samples to create human/alien hybrids is that it has something to do with genetics. Given that lesbians and gay men are less likely to have children, are the abductors attempting to utilise genes that are less likely to be passed on to the general human population? These are dangerous waters, both because of the prejudices that exist against homosexuals, and because of the ways in which abductees can be ridiculed by debunkers and certain sections of the media. But this is a potentially significant piece of the puzzle, and is something about which we�ll doubtless be hearing more over the next few months. Books Books Books The Watkins Books Summer catalogue is out now, and is packed with new titles on various esoteric subjects. Mysteries, the paranormal and self-development all f eature strongly, so check out www.watkinsbooks.com for details of numerous interesting books. Desmond Leslie And George Adamski A regular reader of this column asked me to say something about Desmond Leslie�s appearance at the UFO Conference held in San Marino on 3/4 June, with specific reference to whether he still stood by the testimony of the contactee George Adamski. The answer to that is that he most definitely does. Now, that�s not to say that Adamski couldn�t be - as Leslie put it - "silly". But as he said, we all are, sometimes. Does that mean that Adamski exaggerated a bit? Maybe. But Desmond ended his powerful and witty speech by making the following statement: "George Adamski was an honest man". I�m not sure I can add much to this. Although I wrote a brief summary of Adamski�s story (and those of most of the other better-known contactees) in chapter 2 of The Uninvited, the best way to assess the story is by reading Flying Saucers Have Landed, the book that Desmond Leslie and George Adamski co-authored. Additionally, try Adamski�s two subsequent books, Inside The Spaceships and Flying Saucers Farewell. And if you can get a copy, the very rare George Adamski: The Untold Story by Lou Zinsstag and Timothy Good is well worth reading. All I can tell you is this: I very much enjoyed meeting Desmond Leslie and chatting to him at length over various meals during our stay in San Marino. He�s a charming and intelligent man, who came across as entirely sincere. He knew Adamski very well and spent a phenomenal amount of time investigating the man and his claims - claims he stands by nearly fifty years after they were first published. Adamski died in 1965 and few of those who now write about him ever met the man, so to my mind the view of Desmond Leslie must count for a lot. But at the end of the day, it can�t be proved either way. Only George Adamski knew for sure, and he took his secrets to the grave. Nick Pope London August 2000 Nick Pope�s three books, Open Skies, Closed Minds, The Uninvited and Operation Thunder Child are available from all good bookshops and from the usual Internet book sites. His UK publishers are Simon & Schuster. In America, The Overlook Press publish his books in hardback while the paperbacks are produced by Dell Publishing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: "Boycott" John Carpenter? From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 16:02:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:23:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: "Boycott" John Carpenter? Hello All, An Australian 'researcher,' (self-professed) sent me the following proposal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Greetings Ann Mulvey and fellow Researchers, Are we finally ready and able to boycott one of "our own" for the protection and restoration of our credibility and integrity as a Global UFO Research Community? <snip> ---------------------------------------------------------------- My response: Hello Mike, Please forward this response to _all_ the people who received your original please. *Ann, please post this to the Compuserve UFO Forum if you will. JV Response to proposal to "Boycott" John Carpenter: I am an abductee too. Not a self-professed amateur UFO investigator. My stake in this is in blood and bone. Myself, my wife, and my children have all been affected by this strangeness all of our lives. _That_ is where my concern and involvement stem from. Because I broke this story in public I think I have the right to comment here. I care about the people... not revenge. I leave Carpenter and the rest to God and the courts. By formally calling for a "boycott" of John Carpenter you are (in essence) trying and convicting him in a public Kangaroo court! Here in the US you are - innocent until _proven_ guilty - not the other way around. If and when John Carpenter is sued in civil court by the people whose rights he may have violated, and he is found guilty by a jury of his peers then, and only then, is a "boycott" appropriate. You have arrested, tried, and convicted him in one fell swoop. Now you publicly propose to execute his sentence/punishment by calling for a boycott. I am currently working hard to get him to notify the clients whose files he sold to Bigelow. As I said above, I leave his judgement and if found guilty, his punishment, to God and to the courts. I sit in judgement of no man. I am only seeking to get some justice for the abductees whose privacy and anonymity may have been seriously compromised - not nailing John Carpenter to a cross or trashing his chances to earn a livelihood. There are Universal Laws that take care of that kind of thing by themselves. Leave John to the Lords of Karma. "Vengeance is Mine sayeth the Lord"! Focus on getting help for the folks that were violated, not 'hurting' John personally because he hurt others. The way you want to 'hurt' him is _no different_ from the way he hurt his own clients. By finding him guilty in public (without trial or allowing him to defend himself) you reduce yourself to the level of the thing you claim to be outraged by! Think about it. Exercise some wisdom. Direct your energies in a positive channel and help pressure Carpenter into notifying those clients whose files he sold - not on taking Carpenter down. By definition you are trying to rouse up a lynching party before the man has been found guilty. I will not be a party to such a thing. I don't like the way you think or do business Mike. Please remove me from your mailing list. If you wish to join us in getting Mr. Carpenter to notify his clients then we will warmly welcome your help. If you wish to launch a personal vendetta against John Carpenter or anybody else, count me out! Sincerely, John Velez, Webmaster, Abduction Information Center http://www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.html -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:42:18 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:40:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks Greetings, Just to show you we haven't made this whole thing up, here's a reply from one of the participants in the video released by John Carpenter entitled 'Encounters in Australia' See UFO UpDates Archive 'Carpenter's OZ Video-Rumors and Facts' for more details at: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m07-008.shtml The name is Kelly Cahill, and she was interviewed for the video and confirms that she and others were mislead by John Carpenter, who told the participants that their interviews would be kept private. Carpenter then released them on a commercial video soon afterwards. Now, compared to the damage done to the abductees whose files were sold by Carpenter, this matter of the misrepresented Australian video interviews is very small. The participants involved with the video interviews do not want to pursue Carpenter any further at this point. This is being brought to your attention only to illustrate that the "professional misconduct" displayed by Carpenter is not an isolated incident 'out of character', but shows a definite and disturbing pattern of total disregard for patient confidentiality and the common standards of honesty and integrity within the UFO Research Community. You can find out more about Kelly Cahill's celebrated roadside abduction case, corroborated by independent witnesses, near Melbourne in 1993, by going to any Australian UFO website or referring to her book 'Encounter' (Harper Collins 1996) or see Bill Chalker's book 'The OZ Files' (Duffy & Snellgrove 1996) Let me preface her remarks by pointing out that Kelly was responding to posts on this subject from Australian and other mailing lists, and in particular to a post calling for the Global UFO Research Community to "Boycott" the Carpenter/MUFON/NIDS coalition by refusing to 'buy' any more of their books, videos, or lectures until they publicly recognise and correct their "professional misconduct". I would also like to point out that what Kelly expresses about the UFO politics in Australia can also be said for many other countries as you all know very well. But that doesn't excuse the fact that Carpenter's file-sale could be considered the greatest offence against the credibility and integrity of the UFO Research Community since big-time UFO Researcher and Roswell Invesigator Bill Moore proclaimed he was an active dis-information agent for the US Government a decade ago. Here's the first and only response from Kelly Cahill with her permission to post on all mailing lists following the 'Carpenter Case'. I don't personally agree with all her comments, but I'll let you decide for yourself what rings true for you. _____________________________________ From: xxxxx.xxx (Kelly-Cahill) To: "Mike Farrell" <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: To Boycott or not to Boycott "Carpenter"? Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 Dear Mike, In many ways I agree with the letter of John Valez, which opposed calling for a "boycott" against Carpenter. The bitchiness and "lets kill 'em all" attitude in Australian UFO politics is the main reason I have stayed out of the field in this country for the past few years. Yet I have been welcomed with open arms in other countries without my contribution being a threat to others in the field as it appears to be here. I have seen many dirty deeds done against other people from researchers in this country... maybe if I took them up as public issues we could boycott half the Australian research community... (bet that has a few people quivering in their shoes... hehe). Honestly, I am one of the people who has been mistreated by John with the video scenario... but I personally had that out with him long ago. People do stupid and greedy things... The buyer of John's files is not an unknown quantity in the global UFO field and has certainly funded many events and researchers. These files did not go on public display for the world... but to another involved in the field. It could have been a lot worse... they could have been sold to the media instead... then everyone would have something to really complain about. Could it be that there is a certain amount of jealousy over the fact that someone actually got paid something? If you were to be funded by a millionaire... would you pass that opportunity up? Also what of the research organisations that change hands? Are the new officials entitled to peruse the files of experiencers? Again, is talk and gossip about file contents of experiencers not just as harmful as the actual hardcopy data? Because if so, then just about every researcher I have ever met is guilty of it. To be honest, I am not happy with John Carpenter for my own personal reasons... but I don't like the witch-hunt attitude in this country's politics... and the absolute determination to destroy someone. I have had another Australian researcher take a private discussion I had with him and spout off to an American publication about it... very personal information. Again I was very upset, but did not see the need to force him out of the UFO field. There are other incidents that I could discuss in detail... but what on earth for? I know this sounds callous and may be taken that way by other experiencers... but it really isn't. I am in favor with more data being shared between credible researchers, rather than hoarded and jealously guarded. For example, if one researcher was working on a project, it would be good for other researchers to be able to contribute what data they have that they may think to be of use for the particular project. Not that I am saying that this is what John has done... cause obviously it isn't. But I think experiencers have to remember... that the data is what was of interest here...not them personally. This is where we fail to see the very basics of human nature... no-one cares who you are as a person and it is the last thing they are interested in or concentrate on. When they discuss the results of a personal medical examination of a particular experiencer... no-one cares who the experiencer is... nor are they thinking about her vagina... they are only interested in the data gleaned and possible comparisons. I am against what John did... but fair is fair... lets wipe out half the global UFO field in one shot if we are going to become the inquisition... Or prove ourselves to be better researchers, and gain a far more respected reputation that will bring more trusting experiencers to our doors. Setting out to destroy someone with revenge is almost as bad as betraying a person when it comes to the issue of respect. I certainly would not share my trusted information with anyone who may turn on me at any time. Well that's all I really have to say. Live and let live is a good way to be. I think John is well and truly aware of the problems this has caused and has probably learned a very big lesson from all of this fuss... would you do it again if it were you? There is no need to take it any further in my opinion, as the point has already been made. Maybe what is left to be done is possible discussions between John Carpenter and the abductees involved... some may like an apology. Mike... this will be the only public thing I have to say on this issue. Please add it to your mailists. I realise that there will probably be some nasty responses in reply because of the imaginary political correctness in the UFO field in this country. So bite me I say! Kind regards... Kelly Cahill __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: MUFON At The Crossroads From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 10:24:29 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:08:49 -0400 Subject: UpDate: MUFON At The Crossroads I would like to share the latest update from Gary Hart (MUFON Field Invesigator from Illinois, USA) who was and still is the principal investigator of the "Carpenter Case". He has volunteered much of his own time and money to champion the cause of the abductees who were "sold out" by John Carpenter some 4 years ago. Gary recognizes that this case goes far beyond the incidents of "professional misconduct" by Carpenter. Though all the abductees violated by the sale of their files must be contacted and informed of their unjust predicament. The integrity and credibility of MUFON, the world's largest UFO organization depends on the outcome of this case, whether they realize it or not. And the National Institute of Discovery Sciences and all other researchers who enjoy the private funding from Las Vegas casino millionaire Bigelow had better take notice. The strings attached to monetary donations by secretive "benefactors and patrons" may be a bigger price than we are all willing to pay for the sake of UFO Research. Who gets something for nothing? Think about it! ______________________________ From: geehart@frontiernet.net To: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: To Boycott or not to Boycott "Carpenter"? Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 Mike, Again I agree with you. I know too much about John and the many things about him that will _not_ see the light of day. The abductees I am working for directly, several dozen on the list of 90 names we have, all are full support of my efforts. I needed to make everyone aware of the situation once MUFON was officially approached. What people want to do individually with this information is up to them. The abductees willing to stand with me will sign statements that we will take to the state licensing board. This may take several months to accomplish as much of my report will have to be re-written for them. They may take as long as a year to render a verdict so public awareness now will prevent some problems that would have occurred as we follow this process. I find it very interesting that MUFON knows John sold files though he has denied it to me many times. He now admits that other abduction researchers may not have gotten Informed Consent forms from all their hypnosis subjects plus it will be hard to contact everyone involved... a clear admission that material left his hands! His messages repeatedly try to trivialize the situation as no big deal. If MUFON sticks to this position, they are at least unprofessional themselves in addition to the major ethical issues where John has directly violated their Code of Ethics. How can anyone NOT see this as a big deal? I don't see what is going on as a kangaroo court. John is snagging himself in a web of deception. The longer he talks, the deeper the hole he digs. Unfortunately, there are several more people like this we know of. Cleaning house has to start with John. He has provably broken every rule in MUFON's book. So will they act now with the information they have? The integrity of the whole organization is on a razor's edge. Will they stand or fail us? Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:29:23 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:16:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight For Updates Readers; Karl Woods has now approached UFO Magazine with a view to promoting the video footage he shot over Hartford, Cheshire on 9th July 2000 at 1345. We are quite happy with the way in which Graham Birdsall and Russ Callaghan are handling this material - I have had friendly and useful conversations with both men - but some things need to be said; 1 - Karl Woods, it has now been proven, is not a "friend" or colleague of Eric Morris. Apologies welcome. 2 - Karl and friend Mike James asked me to act as an agent for them in order that they might financially benefit from the footage. Neither I not UFO Magazine (UK) have a problem with that. Karl has said as much; he is happy to know that the footage has a certain "commercial value" (!). 3 - At all times we acted in concert with him. He knew exactly what was happening and received �800 from the Daily Mail via Eric Morris for the exclusive interview he gave them and which he had total control over. Let's face it, he was photographed not me or my colleague Eric Morris. 4 - A regional paper, The Daily Post, received our Press Release and reported the story as per usual. They have done this on a dozen occasions over the last year ot two. When I spoke to the Asst. Editor Stuart Brown he said that the image they had used to accompany their story had been "photographed from the TV" - in other words their photographer had photographed a TV screen to pinch the image! I told Mr. Brown that this was not acceptable and that he should compensate Karl Woods because it was his copyright. Karl Woods confirmed this in a similar conversation a few days later but the story had changed! The Post was now claiming to have received stills from "Quest Publications Ltd" which most certainly did not happen. Neither Russ nor I can understand why the Post changed its story... Nevertheless, this is not a matter for me but for Mr. Woods and his solicitors. 5 - Karl and Mike are concerned about things having "snowballed" - their words - and yet they were happy for us to go to the TV and Karl spoke to the Daily Mail! I must have missed something here! 6 - Initially, Mike James said that he wanted to stay "in the background" and "out of the picture". Karl and Mike had several requests and they knew from the start that we'd go to the press in order, specifically, to appeal direct to the public for further information. Some new sightings and reports have been forthcoming and I now understand that there is a suggested link between the Cheshire events and a sighting in Gloucestershire. The word tentative is a good one in this case! 7 - Karl said that he would "transfer" the copyright over to Eric Morris "for 24 hours" whilst we went to the press. In fact, during the one brief meeting I had with him, he said that we could "do anything you like with it - just keep me out of it". Dave Kelly, a well-known Ufologist in the NW, has signed an affidavit to the effect that almost the same comments were made to him and Eric on their first visit! 8 - Much nauseating waffle has been written and spoken about "analysis". Analysing such a video is pretty much a waste of time but a favourite amongst Ufologists and their associates. Nevertheless, Woods agreed that should any money be forthcoming, we would use it for analysis. As it happened, I was contacted by NIDS who offered to do this for nothing. Dr. Green at Warwick University also contacted me as did the Physics Department of a South American University. I told them then that the copyright was with Karl Woods. So we did what Woods asked - try and get it analysed. Phil Mantle also offered to contact Jeff Sainio of MUFON to help. 9 - We never expected so much interest. My press release (I do work with the media on a daily basis amongst other things) was written quickly and based upon the information to hand, namely that other local sightings had been made including something quite remarkable from Stoke-on-Trent. The media is always interested in footage as any self-respecting Ufologist will tell you... 10 - I have not received any money through this. None whatsoever. Not a penny! Karl Woods, in the meantime, has received �800 from the Mail and should receive more from the Post. He initially offered to split the �800 with us but we'd rather he kept the money to be honest. There is an appearance fee due from the TV but I don't know anything about the details. I didn't appear for a start!! The blatant hypocrisy displayed by almost everyone in this matter has been incredible. At every stage smears have been dressed up as "enquiries" and the skeptics have made a big deal about it - miserably failing at every stage and ending up looking very jealous and very stupid because they have not seen the footage nor done any meaningful investigation. Perhaps the only "wind speed" that we should be measuring is the hot air emanating from certain skeptic's computer keyboards and mouths! Some of them have even written to colleagues of mine "warning" them not to support us publicly. In the meantime we'll carry on doing what we're good at - investigating UFOs and the Paranormal and going _directly_ to the media. That's our way and you won't find us apologising for it. As a result of the media's self-inflicted blitz we've been asked to appear on various TV and radio shows. If we get paid, then fine. This whole episode has done one very valuable thing - got UK ufology into the spotlight again after some lean months. Again, this is all to the good and there are two Conferences on 16th September that may benefit. Let's hope so! Between now and then many harsh words will be written - but not by me - because I don't care what the skeptics say, and neither do many other UpDates readers many of whom are convinced by the reality of Alien Contact - as am I. All we seek is further proof..... For those interested in seeing streamed video footage of the object or hearing and seeing Karl Woods, please visit the UFO Magazine (UK) website at; www.ufomag.co.uk Thank you for listening. Tim Matthews - British UFO Studies Centre. PS - Some details. In initial conversation Karl said that he estimated a cloudbase of 5,000 ft - not 2,000 as now suggested, nor mentioned that he thought the object was 12 miles away.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:49:42 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:18:49 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Hale >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 03:55:24 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Greetings, >Here's a response to the "rumors" about disputes over the >commercial video release by John Carpenter entitled "Encounters >in Australia". It's factual to the best of my investigative >efforts. <snip> >This video features eight interviews with: >>Glenny Mackay-QLD (15min) >David Summers-QLD (10min) >Kelly Cahill-NSW (15min) >B.Butler from Melbourne (20min) >Elizabeth Robinson (Perth, WA) >S.Whiteman from Sydney (15min) >Keith Basterfield-Vic. (10min) >Melissa-QLD (15min) Hi, Can anyone tell me if, any of those people mentioned above have written any books, given any public lectures or have appeared on any other UFO Abduction video, prior or since the release of John Carpenter's Video, in which they detail the events to their experiences? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:29:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:54:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Kaeser >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 03:55:24 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Greetings, >Here's a response to the "rumors" about disputes over the >commercial video release by John Carpenter entitled "Encounters >in Australia". It's factual to the best of my investigative >efforts. <snip> Mike (and all)- The sad fact is that most people who sign consent forms for video release rarely know exactly how that material is going to be used and where. Most consent forms that I've seen are very broad and (unless it is contested before it is signed) gives the producer global control over the material. This would include the re-selling of the material to another producer for use in other productions. I have contacted numerous researchers about their comments in video releases that I've found, and learned that the quotes were from earlier un-related interviews. In a majority of cases they weren't even aware that the material had re-surfaced in another production. Indeed, interviews that are given under a common release become property that can be used, sliced up, and/or sold. I guess that if we're going to take the bandwidth to tar and feather Carpenter, we should probably have a copy of the exact agreement that each person signed. Perhaps a copy of that agreement was given to each of those who signed it, and that might be a good place to start. One of the issues being raised by this thread is the fact that UFO material is also becoming a commodity that has value. As UFOlogy becomes more entertainment than an area of research this becomes more apparent, and it would be in our best interest to understand the mechanisms involved. Researchers have had to deal with the privacy issue all along, and even NICAP had specific guidelines in place if the witness didn't want to be identified in public statements or releases. But as archives are developed, how many files from former abduction researchers are being "sanitized" before they are included for review by other researchers? If they are "sanitized", does the remaining information provide enough detail to be of value to future researchers? In the case of the Project Blue Book microfilm archive the names of all individuals were blacked out and it was difficult to go back and follow up on any of the material. The discovery of an un-"sanitized" copy of the microfilm archive opened a number of doors for researchers and made their job a lot easier. As a Professional, Carpenter has guidelines and rules that he must follow as a member of the medical profession. If those who have been wronged are willing to come forward, then complaints can be filed and the matter heard before the Missouri Board of Social Workers. Others can file on their behalf, but it is likely that the abductees would still have to have some involvement in the procedings to provide the necessary evidence of wrongdoing. As a quasi-legal proceding the accused would at least have a right to cross-examination of the witnesses against him. But the issues raised here cover a far broader scope than those raised by this case. As archives are transferred from person to person, there is a good chance that large amounts of information that was thought to be private could suddenly become public. To their credit, current abduction researchers have taken great pains to protect their files and I have no reason to believe that any privacy information will be released from them. However, as we have also seen, the raw data from these files has often not been made available for review and has (to a certain extent) stymied the Abduction Transcription Project. It seems somewhat obvious that from the lack of reaction by MUFON that they believe that the transfer of information was in accordance with the "Ethics Code for Abduction Experience Investigation and Treatment" as outlined by Gotlib. This will likely be a subject that is written up in a future issue of the MUFON Journal, as they attempt to explain their position in all of this. Carpenter has already indicated that he's going to explain his position in an upcoming article, and one can only hope that MUFON will also make a statement on their position in this. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Help For Loren Coleman From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:23:34 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:06:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Help For Loren Coleman Subject: Goffstown, NH CEIII account Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:57:30 -0400 From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com> To: Forteana <forteana@primenet.com> Anyone have details and eyewitness names for the 1973 Goffstown, NH, UFO and small occupant report? I just don't have a handle on this stuff the way I do the cz items, but I'm visiting Goffstown, and was curious. And I'm not even on any UFO lists. Thanks, Loren
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:34:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:08:47 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? Dear friends: Yesterday I contacted Arturo Menay, director of Radio Coya of Mara Elena, Chile, and representative of the first movement, Anti -"blood depredator"- (Chupacabras) He tells me that the attacks continue. 6 cats killed before yesterday so far more than 70, all female. In any event, he inform me, they, the blood depredators, no longer call the attention with their presence, what more, children begin to play with the dead cats taking them from the paws and scaring their friends. Menay also inform me that just beside the right wheel of his automobile he found a sucked cat, he revised this feline claw for remains of the attacker hair but didn't find anything. It got his attention the fact that the attacked cat appeared in that place without having listened any noise or strange movement. It confirmed me that exactly 2 hours before the airplane of the Chilean air force (FACH) eject the bomb, the whole personnel that worked in the mine salt deposit stopped working, and 2 hours later they restarted it. This indicates us clearly the forethought of this attack and it also indicates us the complicity given by the high executives of this company (Soquimich). Jaime Guerra, in charge of Cultural Programs of Mara Elena's Municipality, has begun to throw the version: "Here, it doesn't happen anything". However, Mrs. Emilia Rojas, municipal secretary, has been witness the presence of out of town people and that they have made private meetings, close doors, in Jaime Guerra office. This had being notice, as bribe possibilities would be evident. Here in Calama and thanks to a neighbor that works as a Public Works inspector for the Municipality, confirmed the fact that YES, indeed, all farm owners, that lost their animals to blood depredators, had been reimbursed by the loss of their animals. He told me, they were given excessive money compared to the cost of these animals. Some of them were paid in cash, and others with a not amount specified in a document from INDAP (Instituto Nacional de Desarrollo Agropecuario). All this, was always accompanied with the commitment to these farm owners, to forgot this whole matter and not to comment it to anybody. A well known owner named Cabrera, will travel to the city of Iquique to have some pleasant vacations and he will take the advantage of buying a new automobile. Their neighbors comments; "before, he didn't have the money to buy a bicycle". In short; facing the impossibility to control this blood depredator s plague, authorities has taken the determination of "BUYING EVERYONE SILENCE" Note: This e-mail is from the Calama UFO Center, associated with the Miami UFO Center. We are receiving testimonies like this one not covered by the press. Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo Miami UFO Center (Espaol) http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html Miami UFO Reporter (English) http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/in dex.html Miami "Chupacabras" (Espaol) http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html Patagrande -Bigfoot- (Espaol) http://patagrande.homestead.com/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Brigham From: Tim D. Brigham <Dellamorte@mad.scientist.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:18:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:12:08 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter/Status Report Request - Brigham Someone recently commented that the social work authorities in John Carpenter's state have not received a single complaint regarding this matter. This is nearly unbelievable given all the talk this has been the center of. The most appropriate way for this to be handled, regardless of how you view the entire matter, would be for those whose files were sold to file formal complaints with the licensing authorities in John Carpenter's state immediately. Said authorities would be obligated to find out all the facts of the case and take appropriate actions, including (I would guess) notifying all those who had been wronged (if any). I do not see what is to be gained by having this all tied up by some sort of 'internal UFO investigation' by persons who have not demonstrated any knowledge of how such matters are to be handled. Putting this off yet again is probably going to do more harm than good. Continuing to make requests for 'the right thing' to be done, or letting UFO 'experts' handle it apparently won't get very far either. Discussion and rumors from those in the UFO field will not cause this to be taken seriously. If your name is on this list, I would strongly urge you to handle this the only way even remotely appropriate: call the board/authorities, register a formal complaint, and tell them you want an investigation/appropriate actions to be taken. Put this to those who can and should be responsible for it, and let the facts come out (whatever they may be) in the only way appropriate. Doing anything else minimizes the seriousness of the allegations as well as any harm caused.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: "Boycott" John Carpenter? - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 12:33:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:13:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: "Boycott" John Carpenter? - Hubbell >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 16:02:26 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: "Boycott" John Carpenter? >To: updates@sympatico.ca Hi John, >I care about the people... not revenge. I leave Carpenter and >the rest to God and the courts. By formally calling for a >"boycott" of John Carpenter you are (in essence) trying and >convicting him in a public Kangaroo court! Here in the US you >are - innocent until _proven_ guilty - not the other way around. I have to agree although on the surface the _boycott_ would seem to be our only alternative. When you think about it, however, it's kinda silly. I don't know Mr. Carpenter. I'm not even in the same area of the US as Mr. Carpenter so how could I boycott him? I hope Mr. Carpenter does the stand up thing, stops complaining and starts notifying the clients whose files were sold. Realistically, that's chasing rainbows. The only recourse those victimized by Mr.Carpenter's actions is through the courts, either criminal or civil actions. While Mr. Carpenter himself now believes he made a mistake (understatement alert!), I'm afraid he's set himself up to be the legal precedent for other abductee researchers. It seems pointless to me to keep calling for him to do the right thing and notify the clients involved in the scandal. Given the plentitude of excuses he's fabricated, it's unlikely he ever will. We have to face that ugly fact. Like you, John, I've been _had_ as abductee although I'm not one of the 140 whose file was sold. But you, and I as well as every abductee world wide have experienced a terrible breach of trust, one that will not be healed for a terribly long time. So instead of calling for Mr. Carpenter to resign (as I did) or for a boycott, we need to stay calm, cool and get focused. Above all, we have to make sure that this never ever happens again, legally, either through the criminal or the civil courts. That's the plan from my point of view. So let's go from here. By putting aside our bitterness and disappointment not only in Mr. Carpenter but in everyone involved, we will be able to maintain our focus on the job at hand. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:18:40 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:16:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca Greetings Mike >Las Vegas-based billionaire real estate magnate Robert T. >Bigelow's, National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS). >Schuessler said he hoped to promote "sharing" info/efforts with >NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition >with NIDS and other UFO organizations. I confess. What Iknow about NIDS I could fit on the head of a sewing needle with room to spare. FWIW, I'm not very fond of Mr. Bigelow for his part in the Carpenter scandal. _But_ If Mr. Bigelow is all fired up over a coalition with NIDS and other UFO organizations, abductees worldwide need to start thinking seriously about an advocacy group! I'm sure they're out there, somewhere, but based on their silence in this matter, they aren't much of an advocacy group. Considering Robert Bigelow's past actions, it's apparent, to me anyway, that we, the abductees, have no one and no where to turn. You can't open the Yellow Pages for the Abductees-R-Us phone number. Where are the researchers and organizations that you would trust in Australiar? I know a few in the United States whom I would trust and have trusted in the past. What about England? France? Switzerland? Surely there are respected advocates there as well. I really hate to say this but I think it's pointless to keep badgering John Carpenter. It's unlikely he'll ever notify the 140 clients whose files were sold and we're just wasting our time since our pleas are falling on deaf ears. When you think about it however, Carpenter's reluctance to do the right thing works in our favor. If we get over our anger and bitterness, and get focused on developing a clearing house of information on UFO groups, organizations and researchers, we can begin to undo the damage Carpenter has done. Carpenter surely would be listed in the _not to be trusted_ category. I'm tired of spinning my wheels on a hopeless cause and want to get busy by turning this catastrophe into a good thing. >He went on to note that in the next year or two MUFON hopes to >have its entire case database on-line via its web >site.(Apparently only general case synopses will be available >on-line for access by the general public; specific case details >will be accessible only to registered MUFON members.) Well, this doesn't inspire confidence. If hackers can break into government computers, MUFON cannot guarantee the privacy and anonymity of abductees anywhere. Guess I'll have to join MUFON and become their conscience <grin>. <snip> >... Carpenter downplays the negative effects of his >abductee "file-sale" and drags his feet on correcting his >"mistakes". He also downplays any involvement by MUFON or NIDS >in the Carpenter case and would like us all to forgive and >forget about this whole matter as soon as possible. Unlikely. Despite the silence from other researchers and organizations, Carpenter will never be trusted again, and it won't take the boycott that some have called for to do it. Carpenter dug his grave wide and deep all on his own by selling those files. Frankly it doesn't matter who approached whom, it's my opinion the trust factor can never be repaired. <snip> >So what do we get when we put two "black holes" together?:-<> We get off our collective behinds and turn a negative into a positive. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: A Question Of Definition? From: Karoline Louise <KarolineLouise@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:29:21 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:19:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: A Question Of Definition? What follows is a hypothetical question Supposing a researcher was presented with a truly remarkable case of missing time, with physical scars which had been checked out by a doctor and pronounced to be inexplicable. Imagine there was a child in the case who had the regulation nosebleeds, manifested dreams of 'owls' and/or other such typical 'alien' manifestations, but NO other 'UFO' component. Imagine instead the child told of dreams of going to sleep in his bed and 'waking' in (say) a previous century, where he talked to a man now dead, and was later able to provide a description of the place he had been in a place he had never seen in 'reality', but which could be proved to have been a real place from the past. How would this case be treated? Is this 'alien abduction'? or 'past life recall'? Or is it evidence that these man-made definitions are more delusory than real, and more misleading than enlightening? Are there really no such cases which challenge the current compartmentalisation? Or are they tending to be ignored by investigators simply because they cannot be fitted into any of the orthodox 'disciplines'? I'd be interested in hearing any views Karoline Louise
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:29:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:31:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:20:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Selling Files - Jones >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:26:41 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Selling Files - Jones >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:29:17 +0100 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Selling Files >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Good Evening Jerome Thank you for taking the time to reply to my posting. I was not joking when I said to Peter that I would be interested in your reason why there was not entry for Dr Gotlib. >Sean: >>Why was there not an entry in your magnum opus of "The UFO >>Encyclopaedia" for a certain Dr Gotlib? >Simple. I was quite sparing in my use of biographical entries, >as you would know if you had seen my encyclopedia (not >"Encyclopaedia") -- as I infer you have not -- and I confined it >to individuals who had played a larger, more enduring, and/or >influential role in the history of the subject. "A certain Dr. >Gotlib," whose role in the subject, however admirable, was >fairly fleeting and consisted in its entirety to the editorship >of a small-circulation newsletter, does not qualify by that >definition. I think the difference between Encyclopaedia and encyclopedia is the same difference between colour and color, the same as the difference between centre and center. The difference being one is spelt the American way and the other the British way. >If I had it to do over again, there would again be no entry on >David Gotlib -- which is to say absolutely nothing against this >fine, thoughtful man. >Jerry Clark Please be assured I fully respect your work for I really do own a copy of " The UFO Book, Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" as it is called this side of the water. However one final question if I may. If you only list/mention/include people who have played a part in Ufology why does Peter Brookesmith not get a mention? After all would you not say that he has been around for some years and has contributed many times to Ufology with his books, magazines and other publications? -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:41:49 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:23:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks - Mortellaro >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:42:18 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Carpenter's OZ Video - Cahill Speaks >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Greetings, >Just to show you we haven't made this whole thing up, here's a >reply from one of the participants in the video released by John >Carpenter entitled 'Encounters in Australia' See UFO UpDates >Archive 'Carpenter's OZ Video-Rumors and Facts' for more details >at: >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m07-008.shtml >The name is Kelly Cahill, and she was interviewed for the video >and confirms that she and others were mislead by John Carpenter, >who told the participants that their interviews would be kept >private. Carpenter then released them on a commercial video soon >afterwards. >Now, compared to the damage done to the abductees whose files >were sold by Carpenter, this matter of the misrepresented >Australian video interviews is very small. The participants >involved with the video interviews do not want to pursue >Carpenter any further at this point. >This is being brought to your attention only to illustrate that >the "professional misconduct" displayed by Carpenter is not an >isolated incident 'out of character', but shows a definite and >disturbing pattern of total disregard for patient >confidentiality and the common standards of honesty and >integrity within the UFO Research Community. >You can find out more about Kelly Cahill's celebrated roadside >abduction case, corroborated by independent witnesses, near >Melbourne in 1993, by going to any Australian UFO website or >referring to her book 'Encounter' (Harper Collins 1996) or see >Bill Chalker's book 'The OZ Files' (Duffy & Snellgrove 1996) >Let me preface her remarks by pointing out that Kelly was >responding to posts on this subject from Australian and other >mailing lists, and in particular to a post calling for the >Global UFO Research Community to "Boycott" the >Carpenter/MUFON/NIDS coalition by refusing to 'buy' any more of >their books, videos, or lectures until they publicly recognise >and correct their "professional misconduct". >I would also like to point out that what Kelly expresses about >the UFO politics in Australia can also be said for many other >countries as you all know very well. But that doesn't excuse the >fact that Carpenter's file-sale could be considered the greatest >offence against the credibility and integrity of the UFO >Research Community since big-time UFO Researcher and Roswell >Invesigator Bill Moore proclaimed he was an active >dis-information agent for the US Government a decade ago. >Here's the first and only response from Kelly Cahill with her >permission to post on all mailing lists following the 'Carpenter >Case'. I don't personally agree with all her comments, but I'll >let you decide for yourself what rings true for you. >From: xxxxx.xxx (Kelly-Cahill) >To: "Mike Farrell" <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: To Boycott or not to Boycott "Carpenter"? >Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 >Dear Mike, >In many ways I agree with the letter of John Valez, which >opposed calling for a "boycott" against Carpenter. The >bitchiness and "lets kill 'em all" attitude in Australian UFO >politics is the main reason I have stayed out of the field in >this country for the past few years. Yet I have been welcomed >with open arms in other countries without my contribution being >a threat to others in the field as it appears to be here. <snip> Dear Kelly, Mike and Lister Twisters, not to mention Errol, Another historic first (now count about two others, not including me) with some common sense. There is an even more basic conundrum in all this than meets the initial glance, eh? It all proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that we in the UFO community are not professionally, morally or otherwise prepared be righteous without mercilously casting stones the size of Montana. Uh, I think Montana is big. Maybe I should've made that Texas. And what does that tell us? It tells me that I may have been all wrong when I made the statement that "we," the abductees, make the best researchers. Maybe we are the best only when it comes to our own experiences. And maybe we are not even the best at that. We are too emotionally involved in the issue to speak righteously all the time. Hoof arted? And everyone looks rather sheepishly. But when the real culprit gets redder than a cherry gone ripe, everyone begins the trip to the department of silly walks. What does it all mean? Well, if abductees are often unable to discuss a matter without going ballistic, and "researchers" are unable to slake the dollar signs being conjured up in their minds without a thick film of B.S., then who's left? The governement? NASA? The Media? Don't you see that in this mess and with the continuance of it with as yet, not all of the real truth being known, we have reduced ourselves to the level which Kelley described her country's UFO community? Which in turn, describes the entire rest of the UFO community thru- out this planet? We appear to be lost. Everyone, and I mean _everyone_ has lost credibility in this mess. Even our icons... my icons. I know I am not the only one wondering just how far this goes, many of you posters have asked the same question. We have just reduced the sum total of human trust in UFO research. And all by ourselves, stupid maroons that many of us are, we have burst the bubble of NIDS, Carpenter, and so many others. Wereas BC (before Carpenter) there was some measure of hope in the NIDS project, some level of faith in the ability of some researchers to maintain respect for truth, now, there is unbelief and a lessoning of our faith. Which is why John's post _is_ well said, but comes after the damage has been done. And no, I am not blaming John or anyone else. All of us have contributed to what _I_ perceive to be the downfall of UFO and abduction research. Just how low we've fallen is a question which only time will answer. But the only avenue left, as we twist and turn to seek someone, something, in which to trust, are the Goobers in Gooberland. They are not necessarily looking as bad as they once looked, just a few short weeks ago. BC. Jim Mortellaro PS: Some a yous people really don't think, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:07:46 -0007 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:29:13 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Greetings, >By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On The >MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th at the >West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in St. Louis >County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: > >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml > >So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! > >Please take a close look at the following statements: > ><begin quote> > >After Missouri MUFON State Director Bruce Widaman's short >welcome-to-the-symposium intro, out-going MUFON International >Director Walter H. Andrus, Jr., gave a brief address in which >noted his pending "semi-retirement" due to his need to attend to his >wife Jean's failing health. Andrus praised his wife's long-standing >help in his UFO-related efforts. He then turned the podium over to >John F. Schuessler, M.S., who was to assume the MUFON International >Directorship on the Sunday afternoon of the symposium. >After more praise for Andrus, Schuessler moved on to publicly >laud Las Vegas-based billionaire real estate magnate Robert T. >Bigelow's, National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS). >Schuessler said he hoped to promote "sharing" info/efforts with NIDS >and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition with NIDS >and other UFO organizations. (From a few comments I heard from other >MUFONites, apparently not all share Schuessler's enthusiasm for >NIDS.) >He went on to note that in the next year or two MUFON hopes to have >its entire case database on-line via its web site.(Apparently only >general case synopses will be available on-line for access by the >general public; specific case details will be accessible only to >registered MUFON members.) >Washington State MUFON Director Gerald E. Rolwes: >www.mufon.com/washington.html >is also a strong NIDS proponent according to the "scuttlebutt" heard >at the symposium ><end quote> >It doesn't take a "conspiracy nut" to see that there's more >going on here with Carpenrter, MUFON and Bigelow/NIDS than meets the >eye or the press releases! >First, if the new MUFON Director, John Schuessier, says in his >address speech that "he hoped to promote sharing info/efforts with >NIDS and the possibility of some sort of UFOlogical coalition with >NIDS", then you know the parties concerned have already engaged in >lengthy discussions and planning for this "coalition". Schuessier >would not have "spilled the beans" if he was not already confident >of his proclamation. He's just testing the waters! >Now despite allegations of government "insiders" in key >positions within NIDS, this coalition with MUFON may not have >roused any suspicions if not for the recently revealed >professional "misconduct" of MUFON's Director of Abduction >Research, Mr. John Carpenter. <snip> >At the recent MUFON Conference, a representative from NIDS, Colm A. >Kelleher, Ph.D is a guest speaker. As was anticipated, Kelleher's >talk was mostly a gloss-over promo for NIDS. (Kelleher was >conspicuously absent from the late Sunday afternoon symposium >Speakers' Panel "Q&A" session.) Obviously, Mr. Kelleher did not want >to hang around the conference and be in a position to field >questions about delicate matters like the Carpenter "file-sale" and >alleged government "insiders" on the NIDS payroll. <snip> Just for the record, I had to be back in Las Vegas late Sunday, I caught the last flight out of St Louis MO for a meeting on Monday. The comment about NIDS being "alleged government insiders" is tired old internet gossip, dredged up and barely warmed over by people who could not be bothered to check the facts. Why let the facts get in the way? This kind of claptrap unfortunately has become the signature of the United States "UFO investigative effort". While other countries are actually trying to do some serious research, the United States ufologists fall on each other and engage in cannibalism, backbiting, rumor-mongering and false innuendo. The result is that the nature of the UFO phenomenon remains unexamined and other countries researching the phenomenon forge ahead. For once, cant we all just forget about the incestuous infighting and do some research? Colm Kelleher NIDS
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Alleged Alien Symbols, Writing And Emblems - From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:09:46 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:06:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Alleged Alien Symbols, Writing And Emblems - >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:38:47 +0100 >From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk> >Subject: Alleged Alien Symbols, Writing And Emblems >To: updates@sympatico.ca >[Non-Subscriber Post] >Request to UFO UpDates list >Dear Colleagues >I am currently continuing to collect samples of alleged alien >writing, symbols and emblems with a view to compiling a >comprehensive database and in this endeavour I have managed so >far to acquire a number of different and interesting examples >from around the world. >If anyone knows of any cases where alleged alien symbols, >writings or emblems are reported, please mail details to >garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk any questions, suggestions or >comments are always welcome. <snip> Gar, Are you aware of the symbols, etc, identified by RPIT? We are getting a lot of input now from other ufologists connecting these symbols with others... _a_ very interesting one this week w ancient symbols just sent from Bosnia. Keep tuned! See: http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm The Fort Worth Pictures taken by James Bond Johnson. Scroll/click down to the "Beams/Glyphs" http://www.abduct.com/aaer/n52.htm News: Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photo http://www.abduct.com/aaer/n53.htm News: More Symbols Discovered on Roswell Crash Photos James Bond Johnson http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Research Enquiry From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:11:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:08:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Research Enquiry Hi, Does anyone have any information on the following: In the somewhat murky early history of the UK government's involvement with UFOs it is often stated or implied (latterly by Good & Redfern) that the whole alleged 'cover up' kicked-off with a study done in WWII. This study was allegedly carried out by someone called General Massey name. In trying to track this story down all roads seem to lead back to Frank Edwards' 'Flying Saucers Here & Now' book(p.76-77. But Edwards doesn't reference his source and indeed worsens matters by referring to the alleged 'disc' sightings on the Schweinfurt raid of 14/10/43 (which, incidentally I have found nothing on in the PRO and the PRO reference he gives is gibberish). So, does anyone out there have any other sources (pre or post Edwards) for this tale about 'Massey' and his foo-fighter study, or indeed any other useful references to the UK Government's early UFO involvement (besides the obvious stuff). Also, has anyone any suggestions how best to contact any grouping of UK aviation historians? Thanks, Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Kelleher From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:02:24 -0007 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:12:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Kelleher Because of the sensitive and controversial nature of NIDS' primary research topic, it is not our policy to comment on the sources or methods of obtaining research information. NIDS obtains and creates multiple databases in the fields of UFO research, abduction, and animal mutilation, and in doing so, the identities and contact details of individuals are protected or redacted. Unless otherwise approved, NIDS never releases the names or identifying details of any UFO eyewitnesses, abductees, or in the cases involving animal mutilations, ranchers. All individuals and consultants who work for NIDS sign a non-disclosure agreement. NIDS has physicians, psychologists, and professional scientists from government and university labs on its science advisory board who help in maintaining the highest ethical research principles. Colm Kelleher NIDS
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: MUFON UFO Museum To Open In Denver From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:31:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:31:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: MUFON UFO Museum To Open In Denver From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Source: westword.com http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-03/news2.html Tuesday August 8, 2000 The Truth Is Almost Out Here A UFO museum may blast off in Denver. By Karen Bowers In the world of Ufology, it's tough to be taken seriously. "There'll be a sighting somewhere, and it'll be a fantastic sighting," says Mike Curta, state director of the Colorado Chapter of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). "Five hundred people saw it, and there'll be an interview with a doctor, and they'll talk to the local fire chief, and they'll always put in a woman in a muumuu with curlers in her hair and missing three-quarters of her teeth, and she'll say how she's been abducted 27 times and that the last time they let her pilot the craft to Jupiter and back. And that blows the credibility. It seems like a losing battle." But establishing credibility and rapport -- particularly with the FAA, the Air Force and NORAD -- is high on the agenda for Curta and for MUFON's recently appointed international director, John Schuessler, who hopes that moving the group's headquarters from tiny Seguin, Texas, to the Denver area will help. A founding member of MUFON, Schuessler is a mechanical engineer and the former director of engineering for McDonnell Douglas in Houston. He was responsible for designing the life-support systems on the Gemini spacecraft, and he worked on the space shuttle program and on the design of the not-yet-completed international space station before his retirement two years ago. He's about as far from a muumuu-clad space abductee as one can imagine. Schuessler, who now lives in Littleton, became interested in UFOs in the mid-'60s while working on the Gemini Missions, which used two-man capsules to test long-duration flights, docking techniques and space walking. "I heard reports from astronauts who'd seen things, and they didn't know what they were -- cylindrical-shaped things passing by the spacecraft at some distance. There was something up there that we didn't put up there that they didn't understand. It was really tough to build spacecraft in those days, and if they'd seen something...it really pushed my interest. So I began looking into it, and the more I looked, the more I found." In 1969, Schuessler -- who was based in St. Louis at the time -- teamed up with other UFO enthusiasts to form what was then called the Midwest UFO Network. The first di-rector was a chemistry professor at Wisconsin State University in Oshkosh. He was followed by Walt Andrus, who worked as a consumer-products manager for Motorola. Under their leadership, MUFON grew to include a magazine, Skylook, and as many as 5,000 members. (Its roster is now down to 3,000, Andrus says, a fact he attributes to competition from the Internet and other magazines.) Since the beginning, MUFON members have devoted themselves to the scientific research of UFO phenomena. They sponsor international symposiums presided over by scientists, engineers and university professors. They teach their members how to document sightings and how to investigate sighting reports, and they're aided in their investigations by a board whose members represent 45 areas of science and technology. Andrus, who is 79, took over as director in 1970 and moved MUFON headquarters to Seguin five years later; the group opened the MUFON museum there in 1994 in a strip-mall storefront. With 500 square feet of memorabilia, the museum's collection includes photos of UFOs and other phenomena such as crop circles; an art exhibit of drawings and paintings of aliens created by people who say they've seen the visitors; life-sized alien models; and assorted space debris from the days of the U.S./U.S.S.R. space race. The museum also contains a library of UFO- and space-related books, as well as a catalogue of sightings reports. And it could all be in the Denver area as soon as next month. The museum hasn't been a big draw in Seguin, says Andrus, in part because of the town's location --about twenty miles northeast of San Antonio -- and because it's usually closed during the school year. Andrus, who stepped down as international director earlier this month, developed his interest in UFOs in 1948 when he spotted four unidentified objects flying over downtown Phoenix. It's a story he relates with precision, fit for the pages of MUFON's own Field Investigator's Manual. "It was one in the afternoon," he says. "A perfectly blue sky. A typical August day in Phoenix -- 117 degrees. There were four objects flying in formation. They looked like silver balloons. I saw the first one in the northeast sky. It moved slowly west. It was a dull aluminum color and didn't reflect the sunlight. The first one simply disappeared, like someone had stuck a pin in the balloon. Then the second disappeared, then the third, and eventually the straggler disappeared." Unfortunately -- or perhaps fortunately -- the vast majority of sightings MUFON investigates aren't considered UFOs. "We get somewhere between 50,000 to 80,000 reports from some kind of official organization every year," Curta says. "It might be a police department, or SETI [Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence] folks in North Carolina. Of those reports, 90 percent can be explained as normal, everyday -- a planet, an airplane, a meteorite. Just slightly over 1 percent are found to be hoaxes. The other 8 or 9 percent go unexplained. Those are the ones we take a serious interest in." Colorado is considered a hotbed of UFO activity. "Generally we get, I would say, a call a week out of the San Luis Valley. Cattle mutilations, too," Curta says. "They dropped off the last couple years, but we've had more in the last couple weeks than in the last year all together. Why, nobody seems to know. The San Luis Valley is just a strange place, anyway. The newspaper in Salida had an article in 1894 about a bunch of town residents who saw a cigar-shaped object hanging over the city. We still get a lot of that today." The sightings that can be classified as UFOs are dissected by as many volunteer/ experts as MUFON can round up. Copies of the photos are sent to MUFON headquarters and may appear in the museum. The organization also maintains a UFO hotline and distributes "What to Do If You See a UFO" lists. ("The number one thing to remember is REMAIN CALM!" one reads.) Its Web site contains detailed UFO-sighting report forms asking for information such as environmental factors, terrain and elevation, and providing space for sketches. "I'm very much a skeptic and a cynic," Curta says. "I take it all with a grain of salt. No doubt there is something going on, but what it is, I wouldn't venture to guess." John Schuessler has never even seen a UFO. "I'm not a sighter," he says. "I keep going where people see things, and I never get there in time." For now, though, he's watching the real estate ads, not the sky, trying to find office/display space for the headquarters and museum. He's hoping to find something in southwest Denver, preferably with a storefront so MUFON can show off some of the museum's artifacts. With luck, the museum, which will be free and open to the public, will be unveiled by the end of the year. (For updates, check MUFON's Colorado Web site at comufon.org ) �2000 New Times, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 12:55:42 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:50:42 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:03:48 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:37:42 -0700 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> >>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: Raw UFO Data - Deardorff >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca ><snip> >>>Your argument is only valid if one's purpose was to just make >>>sure to "pad the data pile". How would you propose filtering >>>the sightings made by the 40% of adult Americans who believe >>>that alien spaceships are flying above, but who have never seen >>>one, themselves? (52% of believers - 12% of witnesses). >>>What would your criteria be? >>That's pretty simple. The adult Americans who have never seen a >>UFO have therefore never reported a UFO. There's nothing there >>to filter. >Jim, List: >Obviously, I was referring to _sightings_ by people who had never >before seen a UFO, but who believe in ET spacecraft UFOs. Bob, OK, I see your meaning now. I wouldn't propose filtering any of these out on that account, and I doubt that Larry Hatch did. It's common practice within science for an experimentalist to make a test on some theory in which he may believe, or in which his boss, if he's the theorist, believes. The results of those experiments, if well done, can get published, along with those made by experimentalists who may have set out to disprove the theory. But even if you were to filter out all but those cases in which the witness(es) said, "I never used to believe in UFOs, but now...," you'd still have quite a lot of cases in your UFO collection. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Phobos II From: Joachim Koch <achimkoch@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:44 CET Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:06:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Phobos II Hi Errol, Hi List, Some time ago, I read something about the Soviet space probes Phobos here on this List. I decided to tell you what I have heard about this. Please forgive the delay. In the eighties of the past century I've been one of the editors of the well known German magazine for amateur astronomers named 'Space'. We closely followed the Soviet Space Missions with their Phobos I + II probes as information about this slipped through the 'Iron Curtain'. As well as others, we all were disappointed about the abrupt failure of both missions. At first, we believed in the widely spread explanation that Soviet technicians weren't capable of handling their own soft/hardware the nearer they got to Mars --some virus that seemingly jumped across the Atlantic Ocean-- but then we became suspicious about all that. One thing which triggered our suspicion was the book of Z. Sitchin (wait!) 'Genesis Revisited', published in October 1990 by Avon Books. There he described all what happened and showed the so-called last frames of Phobos II (in Chapter 12) for the first time and ended this topic with the words (page 284): [start quote] "...In his careful words to AW&ST, the chairman of the Soviet equivalent of NASA referred to that last frame when he tried to explain the sudden loss of contact, saying: 'One image appears to include an odd-shaped object between the spacecraft and Mars.' If not 'debris,' or 'dust,' or a 'jettisoned part of Phobos II,' what was the 'object' that all accounts of the incident now admit collided with the spacecraft - an object with an impact strong enough to put the spacecraft into a spin, an object whose image was captured by the last photographic frames? 'We just don't know,'said the chief of the Soviet Space program. But the evidence of an ancient space base on Mars and the odd-shaped "shadow" in its skies add up to an awesome conclusion: What the secret frames hide is evidence that the loss of Phobos II was not an accident but an incident. Perhaps the first incident in a Star Wars - the shooting down by Aliens from another planet of a spacecraft from Earth intruding their Martian base. ... " [end of quote] In 1990, I made contact with a former employee of the 'Zeiss- Planetarium' here in Berlin which, before the wall came down, was one of the most prestigious objects in the ancient GDR. This man, a Mr. Schloessin, knew a female Soviet scientist, Dr. K.B. Schingazera, who was involved in the scientific part of the Phobos mission. He gave me a map of the (hollow?) moon of Mars, Phobos, which wasn't available at that time in West Germany and I hadn't seen such a huge map of a tiny moon so far. Schloessin gave me her address and so I wrote to her. I told her about my education, profession and Mr. Schloessin. I mentioned Mr. Sitchin's publication, the photographs and his findings/theories. I asked her to confirm the existence of these photographs and what happened to Phobos II according to Sitchin's report. I asked for further details and her opinion about all that. You must know that at that time everything was unstable in Eastern Europe, all the old KGB structures were (and are) still alive. So you never knew if a letter you sent to the old U.S.S.R. would ever reach the recipient. More so if you wrote to former employees of such sensible departments of the old Soviet space program. Even we here in Berlin felt uneasy when entering the former Soviet sector of our hometown which was a forbidden area for us, living in the allied sectors, for more then forty years. By the end of March '92, I received a letter - written by hand in German. The sender was: Dr. Schingazera from Moscow. You can imagine how I felt. She wrote: (translation from German to English by me) "Dear Herr Koch! <personal parts of letter snipped> Regarding the "Phobos-Mission" I can tell you: 1) "Phobos I" was lost 'underway' due to a mistake in the computer program. This disrupted the transmissions. 2)"Phobos II" did function around Mars as an artificial satellite for a while, but after a few days, while many experiments started to be carried out, a wrong command to the sun panels was sent to the probe. Subsequently, the orientation and the source of energy were lost. The result: no contact toward Earth. All materials about "Phobos II" were broadly published, many lectures included, on the COSPAR-Conference in Hague, Netherlands, in July 1990. I attended this conference and gave a lecture. You may read these lectures in the proceedings. At that time, most of our scientists who worked on the Phobos program, attended the conference. No report about about additional photographs or something unusual was heard or reported among them. It is my opinion that you have read an interesting speculation of an American author. This happens from time to time in science. Best wishes K.B. Shingazera" At that time I was also member of a strange group which is still in existence and named 'MUFON - Central European Section'. My intent for joining this group, initially, was to become a member of _The_ MUFON. What an error. This German group acts as a sect-like invitation-only group under the reign of a man who declares what is right or what has to be wrong: Mr. Illobrand v. Ludwiger. Once he might have done a deal with the aged W. Andrus of real MUFON to invent a German ("Central European Section") offshoot of the American Organisation. Mr. v. Ludwiger, a physicist, worked at the major German weapons enterprise, MBB (and later at DASA), and has (according to Mr. Lammer, an Austrian researcher) connections into the world of the knights with the non-lethal weapons. On camera, in the German (private) RTL television program of one of the major print magazines, 'Der Spiegel', Mr. v. Ludwiger, the German MUFON-offspring of Walt Andrus, stated, that he believes the American Air Force Report, that it was a MOGUL balloon which crashed near Roswell. Unnecessary to mention that inside his group one risks being banned and excluded if one dares to have a different view of reality than that of Mr. v. Ludwiger. In the Fall of 1991, I attended the annual meeting of "MUFON-CES" and to our surprise it was announced that we would hear a lecture of: General ret. Stubblebine and Dr. Rima Laibow (of T.R.E.A.T.) about the 'Phobos Incident' and abduction research. As by chance, both came back from a trip to Russia where they had to investigate "something". [You all are invited to make up your mind why this well-known member of the military (...) community and this well known researcher of anomalous trauma such as abductions both went/were sent to Russia and both have such a detailed knowledge about what happened to the Phobos probe) Well, as the lecture went on, this General stood in front of us and told us what he liked to tell us. Obviously, he enjoyed being in a position to know more than he was telling. Then it was demanded that all video cameras should switched off and no more photographing was allowed. As far as I remember, they told us: That a remote viewing probe (by PSI Tech?) was sent out to the Red Planet and the (at least surprising) result of that probe was Stubblebine's and Laibow's voyage to Moscow to verify this. These remote viewers had (all!) seen: -that while Phobos II approached and surrounded Mars it was watched. - the impression of a surveillance system on and below the surface of Mars (the picture of an overall sharp watchdog appeared)which would react to any approach to the planet. Upon my question it was said that this surveillance system was "too old" that it could not distinguish between exploring (innocent) probes and other (probabely hostile) probes. Because of this - the approach of an unknown flying object - the "defending mechanism" of the surveillance system was activated and caused the malfunction of Phobos. -that when it (Phobos II) came (too) close to the moon Phobos the "watchdog mechanism" was activated. Additionally it was seen that another larger spacecraft hovered above (and outside Phobos II's cameras)and monitored/directed the end of this mission. Phobos, the moon measures 26,6 x 22,2 x 18,6 km by a radius of 11 km. Its most remarkable crater, Stickney, is 12 km wide. Another crater,Hall, measures 5 km. No mechanism is known so far that could explain why Phobos wasn't annihilated if the craters of this tiny body would have been created by an impact. That is the reason why many think that Phobos is hollow - artificially. This is the end of my report. P l e a s e if you would like to start to tell me things c o n s i d e r when and why do you accept things to be real? With my name and my person, and with my friend and colleague, Hans-Juergen Kyborg as a witness, I stand by what I've described above. Joachim Koch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 00:38:24 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:08:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:29:21 -0400 (EDT) >From: Karoline Louise <KarolineLouise@aol.com> >Subject: A Question Of Definition? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >What follows is a hypothetical question >Supposing a researcher was presented with a truly remarkable >case of missing time, with physical scars which had been >checked out by a doctor and pronounced to be inexplicable. >Imagine there was a child in the case who had the regulation >nosebleeds, manifested dreams of 'owls' and/or other such >typical 'alien' manifestations, but NO other 'UFO' component. >Imagine instead the child told of dreams of going to sleep in >his bed and 'waking' in (say) a previous century, where he >talked to a man now dead, and was later able to provide a >description of the place he had been in a place he had never >seen in 'reality', but which could be proved to have been a real >place from the past. >How would this case be treated? >Is this 'alien abduction'? or 'past life recall'? >Or is it evidence that these man-made definitions are more >delusory than real, and more misleading than enlightening? >Are there really no such cases which challenge the current >compartmentalisation? >Or are they tending to be ignored by investigators simply >because they cannot be fitted into any of the orthodox >'disciplines'? Hi, As Karoline, I believe knows, she is right about this. We tend to seek what we want to find in this subject and by defining the boundaries of the phenomenon in advance we decide what to describe as the 'alien abduction' and limit what it is that we consequently uncover. There are numerous cases which are not traditional abduction cases but are nonetheless clearly relevant. Here are just a few I have come upon in the UK: 1: Two witnesses walk up a hill, enter an altered state of consciousness, see strange human figures in futuristic clothing and hear them discussing the lives of the children as if to these strangers they have already occurred. There is a bright sky, but nothing obviously a UFO. The children find themselves disorientated, walk down the hill and discover they have been missing for 24 hours. They also have strange scars or marks on identical parts of their bodies. 2: A woman claims she was taken for a ride in a dark car by her husband and lost full consciousness but recalls being medically examined inside an unfamiliar room where she was also able to witness various images that related to scenes from her past and future. Her husband and another man spoke to each other saying that they knew this story - if ever reported - would be interpreted as 'flying saucers' . 3: A woman was going to the shops when she saw a strange helicopter appear out of mist dead ahead. It was clearly an earthly craft with normal humans inside, who were talking about an 'experiment'. She watches them as they watch her, but her recall becomes hazy and confused and she forgets the encounter for weeks. Memory returns gradually when she starts to notice physical changes to the environment in the location where the helicopter had been. A tree that was not there before, but is now, and so on. These are just some of the cases in my files that have features of an abduction but are not abductions in any traditional sense. There are many more. In fact, even in one of the most classic UK abductions (that in Aveley, Essex October l974) its essence - pre hypnotic recall - is very odd. Put simply a family were driving home, encountered a bank of green mist, drove into it, felt a bump as if they were sucked up and cast down onto the road again and now found it was hours into the future. Their entire lifestyle altered and they were almost like different people (they did not even like the same foods they once did). There was no conscious recall of an alien abduction. It only appeared, via dreams, then through hypnosis, but crystallised out of very strange images in which the car was floated upwards, turned transparent and the family drifted 'out of the body' and saw themselves both in the car and out of it inside a strange room. It is easy to see how only minor changes of emphasis, perhaps subtle guiding according to the perspective of the investigator or beliefs adopted by the witnesses, could push this case in at least two ways. Towards the alien abduction scenario eventually created for this case. Or towards the idea that the car ran off the road in the mist, the family had a near death experience and returned from it later confused and disorientated with only vague conscious recall. Indeed I have quite a few cases where the NDE / Abduction overlap is even more marked than here. But I don't think the border confusion between case types is confined to just these two phenomena. Its an area I've been exploring a lot lately whilst researching a book called 'Time Storms' - where I have realised (after many years of putting these pieces together) that the abduction is but a part of a far wider whole and we need to embrace a much broader range of cases to figure out what is going on here. IMO Karoline is spot on . There is a decidedly extraordinary phenomenon occurring and its parameters are much wider than the few cases that Ufologists adopt as their own because they fit our interpretation of the evidence. Remember - as I have found in virtually all UK abductions - the abduction prone personality (the type of individual to whom these things most often occur) almost invariably has a track record of strange phenomena throughout their lives. It includes psychic toys (balls of light played with as children), ESP, precognition, apparitions, out of body states and so forth. Very often the abduction emerges from within this pattern as a memorable but far from unique event in an otherwise long record of anomalous phenomena. I think it may well be a serious mistake not to treat this data as a continuum but to pick and choose the bits we think we want to concentrate upon because they fit in with our own interpretation of what's going on here. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:28:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:39:53 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Clark >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:12:38 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >At a recent social function I met a mature titled gent who >claimed to be a friend of a British intelligence agent who had >visited Area 51. >Apparently, this agent had seen parts of extraterrestrial >technology being manufactured at the infamous site. "There are >spacecraft there," I was informed. "But why then are they >keeping this a secret," I asked, to which my new friend reported >that steps had been taken to inform the public, which was to be >announced by President Clinton. >However, when Clinton became involved in the sex scandals it was >decided that the truth might not be taken seriously and >therefore should be saved until they had a president more >capable of dealing with it. >The name of the president elected to enlighten the world in the >new millennium, is, I am told, George W Bush! Is that foresight? >We shall wait and see - but if it transpires, you read it here >first! Georgina and listfolk: I love stories like this one, even if -- as here-- they often don't make a whole lot of sense. First, if there was anything that would have distracted the electorate's (and the world's) attention away from President Clinton's personal failings, it would have been an announcement of an extraterrestrial presence on earth. Martians will trump Monicas anytime. If such an announcement was available to Clinton, surely he would have used it at some point during the ordeal that led to his impeachment. Second, who "elected" George W. Bush at this stage to give us the word about the ET presence? The only people who can elect the younger Bush to office are American voters, and they won't be speaking till November 7, at which time Bush's elevation to the Presidency is by no means assured. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:38:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:31:41 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:26:41 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: Selling Files - Jones >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>If I had it to do over again, there would again be no entry on >>David Gotlib -- which is to say absolutely nothing against this >>fine, thoughtful man. >>Jerry Clark Jerry, At some point the question was why there was no _mention_ of David Gotlib and the Bulletin of Anomalous Experience, never mind an entire entry on same. Your reasoning re the latter I agree with, btw. But nary a mention? Anyway, the complete (lamented) run of the BAE is now happily available on CD. If you do get a chance to do it over again, though, I suggest you trim a few pages off the top of the 8-9 devoted to "Derenberger Contact Claims" and add them to the following entry on the "Dr. X Case," which is presently represented by only three pages, and which, in MHO, is much more interesting and influential than Derenberger's erstwhile "contribution" to ufology. Not a complaint, mind, just free editorial advice, of which you no doubt get enough already. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] - Brookesmith From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:57:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:42:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] - Brookesmith Compliments of the Duke... >Date: Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:31:41 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> It is of course a great relief to get a straight answer out of Judge Clark on this one. I wonder why he couldn't do as much for Dennis the Sasquatch when he asked. I wonder too about how Jerome defines "influential" and "ufology" a propos the reasons he gives for his decision to exclude Gotlib and BAE. BAE I'd guess _was_ very influential on many of the smarter ufologists interested in abduction. Just look at the list of contributors! -- and it's a _very_ useful resource for the unchallenged of brain, and is of course now available on CD. Why would Clark J's guess (for it has to be that) be any better than mine? BAE may not have moved the bulk of ufology much, but Bishop Clark has been known to tell us early and often that ufology should be judged by its best products, not its worst. In that case, why didn't he promote one of the very best products of ufology? Robert Todd was rather influential on the brighter lights in the Roswell saga, too, but he didn't get a mention either. All this said in full sympathetic knowledge of how difficult it is to edit an encyclopaedia [sic], having done it, and planned many more than I could lay my reptilian hands on day-to-day. best wishes Pseudococcus D. Macnab Not Very Influential Either
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Farrell From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:47:41 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:47:39 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Farrell >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:49:42 -0700 >Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts - Hale >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 03:55:24 +0000 (GMT) >>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>Subject: Carpenter's OZ Video - Rumours & Facts >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Here's a response to the "rumors" about disputes over the >>commercial video release by John Carpenter entitled "Encounters >>in Australia". It's factual to the best of my investigative >>efforts. ><snip> >>This video features eight interviews with: >>>Glenny Mackay-QLD (15min) >>David Summers-QLD (10min) >>Kelly Cahill-NSW (15min) >>B.Butler from Melbourne (20min) >>Elizabeth Robinson (Perth, WA) >>S.Whiteman from Sydney (15min) >>Keith Basterfield-Vic. (10min) >>Melissa-QLD (15min) >Hi, >Can anyone tell me if, any of those people mentioned above have >written any books, given any public lectures or have appeared on >any other UFO Abduction video, prior or since the release of >John Carpenter's Video, in which they detail the events to their >experiences? Hi Roy, here's an answer to your question about the participants in Carpenter's Video "Encounters in Australia" (1996) These people have published books, videos, lecture tapes, and have appeared on Australian TV programs and documentaries. Glenny Mackay-QLD David Summers-QLD Kelly Cahill-NSW Elizabeth Robinson Keith Basterfield-Vic. These people are abductees and have not appeared in the media in any other form to my knowledge. B.Butler from Melbourne S.Whiteman from Sydney Melissa-QLD The point here is that most of these participants had previous experience with the media and we all know very well how unreliable the popular media can be with their promises. The mainstream media will quote UFO witnesses and researchers out of context, will grab the most sensational soundbites even if it makes the person look ridiculous, and will often leave out the most convincing testimony and evidence just because they don't want to open any cans of worms. They just want to sell their "spooky little story" and be done with it. Unfortunately, the editors who are not invloved with gathering the story are the ones that decide what is shown and what is left on the cutting room floor. So no surprises here! What is sad and disappointing, is when a fellow researcher gives you certain assurances and then acts like the very media people that habitually distort and misrepresent the material offered by UFO witnesses and researchers. The participants of Carpenter's video thought they were dealing with someone who had their best interests in mind. Someone who would not betray them like mainstream media profiteers. Sadly, they were wrong. Carpenter acted just like the media that ridicules and thwarts are efforts to get the Truth of the UFO Experience and Research out to the public at large. If we can't take the "word" of a fellow researcher, then what have we got to fall back on? __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:38:05 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:54:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will >Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 09:15:18 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >Subject: Bush: UFO Investigation "First Thing" Cheney Will Do >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Source: Jeff Rense, >http://www.sightings.com/general3/disclosure.htm >Stig >*** >Actual CNN Transcript Of Gov. Bush Promising UFO Disclosure >From Charles Huffer <cahuffer@yahoo.com> >To Randy Kitchur <kitchur@hotmail.com> >8-7-00 <snip> Gentlemen, Wouldn't it be just ducky if these guys were laughing up their sleeves? Wouldn't it be funny as hell if they were playing with you to get your vote or otherwise just saying the words to get rid of you whilst all the during the time they were just funnin' you? They are, after all, politicians. Isn't that what politicians do? Yes the constituency while getting their vote and later, after the erection... business as usual. That's right. That's right! After the erection. You don't think it's an election do you? Huh? Cynical J. Citizen, Esq. (which makes it even worse)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 8 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:59:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca >By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On >The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th >at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in >St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml >So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! >Please take a close look at the following statements: <snip> Mike, Listers and EBK, Mike, not only is your concoction of horse hockey a stretch, but you do a huge disservice to the UFO and abduction community as well. Nothing I read in your post as quoted and attributed to NIDS/MUFON is anything but an honest appraisal of what would have been lauded BC (before Carpenter). You are judging an entire community after one of it's members _alledgedly_ does something wrong. I quote Chief of Police Howard Safir who today announced his resignation and had to comment on the three terrible things which happened to citizens during his watch. He said, in effect and paraphrased, "A member of a (race) robs a bank. Would you then assign the name "Bank Robbers" to all members of that race because of what one person did?" You sir, are not running on all your cylinders. You are not thinking. You are just trying to pile more detritus on top of detritus to those who would not think for themselves in the first place. You damage yourself as well as the entire community of sufferers. You create problems where they do not exist. And even if they did, why the hell are you connecting dots which do not even as yet exist? Not only has Carpenter's guilt _not_ been proved, but now you are attempting to blame every stinking person who ever had the audacity of being associated with Carpenter! And that sir, is childish and ignorant. You should be ashamed of yourself, as should all those who voted for crucifixion before the jury stepped out of the deliberation room. Damned it, even before the jury was selected! People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. To you I say what I should have said to some others who wrote the same type of detritus, go see a professional and think about Quaaludes. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:14:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 00:01:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:07:46 -0007 >From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher >To: updates@sympatico.ca >The comment about NIDS being "alleged government insiders" is >tired old internet gossip, dredged up and barely warmed over by >people who could not be bothered to check the facts. Colm, Ex-FBI agents and US Intelligence agents fit my definition of gov't. insiders. You have a problem with this definition? These people are some of your employees. The description is accurate. You sound like rhetoric yourself. >This kind of claptrap unfortunately has become the signature of >the United States "UFO investigative effort". While other >countries are actually trying to do some serious research, the >United States ufologists fall on each other and engage in >cannibalism, backbiting, rumor-mongering and false innuendo. You insult the facts. Get on with your investigating. No one is stopping you. What are you complaining about? NIDS is not an open organization. This is why we do not cooperate. NIDS was made to be this way. No information comes out unless you wish it to as it all remains the property of NIDS. Ok, fine. Do your plans include running in- vestigations through MUFON? If you access their database would you have any obligation to send back any findings to MUFON members based on that body of information? As for the other stuff you mention - I didn't hear any of that of which you speak. Did anyone else? Aren't you overreacting a bit. We have been discussing important issues. Regrettably, you trivialize the facts like some others I know. >For once, cant we all just forget about the incestuous >infighting and do some research? >Colm Kelleher >NIDS Oh, perhaps you mean that ethics and professionalism are not important as that is what we have been talking about. I think you are negatively overreacting and missing the real positive points of our discussions. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Peterborough From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 00:29:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:06:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Peterborough Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:43:32 -0700 From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1@frontiernet.net> To: fort@egroups.com Subject: Re: Goffstown, NH CEIII account Loren Coleman wrote: >Anyone have details and eyewitness names for the 1973 >Goffstown, NH, UFO and small occupant report? I just don't >have a handle on this stuff the way I do the cz items, but I'm >visiting Goffstown, and was curious. And I'm not even on any >UFO lists. >Thanks >Loren Loren, Try these 23 sites: The "**" site seems pretty good... UFO Organizations in the U.S.A. Alphabetical Listing <http://www.ufoinfo.com/organizations/org_usa.shtml> UFO ROUNDUP Volume 1 No.14 <http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/v01/rnd01_14.shtml> **Occupant Database <http://www.nicap.co.uk/Occupant.htm> UFO Intelligence Summary <http://www.lowea.freeserve.co.uk/ufointel.htm> T-Files: Talamasca's X-Files Site Dreamland--UFO and Alien Links <http://www.tfiles.net/Dreamland.html> UFOS SIGHTED IN NEW ENGLAND AND PENNSYLVANIA <http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.0392.html> UFO Glossary <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AndyPage/ICAAR.htm> NH Antiquarian Booksellers Association <http://www.conknet.com/~bksbylake/nh-aba.html> area51.simplenet.com/archive/ufo/ftp.eskimo.com/ufo/reports/rep96f <http://area51.simplenet.com/archive/ufo/ftp.eskimo.com/ufo/reports/rep96f> *U* Sources <http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html> Goffstown UFO <http://www.search.com/search?q=Goffstown+UFO&channel=1&ref=wf> Goffstown UFO - technology <http://techsearch.cnet.com/search?cat=103&partner=techsearch&q=Goffstown+UFO&re f=wf> Goffstown UFO - help <http://www.help.com/cgi-perl/search.pl?query=Goffstown+UFO> Goffstown UFO - downloads <http://download.cnet.com/downloads/1,10150,0-10001-103-0-1-7,00.html?qt=Goffsto wn+UFO&cn=&ca=10001> Goffstown UFO - news <http://news.cnet.com/news/search/results/1,10199,0-1002,00.html?qt=Goffstown+UF O&cn=&ca=1002> UFO Organizations: New Hampshire <http://ufoinfo.com/organizations/usa_newhampshire.html> UFO Intelligence Summary <http://www.evansville.net/~slk/ufois.htm> Marrison Technologies -- Information Center <http://www.marrison.com/ic/pages/a/antiquarian.html> BMX Ultra - Classifieds <http://bmx.ultra.net.au/classifieds> UFO Glossary <http://cbr.nc.us.mensa.org/homepages/andypage/ICAAR.htm> The Lion King WWW Archive - Guest Book <http://www.lionking.org/oldbooks/oldbook-11.html> Occupant Database <http://www.lowea.freeserve.co.uk/Occupant.htm> Telegraph: The Sausage Factory <http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Info/sausage.htm> Terry -- Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@frontiernet.net > Alternate: < terry_colvin@hotmail.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: Fortean Times * Northwest Mysteries * Mystic's Cyberpage * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Allies, CIA/NSA, and Vietnam veterans welcome] Southeast Asia (SEA) service: Vietnam - Theater Telecommunications Center/HHC, 1st Aviation Brigade (Jan 71 - Aug 72) Thailand/Laos - Telecommunications Center/U.S. Army Support Thailand (USARSUPTHAI), Camp Samae San (Jan 73 - Aug 73) - Special Security/Strategic Communications - Thailand (STRATCOM - Thailand), Phu Mu (Pig Mountain) Signal Site (Aug 73 - Jan 74)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:24:16 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On >>The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th >>at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in >>St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: >>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml >>So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! >>Please take a close look at the following statements: ><snip> >Mike, Listers and EBK, <snip> >You sir, are not running on all your cylinders. You are not >thinking. You are just trying to pile more detritus on top of >detritus to those who would not think for themselves in the >first place. You damage yourself as well as the entire community >of sufferers. You create problems where they do not exist. Isn't it something how sometimes the things we say to others are the very same things we need to hear the most ourselves. There is even a name for what you are saying to Mike here; it's called "projecting." I propose that it is _you_ who are damaging yourself and the entire abductee community by your incessant negative meddling with the work that is being done in order to get Carpenter to notify the clients whose files he sold. If it had been you that Carpenter betrayed that way, we'd never hear the end of the whining and complaining that you'd do. Every step of the way you have tried to interfere with the process almost as if you were on a 'mission'. In your last rant you tell Carpenter that the reason he should comply and notify the abductees is because you are sick and tired of reading our postings to him about it. How selfish, self-centered, and self-absorbed must someone be to make such an insensitive remark. Why don't you do with the postings on the Carpenter/files thread what many folks do when they see one of your postings and simply trash them if they bother you so much? You seem to be having a huge problem understanding why we are demanding that Carpenter notify the abductees whose files he sold without their consent. You have worked steadily and with much vigor _against_ the right of these 140 abductees to know by minimizing and confusing the issue at every oportunity. We are busting our humps to get Carpenter to show those abductees the _respect_ that he should have showed them three years ago _before_ he sold their files; and you find it all a personal "bother." As an (self-professed) abductee you should be deeply ashamed of the behavior and running commentary you have made throughout this whole sad affair. I really feel sorry for you. >People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, >which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up >the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves >lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. A "good name" is something that is earned through deeds not 'rap'. Mr Carpenter thought nothing of taking the personal reports of 140 people who confided in him and trusted him and sell them to the highest bidder without either notifying the clients or asking them if it was alright with them for him to do so. That is a violation of trust, and all accepeted ethical standards. I and a paltry few others are fighting hammer and tong to get Carpenter to give these folks the respect they deserve. All you've contributed in terms of 'help' is to crap on the issue and on the people who are fighting for the abductees rights every chance you get. How can you live with yourself. >To you I say what I should have said to some others who wrote >the same type of detritus, go see a professional and think about >Quaaludes. Wow! For someone who eats handfuls of mood altering drugs just to get through a day you have a lot of crust telling Mike that he should take Quaaludes. Whether you agree with Mike or not, a comment such as that is mean-spirited at best. If someone else on this list told _you_ to go see a shrink and eat Quaaludes you'd be crying about flames and Name-calling! For some reason it is perfectly okay in 'your world' for you to do it though. A little schizzy wouldn't you say? Hmmm, maybe you ought to see a shrink and take some Quaaludes eh? (Don't sound so good when you're on the receiving end eh Jimbo?) :) "Remove the log from your own eye before you point out the splinter in anothers eye!" Your rants are really starting to wear thin. You dig the grave deeper with each posting. Keep talking Jimbo. I'm sure it's interesting to others too to see what kind of stuff you're really made of. If you don't have anything constructive or of value to say, why not try lurking for awhile. At least that way you won't shoot yourself in the foot everytime you open your mouth. I only post when I have something of importance to say. A habit that you yourself may wish to cultivate. Again, _please_, stop trying to throw a wrench into our efforts to get those abductees notified as well as our efforts to secure some respect for them from the man who violated their faith and trust in him. For their sake and for the sake of all future abductees stand down if you cannot help or contribute something positive or of value to the effort. So far, you've been one of the obstacles, not one of those fighting for the rights of your fellow abductees. If you're not a part of the solution you're a part of the problem! I'll tell _you_ the same thing you told Mike: (only in your case it really applies!) I quote you. >You sir, are not running on all your cylinders. You are not >thinking. You are just trying to pile more detritus on top of >detritus to those who would not think for themselves in the >first place. You damage yourself as well as the entire community >of sufferers. You create problems where they do not exist. Well said Jimbo! Take _your_own_advice will ya. ;) John Velez, Webmaster, AIC
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents On Web From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 07:59:45 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:39:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents On Web Source: Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/science/080800/ufos.sml On the page there's a poll asking if you think that the U.S. government is covering up the existence of ET's. An overwhelming majority (70.3 % at the moment) is answering in the affirmative. Stig ** UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents on Web Tuesday, August 8, 2000 FORT MEADE, Md. -- UFO theorists are probing declassified National Security Agency files on the spy agency's Web site, hoping to find evidence that proves there is life beyond Earth. The NSA hoped the documents released two years ago would quell suspicions that it harbored information about unidentified flying objects. Instead, thousands are looking at the documents, which include a National Enquirer article with the headline, "Take UFOs Seriously or Be Prepared for Sneak Invasion by Space Aliens." "The fact that they're releasing this stuff and it's so blacked out, the theories just flurry," said John Greenwald, who has collected UFO documents from government agencies for more than five years and posts them on his Web site. NSA staffers receive hundreds of written requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the UFO queries are slowing everything, said Pamela Philips, chief of FOIA/Privacy Act Services for the agency. "More people than ever are interested in this stuff," said Peter Gersten, an Arizona attorney and director of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy. "Each year you get more and more people, especially young people. With X-Files and Star Wars, it's exotic. It's entertaining. It's the greatest mystery of all time." *FOX FAST LINKS: The NSA's UFO Documents Index ** *Privacy Statement For FoxNews.com comments write to comments@newsdigital.com For Fox News Channel comments write to comments@foxnews.com � Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. � Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. � News Digital Media 2000. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: More CAUS Stuff... From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:26:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:41:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: More CAUS Stuff... Someone sent this to my box: www.caus.org/planetary_appeal.htm This is somehow associated with Gersten's latest cash-drive as he is "looking for CAUS members who are interested in making several thousand dollars for both CAUS and themselves while helping to distribute a proclamation entitled the "Planetary Appeal." " What happened to the good old days of CAUS fund raisers... Regards, Royce J. Myers III eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind...or your attempts at having other people support you financially... eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 UFO Hall o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 05:51:49 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:47:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:59:51 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On >>The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th >>at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in >>St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: >>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml >>So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! >>Please take a close look at the following statements: ><snip> >Mike, Listers and EBK, >Mike, not only is your concoction of horse hockey a stretch, but >you do a huge disservice to the UFO and abduction community as >well. Nothing I read in your post as quoted and attributed to >NIDS/MUFON is anything but an honest appraisal of what would >have been lauded BC (before Carpenter). <snip> >People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, >which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up >the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves >lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. >To you I say what I should have said to some others who wrote >the same type of detritus, go see a professional and think about >Quaaludes. Hello Jim Mortellaro and List Members, You're too kind with all your compliments. Really, I don't deserve such praise!;-> But more to the point, wouldn't you agree that the purpose of discussion lists like UpDates is to explore all the possibilities of a given situation? If we are not looking at all the angles and asking all the possible questions, then what are we doing here besides patting each other on the back? The fact is, Mr. Mortellaro, that as the Director of Abduction Research for MUFON, the "professional misconduct" of John Carpenter says volumes about the organisation that he represents. The fact that MUFON directors have kept silent on the matter of Carpenter's "file-sale" and the fact that MUFON has not taken the initiative to recognize the negative consequences of Carpenter's "professional misconduct", nor have they publically apologized or made any attempts to make amends to the abductees whose confidentiality was violated, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that MUFON has more important projects on it's agenda, like the private funding from Bigelow to create the MUFON/NIDS "coalition". Mr. Mortellaro, I've been involved with UFO organisations as a committee member both here in Australia and back in America, and I can assure you that everyone knows what everyone else is doing or not doing. I can assure that politics are alive and well in Ufology. And like it or not, we have to deal with that aspect of Ufology as honestly and honorably as possible. The stakes are higher according to the status, influence and funding of the organisation. So when MUFON and NIDS are invloved with "professional misconduct", then yes, it's an issue that should concern and involve all those who consider themselves to be contributing to the UFO Disclosure Movement. And NIDS is involved because Bigelow paid $14,000 for 140 files that were sold without the permission and foreknowledge of the abductees. And MUFON is involved because one of their directors, who has the "keys" to MUFON's abductee file cabinet, was the one who sold these files to Bigelow. Why MUFON and NIDS are letting Carpenter take the fall for this one is a whole other "can of worms". The fact is, we have not heard specific responses and clarifications from Bigelow or MUFON on this matter. You would think that people in these high-profile positions would realize the importance of explaining their actions and especially their "professional misconduct". As a community, we are not without mercy and compassion when everybody puts their cards face up on the table for all to see! The only point you made that needs to be challenged is your remarks about "disservice to the UFO and Abduction Community". Mr. Mortellaro, since when is it a disservice to put subjects on the discussion table that need to be addressed? Since when is it a disservice to remind all of us of the negative consequences if we choose to white-wash or cover-up this kind of issue? And since when is it a disservice to ask the very people who are responsible for this "mess" to explain their motives and agendas? Also, wouldn't it be nice, Mr. Mortellaro, if you could express your opinions without getting "personal" and attempting to diagnose my mental state of mind. Or am I treading on your "sacred cows"! Well, get used to it... this ain't over yet! And by the way, I don't like "Quaaludes", because they make you lose your balance, which is something you should consider also. __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 07:59:45 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:36:51 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Source: Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/science/080800/ufos.sml On the page there's a poll asking if you think that the U.S. government is covering up the existence of ET's. An overwhelming majority (70.3 % at the moment) is answering in the affirmative. Stig ** UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents on Web Tuesday, August 8, 2000 FORT MEADE, Md. � UFO theorists are probing declassified National Security Agency files on the spy agency's Web site, hoping to find evidence that proves there is life beyond Earth. The NSA hoped the documents released two years ago would quell suspicions that it harbored information about unidentified flying objects. Instead, thousands are looking at the documents, which include a National Enquirer article with the headline, "Take UFOs Seriously or Be Prepared for Sneak Invasion by Space Aliens." "The fact that they're releasing this stuff and it's so blacked out, the theories just flurry," said John Greenwald, who has collected UFO documents from government agencies for more than five years and posts them on his Web site. NSA staffers receive hundreds of written requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the UFO queries are slowing everything, said Pamela Philips, chief of FOIA/Privacy Act Services for the agency. "More people than ever are interested in this stuff," said Peter Gersten, an Arizona attorney and director of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy. "Each year you get more and more people, especially young people. With X-Files and Star Wars, it's exotic. It's entertaining. It's the greatest mystery of all time." *FOX FAST LINKS: The NSA's UFO Documents Index ** *Privacy Statement For FoxNews.com comments write to comments@newsdigital.com For Fox News Channel comments write to comments@foxnews.com � Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. � Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. � News Digital Media 2000. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Farrell From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 06:09:49 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:51:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Farrell >From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:02:24 -0007 >Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:12:18 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Kelleher >Because of the sensitive and controversial nature of NIDS' >primary research topic, it is not our policy to comment on the >sources or methods of obtaining research information. >NIDS obtains and creates multiple databases in the fields of UFO >research, abduction, and animal mutilation, and in doing so, the >identities and contact details of individuals are protected or >redacted. >Unless otherwise approved, NIDS never releases the names or >identifying details of any UFO eyewitnesses, abductees, or in >the cases involving animal mutilations, ranchers. >All individuals and consultants who work for NIDS sign a >non-disclosure agreement. >NIDS has physicians, psychologists, and professional scientists >from government and university labs on its science advisory >board who help in maintaining the highest ethical research >principles. >Colm Kelleher >NIDS Mr. Kelleher, Thank you for once again reminding us about the general and carefully-worded policies of NIDS. But with all due respect, would you be able to be more specific and answer the allegations that Mr. Bigelow paid $14,000 to John Carpenter of MUFON for 140 "abductee files" back around 1996? Would you be able to explain why Bigelow and NIDS would expose their professional reputation to such "amateur dealings" without regard for the inevitable negative consequences and outrage that would and has followed? Would you be able to get Bigelow to actually come down from his "high and mighty" throne and explain why he bought those "abductee files" from Carpenter? Are we to believe that a big-time Las Vegas casino millionaire would be naive and unaware of the consequences of his dealings with Carpenter or MUFON? Would you be able to express your personal thoughts and feelings on this matter, or are you just a "paid spokesman" for the NIDS organization, in which case all we can expect is more of your prepared and canned policy releases? Is this too much too ask of you, Mr. Kelleher? __________________________ THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY! Mike Farrell UFO Researcher & UFO Video Hunter at: http://www.flex.com.au/~eagle1/in8.htm 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:01:10 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:07:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study Source: space.com http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/russian_ufo_report_000808.html Links are preceded by an asterisk. Stig *** Exclusive: Russian UFO Research Revealed By Jim Oberg Special to SPACE.com posted: 02:34 pm ET 08 August 2000 * In an special report obtained by SPACE.com, two of Russia's leading UFO investigators have summarized the results of the Soviet Union's official 13-year study of UFO reports. They maintain that the Western media claims of "secret KGB files" and "captured aliens" are untrue. "One can hardly imagine a greater absurdity," they write, although they do admit that their own research program (1978-1990) was indeed classified "SECRET" at the time and that there remained cases that could not be explained. The investigators, Dr. Yuliy Platov of the Academy of Sciences and Colonel Boris Sokolov of the Ministry of Defense, wrote up their conclusions for an issue of the official Reports of the Academy of Sciences journal, published in Moscow. Dr. Platov forwarded an advance copy of the report to SPACE.com. "Many people are the eyewitnesses of strange things," the writers report, "which cannot always be precisely identified with natural or man-made effects. However, this amount is very insignificant, and from this there does not follow even a 'hint' of the probable interference of extraterrestrial forces into our lives." In a brief background for the project, Platov and Sokolov describe how the mass UFO sighting of September 20, 1977, over the northwestern city of Petrozavodsk and elsewhere, sparked high-level public and official interest in UFOs. Two parallel studies, one within the civilian scientific establishment and one within the military, were set up to run for the following 13 years. The civilian team actually continued formal investigations until 1996, Platov reveals. The official groups did not use the term "UFO" (or "NLO" in Russian). Instead, they referred to "paranormal phenomena." But everyone involved in the project knew exactly what this meant -- any apparently unexplainable aerial apparitions. Military secrets Platov and Sokolov explain that from the start, the teams "assumed a high probability of a military-technical origin of the observed strange effects." This was based in large part on the iron-clad identification of the "Petrozavodsk UFO" with the launching of a spy satellite from a secret nearby base. But this factor dictated that the study be kept secret because most of the suspected causes were already military secrets. Another reason for secrecy was "to decrease a public resonance" regarding the reality of UFOs -- a "resonance" that would only grow if the government's formal interest were known. Finally, there was the possibility of military application of discoveries regarding some of the perceived properties of UFOs such as radar invisibility and high maneuverability. Sokolov himself is widely quoted on Internet UFO pages endorsing this last possible benefit of UFO research. However, his more prosaic explanations for some "classic" Russian UFO cases failed to show up on several search engines I tried. The biggest UFO network ever In January 1980, the Soviet Ministry of Defense issued a directive to all military forces to report "any inexplicable, exotic, extraordinary phenomenon". Sokolov described how this essentially converted millions of military personnel across one sixth of the Earth's surface into a sensory network for UFOs. "It is not likely that anybody could organize such a large-scale research," he boasted, "and practically with no financing." Over the course of more than a decade, Platov's and Sokolov's teams together collected and analyzed about 3,000 detailed messages, covering about 400 individual events. A pattern soon emerged. "Practically all the mass night observations of UFOs were unambiguously identified as the effects accompanying the launches of rockets or tests of aerospace equipment," the report concludes. These sightings were mainly associated with activity at the secret rocket base at Plesetsk, north of Moscow. In about 10-12 percent of the reports, they also identified another category of "flying objects," or as they clarified it, "floating objects." These were meteorological and scientific balloons, which sometimes acted in unexpected ways and were easily misperceived by ground personnel and by pilots. Specifically, Platov and Migulin describe events on June 3, 1982, near Chita in southern Siberia, and on September 13, 1982, on the far-eastern Chukhotskiy Peninsula. In both cases, balloon launches were recorded but the balloons reached a much greater altitude than usually before bursting. Air defense units reacted in both cases by scrambling interceptors to attack the UFOs. "The described episodes show that even experienced pilots are not immune against errors in the evaluation of the size of observed objects, the distances to them, and their identification with particular phenomena," the report observes. The Ukrainian trigger The most sensational Russian UFO case of the 1980s involved a story of UFOs nearly triggering nuclear war. This reportedly occurred on October 5, 1982, at a missile base near Khmelitskiy in the Ukraine. One typical version of this event appeared on an ABC Prime Time Live program which aired on American television in October, 1994. Host Diane Sawyer and correspondent David Ensor presented interviews with former Russian military personnel who described a 900-foot-wide UFO hovering over their missile base while their command consoles switched themselves to "prepare to launch" for 15 seconds before returning to normal. The location was given as Byelokoroviche, but it's the same incident. Sokolov, who took part in the investigation which began the very next day, presents a very different version in the new report. The eyewitness reports from more than 50 people, as documented within hours of the sighting, described bright flashing objects on the northern horizon, in the form of "a balloon." Within hours the investigation team had located records of parachute flares and night-bombing exercises occurring at another military base in precisely that direction at precisely that time. "It should be added," Platov and Sokolov continue, "that the fault of the operation of the command post equipment had nothing to do with the observed phenomena, it just completely accidentally coincided in time." The fault merely involved an indicator light, and there was no evidence the missiles themselves were affected in any way. Nevertheless, the missile base commander, while genuinely alarmed, evidently found it more convenient to blame extraterrestrials rather than his own maintenance troops for the scare. Nobody's abducting Russians The official investigators also point out a striking absence of certain types of reports from their files. "In contrast to numerous descriptions of various kinds of contacts with aliens," they write, "there has not been obtained, within the framework of the project which involved the great observational potential of the army and civilian organizations, any message about UFO landings, any message about contacts with pilots of UFOs, any message about the abductions of individuals by UFOs." "This means," they conclude, "that either the territory of the USSR was, due to any reasons, closed for alien visitations during, at least, 13 years, or that the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin of UFOs is inconsistent. Any serious investigator of the problem of UFOs should, at least, face this reality." Platov and Sokolov clearly are aware that popular press reports, both in Russia and in the West, will undoubtedly still refer to "Soviet UFO secrets." In the harsh economic conditions of post-Soviet Russia, many people, especially military veterans, will continue to be willing to tell any story that other people are willing to pay for. But their insider positions in one of Earth's greatest government UFO investigations, and their evident lack of any motivation aside from telling the truth as they found it, will make their report a significant contribution to our understanding of what really has been happening regarding this mysterious and fascinating subject. ---------------------------------------------------------------- *A New Day for UFO Research *Shuttle TV: Is What We See What NASA Gets? *What Are the Flying Triangles? *New Guinea UFO Said To Be Satellite What do you think? Send your comments to the *editor. *Share your comments, suggestions or criticisms on this or any SPACE.com experience. �2000 SPACE.com, inc. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 00:55:50 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:11:34 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:11:25 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Research Enquiry >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi, >Does anyone have any information on the following: >In the somewhat murky early history of the UK government's >involvement with UFOs it is often stated or implied (latterly by >Good & Redfern) that the whole alleged 'cover up' kicked-off >with a study done in WWII. >This study was allegedly carried out by someone called General >Massey name. >In trying to track this story down all roads seem to lead back >to Frank Edwards' 'Flying Saucers Here & Now' book(p.76-77. But >Edwards doesn't reference his source and indeed worsens matters >by referring to the alleged 'disc' sightings on the Schweinfurt >raid of 14/10/43 (which, incidentally I have found nothing on in >the PRO and the PRO reference he gives is gibberish). >So, does anyone out there have any other sources (pre or post >Edwards) for this tale about 'Massey' and his foo-fighter study, >or indeed any other useful references to the UK Government's >early UFO involvement (besides the obvious stuff). >Also, has anyone any suggestions how best to contact any grouping >of UK aviation historians? Hello Andy: I cannot help with the above, except to comment on the Schweinfurt matter. I have two references besides Edwards: Tim Good's Above Top Secret page 28, and LDLN Issue #338. According to Lumieres, Jean-Marie Bigorne followed the same trail starting with Edward's account, which he also noted was unreferenced. Bigorne wrote to Maxwell AFB, HQ of the USAF Historical Research Center. The reply reproduced in LDLN was: "We did not locate any reference to 'flying disks', or similar objects encountered on the 14 Oct 43 Schweinfurt mission. Most of the attention in post-raid reports was focused on the heavy use of air- to-air rockets by the German Air Force. Records of unusual sightings reported to the Air Force field at the National Archives, address enclosed, under the heading 'Project Bluebook'. Glad to assist." A second letter to Bigorne from George C. Chalou, Asst. Chief, Military Reference Branch, Military Archives Division ( and so signed ) says essentially the same thing. In part: "A search in records of the US Strategic Bombing Survey (USSBS!) European War, Target Damage File, IIIa (2606), Schweinfurt, Germany, failed to disclose any documentation or information regarding little flying discs by B-17 Pilots." In short, if they can find one seemingly relevant document that FAILS to mention UFOs, they are off the hook. Still, the original (Frank Edwards) story seems highly questionable in light of this... and that is certainly no fault of the persistent Mr. Bigorne! Tim Good (op.cit.) goes on at length about the "Massey Project", starting with "If Frank Edwards is to be believed... " 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:40:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:14:19 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Help For Loren Coleman - Hatch >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:23:34 -0400 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca> >Subject: Help For Loren Coleman >To: UFO UpDates - <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Goffstown, NH CEIII account >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:57:30 -0400 >From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com> >To: Forteana <forteana@primenet.com> >Anyone have details and eyewitness names for the 1973 Goffstown, >NH, UFO and small occupant report? >I just don't have a handle on this stuff the way I do the cz >items, but I'm visiting Goffstown, and was curious. And I'm not >even on any UFO lists. Hello Kelly and/or Loren: I have two records for Goffstown,NH in November of 1973, just two days apart: 1973/11/01 2030h 71:37W 43:03N 3333 NAM USA NHM 9 6 GOFFSTOWN,NH: F.DOW: THUMP on PORCH: PSH W/LARGE HAT+TAPE ON FACE: MAKES GESTURES: Ref# 178 WEBB,David:'73-YEAR of the HUMANOIDS Page 18 1973/11/03 1930h 71:37W 43:02N 3333 NAM USA NHM 8 7 GOFFSTOWN,NH: REX SNOW+1:2 OIDS/SLVR SUITS/YARD BAG SAMPLES: DOG SCARED: /r83p313 Ref# 24 NICAP UFO INVESTIGATOR January 1974 I very seldom record even parts of names. I apparently did so to differentiate between these two highly strange and similar sightings. The first listing (Dow) sounds something like a "man in black", or maybe just a poor alsheimer's victim who got lost. The second case (Snow) seems more interesting. Besides the NICAP UI reference, /r83 is Raymond Fowler's book 'UFOs: Interplanetary Visitors', Prentice Hall and later Bantam Paperbacks 1979, page 313. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 02:07:59 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:17:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:25:16 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca> Hello Ron: This won't help much, but neither do the incoherent details given by Mr. Short-Story. * I have only one listing for Garden City, LI, NY but that is for 17AUG1954. Using that to center a map on Long Island, I find several nearby sightings: * 3 of these are for Mitchell AFB, just to the East, but alas these were for different months in 1952. A fourth was 6 miles West of Mitchell AFB, indeed to the West of Garden City, and some time in 1959. * A 5th listing here ( *U* Database ) was for Hempstead AFB, but again this was 1952. Filtering sighting by dates ( Jan,1976 to Dec,1978) on the same map shows only one sighting even remotely close: 1977/8/18 2030h dur:45mns 73:51:20W 40:40:20N OZONE PARK/QUEENS,NY : 1+OBS:3 25'SCRS GO 250'OVHD: SLOW+SILENT : ALL VANISH IN SIGHT! Ref# 160: MUFON UFO JOURNAL Issue No. 222. That's way to the West in Queens. Rather than square lights, we have "saucers", seen around dusk. Not even the time of day matches up. That doesn't mean nobody else has it of course. You might try UFOCAT or some other large database. *U* does not list night-light sightings. Sorry - 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Quantum Leaps In Planet Search From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:09:03 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Quantum Leaps In Planet Search Source: MSNBC at http://www.msnbc.com/news/441793.asp?cp1=1 where very informing pictures and links are to be found. Stig ** Quantum leaps in the planet search Four research groups detect hints of a dozen distant worlds By Alan Boyle MSNBC Aug. 7 - The list of planets beyond our solar system is growing by leaps and bounds - and just as importantly, scientists are developing new methods to expand their reach toward distant worlds. THE LATEST FINDS in the search for extrasolar planets were announced Monday at the International Astronomical Union's general assembly in Manchester, England - and involved four groups of researchers. Advance word about many of the discoveries started leaking out last week. The new findings raise the tally of extrasolar planets to more than 50. All of these planets were detected indirectly, in most cases using a 'radial velocity" technique that analyzes subtle variations in the light coming from distant stars. Planet-hunters say such variations are caused by the gravitational pull exerted by unseen planets as they orbit the stars. (*Click here for "Other Worlds," a graphic explanation of planet detection techniques.) The most notable detection relates to a planet circling the star Epsilon Eridani, just 10.5 light-years or 63 trillion miles away - which would make it the closest world ever found beyond our solar system. Researchers analyzed nearly 20 years� worth of observations from four different telescopes to conclude that the faint variations in Epsilon Eridani's spectrum were caused by a circling planet. "Detecting a planet orbiting Epsilon Eridani - a star very similar to our own sun - is like finding a planet in our own back yard," said research team leader William Cochran, an astronomer at the University of Texas� McDonald Observatory. If the newly discovered world were in our own solar system, its eccentric orbit would pass through the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Researchers said the planet could have a mass roughly equal to Jupiter's, or about 300 times Earth's mass. The radial velocity method can tell researchers only what the minimum mass of a distant planet could be. However, because this planet is relatively close, the find opens the door to further speculation: "We could very likely resolve the true mass of this planet, using both direct imaging and space-based astrometric measurements with Hubble Space Telescope," Cochran said in a written statement. In addition, Cochran said the distribution of dust around the star hinted at yet another world farther out, raising the possibility that Epsilon Eridani harbored a multiple-planet system like our own. TRAILS IN THE DUST This observation meshes with calculations made by another team, headed by Nick Gorkavyi at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Systems. Gorkavyi and his colleagues analyzed the swirls of dust around Epsilon Eridani and two other relatively nearby stars, Vega and Beta Pictoris - and concluded that the dust patterns bore the signatures of unseen planets. In a written statement, Gorkavyi noted that the dusty disks, detected using the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope in Hawaii and the Hubble Space Telescope, would block any direct view of distant planets within. "We turned this problem into an advantage - by reading the patterns imprinted in the dust disk, we can determine whether a planet is hiding there," he said. "The planet is still hidden, but it writes its signature in the dust." One of the apparent planets, circling Beta Pictoris, would have a mass estimated at just 10 times that of Earth, far smaller than the planets found using other methods. All three of the worlds detected using the dust analysis method are thought to follow chilly orbits much wider than Pluto's track around our sun, meaning they�re not likely to be hospitable to life. However, researchers hold out hope that as-yet-undetected planets could be more Earthlike, even in the Epsilon Eridani system. PLANETS UPON PLANETS Discoveries from two other teams of astronomers provide further support for the view that multiple-planet systems, perhaps including analogues to Earth, may be more common than previously thought. Until Monday, only one multiplanet system had been reported, around Upsilon Andromedae. One team, based at the Geneva Observatory, said Monday that they detected six new planets - including a world with a minimum mass half that of Saturn. Such a planet would still be more than 40 times as massive as Earth, but it would set a new smallness record for the radial velocity technique. The sub-Saturnian body, circling a star known as HD83443 about 100 light-years from Earth, is also notable because it's the second planet detected in that system: Another world, with a minimum mass 1.17 times that of Saturn, was found by the same team in May. In addition to the six planetary finds, the Geneva team also reported that a star called HD168443 appeared to have a planet as well as a failed companion star, also known as a brown dwarf, in orbit around it. Another team, including astronomers from the University of California at Berkeley, announced three new detections, including one that confirmed a find by the Geneva group. "We're now at a stage where we are finding planets faster than we can investigate them and write up the results," Berkeley astronomer Geoffrey Marcy said in a written statement. "It's wonderful. Planet-hunting has morphed from the marvelous to the mundane." Moreover, Berkeley researcher Debra Fischer analyzed data from 12 stars previously thought to have just one planet - and found that five of them showed evidence of having an additional 'sibling," which could be either a planet, brown dwarf or unseen star. "This is the first time anyone has noticed that such a high percentage of stars with one known planet show evidence of a second companion," Fischer said. All these results hint that our celestial neighborhood could be a fertile field for planets like Earth. None of the methods used so far are fine enough to detect Earthlike planets directly. However, in the next 10 years, scientists hope to develop space-based instruments capable of spotting such worlds around relatively nearby stars - and perhaps even analyzing their atmospheres for signs of life. * A PLENITUDE OF PLANETS Here are details about the planets announced Monday, including the star's distance from Earth as well as the planet's minimum mass, average distance from its parent star and its orbital period. MJ stands for the mass of Jupiter. AU stands for Astronomical Units, the equivalent of Earth's distance from the sun, or 93 million miles: o Epsilon Eridani: 10.5 light-years away. Planet's minimum mass: 0.8 MJ. Average orbital distance: 3.2 AU. Period: About 7 years. Dust swirls hint at another body with mass of 0.2 MJ about 59 AU (5.5 billion miles) from the star. o HD12661: 121 light-years away. Minimum mass: 2.8 MJ. Orbital distance: 0.80 AU. Period: 250 days. o HD92788: 104 light-years away. Minimum mass: 3.7 MJ. Distance: 0.98 AU. Period: 341.7 days. o HD38529: 137 light-years away. Minimum mass: 0.77 MJ. Distance: 0.13 AU. Period: 14.3 days. o HD6434: 131 light-years away. Minimum mass: 0.48 MJ. Distance: 0.15 AU. Period: 22.09 days. o HD19994: 72 light-years away. Minimum mass: 1.8 MJ. Distance: 1.3 AU. Period: 454.2 days. o HD121504: 145 light-years away. Minimum mass: 0.89 MJ. Distance: 0.32 AU. Period: 64.62 days. o HD190228: 203 light-years away. Minimum mass: 5 MJ. Distance: 2.3 AU. Period: 1,127 days. o HD83443b: 141 light-years away. Minimum mass: 0.35 MJ. Distance: 0.038 AU. Period: 2.9853 days. Discovery announced in May. o HD83443c: 141 light-years away. Minimum mass: 0.15 MJ. Distance: 0.17 AU. Period: 29.83 days. o HD168443: Apparent planet and brown dwarf, about 100 light-years away. o Beta Pictoris: Dust swirls hint at body 10 times as massive as Earth, 70 AU (6.5 billion miles) from parent star. o Vega: Dust swirls hint at body with mass of 2 MJ, 53.8 AU (5 billion miles) from parent star. McDonald Obs., NASA, Berkeley, Geneva Obs., SpaceRef ** LINKS: MSNBC Coverage: "Looking for Life" Planet search yields intriguing finds "Mysteries of the Universe" Discuss the planet search on the Space News BBS Links, Sites and Media: Extrasolar Planets Geneva Extrasolar Planet Search Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia More MSNBC Coverage: Space News: Space.com: A medium solar maximum See the shattered shards of a comet Space.com: Cargo craft docks with station Pentagon signals delay in missile plan Space.com: Skywatchers also focus on faith MSNBC Coverage: Extrasolar Planets ** *MSNBC Terms, Conditions and Privacy � 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Tunguska 2001 Conference From: Patricia Mason <artemis@greatserpentmound.org> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 07:43:53 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:24:43 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Tunguska 2001 Conference --- From: Andrei Ol'khovatov [mailto:olkhovatov@mtu-net.ru] Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 12:52 AM To: artemis@greatserpentmound.org Subject: Tunguska 2001 conference TUNGUSKA 2001 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE (PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT) Dear colleagues, I am glad to make a preliminary announcement of the TUNGUSKA 2001 International Conference on the 1908 Tunguska event to be held in Russia in summer of 2001. Also an excursion to the Tunguska epicenter is planned. Details and updates are posted at: www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/conf01.htm Also I would like to ask you to forward the info to people who may be interested to participate in the conference and/or in the excursion. Sincerely, Andrei Ol'khovatov olkhov@mail.ru Russia, Moscow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:29:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:28:25 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:34:52 -0500 >From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net> >Subject: Buying Silence - The Chupacabrasr Solution? >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dear friends: >Yesterday I contacted Arturo Menay, director of Radio Coya of >Mara Elena, Chile, and representative of the first movement, >Anti -"blood depredator"- (Chupacabras) >He tells me that the attacks continue. 6 cats killed before >yesterday so far more than 70, all female. In any event, he >inform me, they, the blood depredators, no longer call the >attention with their presence, what more, children begin to play >with the dead cats taking them from the paws and scaring their >friends. Menay also inform me that just beside the right wheel >of his automobile he found a sucked cat, he revised this feline >claw for remains of the attacker hair but didn't find anything. >It got his attention the fact that the attacked cat appeared in >that place without having listened any noise or strange >movement. Hello Dr, Forgive me if I sound somewhat curious, but concerning this Creature' can anyone explain the UFO link to it, if indeed there is one? I mean for this creature to get so much attention in the UFO field of research surely means that some people are looking at this creature as some kind of ET? Or am I wrong, and there is no connection to UFOs at all? Can the Dr or anyone on this List, publish any events which are UFO in nature, which have also been connected to this creature as I would like to know the link between the "Goat Sucker" and UFO encounters. I personally feel this is more for those into Cryptozology. Perhaps I can be enlightened somewhat. And for the record, has anyone who has researched this creature come up with any clues as to what they think it is, or its origins? Also has this "Goat Sucker" ever been caught on film (Video/Photograph). 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:22:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:55:03 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 05:51:49 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:59:51 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro Greetings Mike, >But more to the point, wouldn't you agree that the purpose of >discussion lists like UpDates is to explore all the >possibilities of a given situation? Any reasonable person would. <snip> >The fact is, Mr. Mortellaro, that as the Director of Abduction >Research for MUFON, the "professional misconduct" of John >Carpenter says volumes about the organisation that he >represents. The fact that MUFON directors have kept silent on >the matter of Carpenter's "file-sale" and the fact that MUFON >has not taken the initiative to recognize the negative >consequences of Carpenter's "professional misconduct", nor have >they publically apologized or made any attempts to make amends >to the abductees whose confidentiality was violated, proves >beyond a shadow of a doubt, that MUFON has more important >projects on it's agenda, like the private funding from Bigelow >to create the MUFON/NIDS "coalition". The fact that many people as well as other organizations have chosen to ignore the gravity of this situation speaks volumes. Wouldn't you agree? It gives me pause to wonder just exactly what those others, especially those claiming advocacy for abductees, think about abductees. Not very much, in my personal opinion. Sad. Those we are supposed to trust sold all abductees down the pike not just the 140 whose files changed hands for $100 each. <snip> >The fact is, we have not heard specific responses and >clarifications from Bigelow or MUFON on this matter. You would >think that people in these high-profile positions would realize >the importance of explaining their actions and especially their >"professional misconduct". One would think that, wouldn't they. I hate repeating myself but their silence speaks volumes. They are not to be trusted. <snip> >And since when is it a disservice to ask the very people who are >responsible for this "mess" to explain their motives and >agendas? On the other hand, perhaps its better they don't. At this point, I personally would expect nothing but lies. They, all of them, lied to us by their silence, and continue to lie by their silence. I hardly think they, all of them, will have a sudden attack of the scruples and actually tell us the truth. <snip> >Or am I treading on your "sacred cows"! We all are, Mike, and I'm getting tired of wading through it. We're going to need hip boots very soon now. >Well, get used to it... this ain't over yet! Not by a long shot is this over! >And by the way, I don't like "Quaaludes", because they make you >lose your balance, which is something you should consider also. Perhaps Mr. Mortellaro was speaking from experience? Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:31:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:58:19 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 06:09:49 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Farrell >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:02:24 -0007 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:12:18 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS-MUFON Coalition - Kelleher Greetings Mike <snip> >But with all due respect, would you be able to be more specific >and answer the allegations that Mr. Bigelow paid $14,000 to John >Carpenter of MUFON for 140 "abductee files" back around 1996? Ummmm ... no? >Would you be able to explain why Bigelow and NIDS would expose >their professional reputation to such "amateur dealings" without >regard for the inevitable negative consequences and outrage that >would and has followed? Ummmm ... no? >Would you be able to get Bigelow to actually come down from his >"high and mighty" throne and explain why he bought those >"abductee files" from Carpenter? It's been three years. Surely he could think up a good explanation by this time, couldn't he? >Are we to believe that a big-time Las Vegas casino millionaire >would be naive and unaware of the consequences of his dealings >with Carpenter or MUFON? That's what _they_ think. Fortunately for those who are serious about this research, naivete doesn't play a role. >Would you be able to express your personal thoughts and feelings >on this matter, or are you just a "paid spokesman" for the NIDS >organization, in which case all we can expect is more of your >prepared and canned policy releases? The personal thoughts and feelings of a "paid spokesman" for NIDS is an oxymoron. >Is this too much too ask of you, Mr. Kelleher? Ummmm ... probably. You know, Mike, if you sweep dust bunnies under the bed long enough, they eventually come out the other side causing more trouble than anyone wants to admit. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:55:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:01:53 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>To: updates@sympatico.ca< Greetings John, <snip> >I propose that it is _you_ who are damaging yourself and the >entire abductee community by your incessant negative meddling >with the work that is being done in order to get Carpenter to >notify the clients whose files he sold. If it had been you that >Carpenter betrayed that way, we'd never hear the end of the >whining and complaining that you'd do. Every step of the way you >have tried to interfere with the process almost as if you were >on a 'mission'. In your last rant you tell Carpenter that the >reason he should comply and notify the abductees is because you are sick and tired of reading our postings to him about it. Well said! <snip> >You seem to be having a huge problem understanding why we are >demanding that Carpenter notify the abductees whose files he >sold without their consent. There's a simple reason for that. Abductees are big business, John, the fatted calf, the geese that lay the golden eggs. It all comes down to the wallet. <snip> Mr. Kelleher wrote: >>People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, >>which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up >>the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves >>lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. There you have it. In a nutshell. Right from the horse's... umm ... mouth. <snip> >I and a paltry few others are fighting hammer and >tong to get Carpenter to give these folks the respect they >deserve. It'll never happen. It'll interfere with their bank rolls. <snip> >I'm sure it's interesting to others too to see what kind of >stuff you're really made of. Actually it's not. We figured that out a long time ago, and their same ol' song and dance is more than boring at this point. On the other hand, it would be a stretch for them to come up with anything original ... like the truth. <snip> >For their sake and for the sake of all future abductees stand >down if you cannot help or contribute something positive or of >value to the effort. So far, you've been one of the obstacles, >not one of those fighting for the rights of your fellow >abductees. Stand down? No, I don't think that will happen. Nor is it likely anyone involved in this mess will do the right thing. Personally I think that concept is quite alien to them. I've given up wondering where the hell everyone else is in this mess. I've also given up hoping that those involved will actually do the right thing and notify those whose files were sold. This is an on-going 3-year-old mess. Those involved not only committed a grave breach of trust, they lied to abductees all over the globe by their actions when those files were sold, and they continue to lie by their inactivity now that the awful truth has finally come to life. The only bright spot in this disaster is this List itself. It's a world-wide list. We, all of us, now know the caliber of the people and organizations involved in this cover-up. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:03:29 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:31:41 +0100 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Selling Files >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:26:41 -0500 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>Subject: Re: Selling Files - Jones >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dennis; >If you do get a chance to do it over again, though, I suggest >you trim a few pages off the top of the 8-9 devoted to >"Derenberger Contact Claims" and add them to the following entry >on the "Dr. X Case," which is presently represented by only >three pages, and which, in MHO, is much more interesting and >influential than Derenberger's erstwhile "contribution" to >ufology. Without making stuff up out of thin air, I couldn't have added anything to the Dr. X case beyond what I wrote. Maybe you have access to information I don't. The Derenberger story is so fascinating -- such a bizarre, colorful spectacle, and so relatively little known -- that I chose to tell it in full, and I would do so again in the unlikely event that a third edition of The UFO Encyclopedia is published. Besides that, it also says something about the complex human and phenomenological dimensions of contacteeism, an aspect of the UFO age that most ufologists still don't understand very well. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:54:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:05:50 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:29:21 -0400 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Selling Files >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:26:41 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: Selling Files - Jones >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:29:17 +0100 >>>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: Selling Files >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Sean: >I think the difference between Encyclopaedia and encyclopedia is >the same difference between colour and color, the same as the >difference between centre and center. The difference being one >is spelt the American way and the other the British way. You are, of course, correct.>I was making a somewhat pedantic point -- in retrospect hardly worth making -- that the word is spelled "encyclopedia" on the cover of my book. >Please be assured I fully respect your work for I really do own >a copy of " The UFO Book, Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" >as it is called this side of the water. As you may know, that's a condensed version, containing about 30% of the content of the original. >However one final question if I may. >If you only list/mention/include people who have played a part >in Ufology why does Peter Brookesmith not get a mention? After >all would you not say that he has been around for some years and >has contributed many times to Ufology with his books, magazines >and other publications? The index to The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, cites Brookesmith three times (pages 116, 314, 500). The bibliography mentions three items by him, two books and a two-part magazine article. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:55:01 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:09:45 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Jim Oberg, List: >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:01:10 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >Subject: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >To: updates@sympatico.ca, >Source: space.com >http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/russian_ufo_report_000808.html <snip> >Exclusive: Russian UFO Research Revealed >By Jim Oberg >Special to SPACE.com >posted: 02:34 pm ET 08 August 2000 >* >In an special report obtained by SPACE.com, two of Russia's leading UFO >investigators have summarized the results of the Soviet Union's official >13-year study of UFO reports. <snip> >The official investigators also point out a striking absence of >certain types of reports from their files. "In contrast to >numerous descriptions of various kinds of contacts with aliens," >they write, "there has not been obtained, within the framework >of the project which involved the great observational potential >of the army and civilian organizations, any message about UFO >landings, any message about contacts with pilots of UFOs, any >message about the abductions of individuals by UFOs." Or, astronomical phenomena. >"This means," they conclude, "that either the territory of the >USSR was, due to any reasons, closed for alien visitations >during, at least, 13 years, or that the hypothesis of an >extraterrestrial origin of UFOs is inconsistent. Any serious >investigator of the problem of UFOs should, at least, face this >reality." Or, that astronomical education among the public was at such a high level that misidentified sky objects were invisible within the Soviet Union. Unlikely. Were final unkowns being referred to, here, or all reports? Astronomical stimuli were the largest category in Condon, and I believe, remain high in other western studies. It seems a puzzle why they are missing, here. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:06:15 -0007 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:20:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:14:08 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:07:46 -0007 >>From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kelleher >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>The comment about NIDS being "alleged government insiders" is >>tired old internet gossip, dredged up and barely warmed over by >>people who could not be bothered to check the facts. >Colm, >Ex-FBI agents and US Intelligence agents fit my definition of >gov't. insiders. You have a problem with this definition? These >people are some of your employees. The description is accurate. >You sound like rhetoric yourself. >>This kind of claptrap unfortunately has become the signature of the >>United States "UFO investigative effort". While other countries are >>actually trying to do some serious research, the United States >>ufologists fall on each other and engage in cannibalism, backbiting, >>rumor-mongering and false innuendo. >You insult the facts. Get on with your investigating. No one is >stopping you. What are you complaining about? >NIDS is not an open organization. This is why we do not >cooperate. NIDS was made to be this way. No information comes >out unless you wish it to as it all remains the property of >NIDS. Ok, fine. Do your plans include running in- vestigations >through MUFON? If you access their database would you have any >obligation to send back any findings to MUFON members based on >that body of information? >As for the other stuff you mention - I didn't hear any of that >of which you speak. Did anyone else? Aren't you overreacting a >bit. We have been discussing important issues. Regrettably, you >trivialize the facts like some others I know. >>For once, can't we all just forget about the incestuous >>infighting and do some research? >>Colm Kelleher >>NIDS >Oh, perhaps you mean that ethics and professionalism are not >important as that is what we have been talking about. I think >you are negatively overreacting and missing the real positive >points of our discussions. NIDS was set up in 1995 to conduct research in the fields of UFOs, other phenomena associated with UFOs and animal mutilation as well as issues pertaining to overlaps in consciousness research with these topics. About two years ago, we published the names and biographies of people on our science advisory board and staff. They are and have been available for everybody to see at: http://www.nidsci.org. Some at NIDS have worked for the federal government and have the same desire as everybody else to do the research to describe this extraordinary UFO phenomenon. Many of us remember Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann holding a premature press conference several years ago to claim they had solved the Cold Fusion problem. The news conference was carried on CNN and on every other network throughout the world. That press conference and leaking data _before_ peer review killed the field of cold fusion research. It exiled a potentially explosive and productive research field permanently from the United States to Japan, the south of France and other countries. To paraphrase Carl Sagan's dictum: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In the field of ufology NIDS does not do science by press conference. NIDS does not release anecdotal data. We do not rush to publish research data unless we think we can stand behind it. We have been in existence for five years and we will continue to prudently keep preliminary data within our organization and not release it. NIDS publishes in the peer reviewed scientific literature and sometimes on our web site. The published results are there for everybody to see. Go to the NIDS web site at: http://www.nidsci.org. In keeping with any scientific collaboration, NIDS does privately share data with many individuals and organizations throughout North America and the world. As I mentioned to fellow presenters and other people at the recent MUFON 2000 conference, research of the UFO phenomenon is bigger than any single individual, group, or organization. It is bigger than NIDS, it is bigger than MUFON, it is bigger than CUFOS, FUFOR, ISSO, SETV etc. As NIDS speaks to people in other countries regarding UFO data, we are frequently confronted with the question: why do American ufologists engage in ritual blood-letting, paranoia etc? We do not have the answer. We _do_ know that the long history of infighting in the UFO field is extremely damaging to the prospect of new blood and creative ideas entering the field of ufology. It is perhaps ironic that the country that is at the forefront of research in information technology, biotechnology and most other disciplines, languishes in the backwaters when it comes to UFO research. The reason for this is the incessant acrimony within the research community. Many people in the United States and in other countries have told us that they stand on the sidelines and are appalled by the lack of professionalism displayed in US UFO research. More than anything else, the field of ufology in this country requires new blood and new ideas so that a critical mass of expertise can begin to make a difference. As I alluded to in my previous post, unless the hostility and ritual bloodletting that has characterized American UFOlogy for over ten years stops, American Ufology may not survive as a research discipline. Finally, the only reason that NIDS receives dozens of calls per month with new cases is that we have publicly stated that we _never_ release the names, identities or any details regarding eyewitnesses, experiencers, ranchers or other researchers who contact us with information. These identities are _always_ protected or redacted unless of course the individual chooses to release the information themselves. That situation will not change. We are continuously creating and receiving new information databases. The personal information in those databases is always protected or redacted. We have no intention of changing this policy. Colm Kelleher
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: NIDS Forum Back On-Line From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:13:30 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:21:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NIDS Forum Back On-Line Looks like the NIDS forum is back up: http://www.nidsci.org/resources/forum/Read/ Hmmm. Seems to be missing some postings, however. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Re: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight - From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 14:02:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 14:46:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight - Hi, Tim wrote: Message text written by UFO UpDates - Toronto >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:29:23 -0400 (EDT) >From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> >Subject: Cheshire Footage - Setting The Record Straight >To: updates@sympatico.ca >For Updates Readers; >Karl Woods has now approached UFO Magazine with a view to >promoting the video footage he shot over Hartford, Cheshire on >9th July 2000 at 1345. >We are quite happy with the way in which Graham Birdsall and >Russ Callaghan are handling this material - I have had friendly >and useful conversations with both men This is all getting curiouser and curiouser, to quote Alice. How, for instance, does the above square with Russ Callaghan's message to another list which reads: >>The Cheshire UFO Footage - World Exclusive Showing On >>ufomag.co.uk >>What has been labelled 'The Cheshire UFO' has been the centre of >>much heated debate across the Internet. All manner of claims and >>wholly innacurate comments have been espoused by certain >>individuals, resulting in confusion and ill-informed media >>international media hype. But what of the two men who were >>present when an anomolous object came into view on Sunday >>afternoon, 9 July 2000, at approximately 1.45pm near Northwhich, >>Cheshire, England? What of Karl Woods, the man who actually shot >>the footage? What of Karl's colleague, Mike James, a man with a >>proven and credible aviation background? >>Why have we not heard from them? Both men recently approached >>UFO Magazine and expressed bitter "disappointment" at the manner >>in which the footage had been handled by locally-based UFO >>'researchers'. Karl and Mike were not made privy to matters of a >>monetary nature which have compelled them to issue legal notices >>to the parties involved concerning these, and copyright. 'disappointment with the way the case had been handled' by Tim and Eric? 'legal notices' regarding copyright? Lordy! Someone, either Russ or Tim, is telling lies here because the two stories don't match. Let's continue with Russ....... >>Now, for the first time, Karl Woods has stepped forward to >>give his first public interview on the matter. He not only >>addresses these and other relevant issues to set the record >>straight, but has granted UFO Magazine full permission to >>broadcast that interview alongside the footage on its website >>(ufomag.co.uk). >>The interview, and the footage will appear from Tuesday, 8 >>August. The footage will also be screened on Sunday, 17 >>September at the 19TH Leeds International UFO Conference, >>where both Karl and Mike will discuss the footage and be happy >>to take questions from the audience. Regards. I hope someone is there who can ask the correct questions. But wait... wasn't it only a few hours ago that Steve Mera posted an advertisement for his conference on 16 September starring himself, Tim and some other people? Wasn't this the very conference that a couple of weeks ago Tim stated would show the Cheshire video? So why is the famous vid _not_ now being advertised at the Hellsmere Port conference? Could it be something to do with those 'legal notices'? But back to Tim's latest..... >- but some things need to be said; >1 - Karl Woods, it has now been proven, is not a "friend" or >colleague of Eric Morris. Apologies welcome. Read the previous posts on this by myself and Rory Lushman. Eric and Karl knew each other, and in a ufological context too.. >2 - Karl and friend Mike James asked me to act as an agent for >them in order that they might financially benefit from the >footage. Neither I not UFO Magazine (UK) have a problem with >that. Karl has said as much; he is happy to know that the >footage has a certain "commercial value" (!). > - At all times we acted in concert with him. He knew exactly >what was happening and received �800 from the Daily Mail via >Eric Morris for the exclusive interview he gave them and which >he had total control over. Let's face it, he was photographed >not me or my colleague Eric Morris. Obviously Eric's been telling more fibs then as he has stated to at least two ufologists that he has been offered $70,000 (!). Further to this, there is a considerable difference between a witness trying to make cash out of video or photograph and ufologists doing the same. Until they have had it analysed at the very least. >7 - Karl said that he would "transfer" the copyright over to >Eric Morris "for 24 hours" whilst we went to the press. In fact, >during the one brief meeting I had with him, he said that we >could "do anything you like with it - just keep me out of it". >Dave Kelly, a well-known Ufologist in the NW, has signed an >affidavit to the effect that almost the same comments were made >to him and Eric on their first visit! I hate to be picky but Dave Kelly is from Chesterfield, hardly the NW! >8 - Much nauseating waffle has been written and spoken about >"analysis". Analysing such a video is pretty much a waste of >time but a favourite amongst Ufologists and their associates. It rather makes any ufological pursuit pointless then, doesn't it? Oh, except for the promotion and money making side of it! >Nevertheless, Woods agreed that should any money be forthcoming, >we would use it for analysis. >As it happened, I was contacted by NIDS who offered to do this >for nothing. Dr. Green at Warwick University also contacted me >as did the Physics Department of a South American University. >I told them then that the copyright was with Karl Woods. >So we did what Woods asked - try and get it analysed. Phil >Mantle also offered to contact Jeff Sainio of MUFON to help. And we look forward to the results of such analysis eagerly. Any idea when the results may be out Tim? >The blatant hypocrisy displayed by almost everyone in this >matter has been incredible. At every stage smears have been >dressed up as "enquiries" and the skeptics have made a big deal >about it - miserably failing at every stage and ending up >looking very jealous and very stupid because they have not seen >the footage nor done any meaningful investigation. As you wish - yet none of the sceptics' questions have been answered and indeed this latest turn of events and the inconsistencies therein only serve to make those questions more pertinent. >Some of them have even written to colleagues of mine "warning" >them not to support us publicly. I think we'd all like to see proof of this Tim. Can you provide it? If it's written we should be able see real paper with real signatures. If it's emails we'll settle for them. >In the meantime we'll carry on doing what we're good at - >investigating UFOs and the Paranormal and going _directly_ to >the media. That's our way and you won't find us apologising for >it. Well I'm pleased you've actually stated it after all the self righteous waffling of a few weeks ago. Cheque-book ufology is a time honoured tradition in ufology. >Between now and then many harsh words will be written - but not >by me - because I don't care what the skeptics say, and neither >do many other UpDates readers many of whom are convinced by the >reality of Alien Contact - as am I. All we seek is further >proof..... And your conversion to belief in 'Alien Contact' came in which month this year Tim? As a result of what events/information? These sudden changes of belief are all highly intriguing, and somewhat startling, especially considering what you have said you believed in the past. So what do we make of the Cheshire Video situation now? If we were to take a sceptical view, based on the available evidence, it would go like this: * Russ Callaghan/UFO Magazine's statement is correct and Woods has been unhappy at how his video has been manipulated for profit. * He has now approached UFO magazine who are now handling it and will give it exposure (for good or ill) at a UFO conference which is attended by 1000's. * Both Steve Mera's conference advertisement and Tim's e-mail both came out _immediately_ after Russ's statement in an attempt to retrieve the situation. * Arrange the words 'limitation', 'exercise' and 'damage' into the phrase of your choice. I realise Tim doesn't like answering his critics with provable facts but these queries now arise: 1) Will the Cheshire video be shown, in full, at the Mera/Matthews/Morris/Mantle conf? (and as a sub-question, why does this particular cabal of ufologists all have names ending in M?) 2) What does Tim have to say about the differences between his e-mail and Russ Callaghan's? 3) Has Tim and/or Eric received 'legal papers' from Karl Woods Our sceptical investigations continue into the events surrounding the manipulation, marketing and myth making around the Cheshire video. It ain't over 'til the Cheshire cat's smile disappears completely! Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: Magnetic 'Solution' To Crop Circle Puzzle From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:39:41 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:39:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Magnetic 'Solution' To Crop Circle Puzzle Source: BBC News http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid%5F872000/872142.stm Wednesday, 9 August, 2000, 14:43 GMT 15:43 UK Magnetic 'Solution' To Crop Circle Puzzle Colin Andrews has researched crop circles since the 80s Research into the appearance of crop circles in summer fields claims the strange phenomena are caused by the Earth's magnetic field. Scientist Colin Andrews says 17 years of work has revealed that about 80% of the formations are man-made. But he believes that magnetism may account for the rest, which display a simplicity of form compared with elaborate, beautiful patterns of the "hoaxes". Dr Andrews believes a mysterious shift in the magnetic field gives rise to a current that "electrocutes" the crops forcing them to lie flat on the ground. Summertime feature The known hoaxers, artists who spend hours trampling fields with footboards attached to a length of rope, say the public does not believe in scientific explanations. Crop circles are a regular summertime feature of the UK arable landscape, particularly in Wiltshire and the West Country where there are a number of ancient sites. Designs in the flattened wheat, barley and corn become more elaborate each year, fuelling the debate over who or what is responsible for them. Explanations have ranged from freak weather conditions to alien visitors. But Dr Andrews, funded by a grant from the Rockerfeller Institute in the US, believes he is closer to the truth. 'Natural' creations He has hired private detectives to track hoaxers and now says he can rule out 80% of the formations. He claims the less elaborate designs are the "natural" creations caused by a three-degree shift in magnetic field lines. Some claim circles are UFO landing sites Dr Andrews, who plans to publish his findings later this year, says more work still needs to be done his theory. Self-proclaimed hoaxer John Lundberg said no-one would ever believe a scientific explanation for crop circles because people want to believe it is something more mysterious. "The public don't want it explained," he said. Most mainstream scientists believe the only explanation for crop circles lies in the footboards of hoaxers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 9 UpDate: BBC - Q&A: Crop Circles From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:52:48 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:52:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: BBC - Q&A: Crop Circles Source: BBC News http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F871000/871607.stm Wednesday, 9 August, 2000, 14:42 GMT 15:42 UK Q&A: Crop circles As a new study claims some crop circles are created by shifts in the earth's magnetic field, George Bishop, of the Centre for Crop Circle Studies, expounds on the phenomenon. According to Dr Colin Andrews, who has studied crop circles for 17 years, about 20% are caused by eddies in the earth's magnetic field - the rest are man-made. He thinks a mysterious shift in the electro-magnetic field creates a current that flattens the crops in its path. Is it plausible? "Yes - it's a nice rounded theory," says Mr Bishop. Like Dr Andrews, he says all but the simplest circles are hoaxes. The theory could explain why in some circles, microphones and recording equipment hit interference, he says. Some years ago, a BBC crew had difficulty recording in a circle. "If the circles are formed by electro-magnetic eddies, there may be a residual charge of energy," Mr Bishop says. But he does not think the new theory is the final word: "It doesn't explain why often the nodes of the plants have swollen up to 200 times the original size." He thinks the currents may work in tandem with other environmental factors, possibly conducted via water in the air, such as mist, or in underground water tables. Are they only in the UK? No, the circles crop up around the world - in grass as well as grain fields. Why so many in Wiltshire, south England? As an area steeped in the mysteries of the ancients, this is where the hoaxers are most active, and where the majority of enthusiasts go circle spotting. Many more circles around the country and abroad go unseen and unreported, Mr Bishop says. "Ninety percent - and in some years, 98% - of the circles in the UK appear along the aquifer line (a layer of rock able to hold water), which runs from Dorset to Norfolk." When do the circles date from? One of the earliest reports was in Lyon in 815AD, and a late 16th Century woodcut depicts the devil mowing a field into patterns. Wiltshire's ancient stone circles - which include Stonehenge and Avebury - could have been built on the sites of early crop circles, Mr Bishop says. What of the other theories - aliens, for example? Aliens are a modern-day obsession, so not surprisingly the circles have been attributed to little green men - either as messages, or the imprint of UFOs landing in the fields. "People relate crop circles to what is going on around them, what concerns them," Mr Bishop says. "People used to think it was witches and fairies; then it was aliens. Today, people think it might be electro-magnetic pollution, caused by the proliferation of radio masts and mobile phones." And ancient ley lines? "It may well be that the earth does have these energy lines, and it may well create some sort of current when these lines intersect with the magnetic fields." What about freak weather patterns? Mini-tornadoes are unlikely to create such intricate and symmetrical patterns, Mr Bishop says: "We know whirlwinds aren't static - they travel around." But this you can guarantee - the circles will crop up again next summer.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:17:03 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:23:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Farrell >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 05:51:49 +0000 (GMT) >From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:59:51 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On >>>The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th >>>at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in >>>St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: >>>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml >>>So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! >>>Please take a close look at the following statements: >><snip> >>Mike, Listers and EBK, >>Mike, not only is your concoction of horse hockey a stretch, but >>you do a huge disservice to the UFO and abduction community as >>well. Nothing I read in your post as quoted and attributed to >>NIDS/MUFON is anything but an honest appraisal of what would >>have been lauded BC (before Carpenter). ><snip> >>People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, >>which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up >>the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves >>lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. >>To you I say what I should have said to some others who wrote >>the same type of detritus, go see a professional and think about >>Quaaludes. >Hello Jim Mortellaro and List Members, >You're too kind with all your compliments. Really, I don't >deserve such praise!;-> >But more to the point, wouldn't you agree that the purpose of >discussion lists like UpDates is to explore all the >possibilities of a given situation? I do, Mike, however exploring pssibilities which do not exist is counter to the purpose of UpDates. If you think carefully about what you wrote, and looked further into the recruiting efforts of NIDS, you will see that they prefer hiring people with experience in law enforcement on all levels, local, state and federal. This is because of their stated reasoning that such are well equipped to do thorough investigative work. It is not because NIDS is necessarily associated with government. This is not exploring a possibility, it is pure speculation and plants a seed of mistrust into the already complex equation. My opinion. >If we are not looking at all the angles and asking all the >possible questions, then what are we doing here besides patting >each other on the back? I agree. >The fact is, Mr. Mortellaro, that as the Director of Abduction >Research for MUFON, the "professional misconduct" of John >Carpenter says volumes about the organisation that he >represents. The fact that MUFON directors have kept silent on >the matter of Carpenter's "file-sale" and the fact that MUFON >has not taken the initiative to recognize the negative >consequences of Carpenter's "professional misconduct", nor have >they publically apologized or made any attempts to make amends >to the abductees whose confidentiality was violated, proves >beyond a shadow of a doubt, that MUFON has more important >projects on it's agenda, like the private funding from Bigelow >to create the MUFON/NIDS "coalition". See, that's the whole point, Mike. Carpenter's conduct is not known except what he has been accused of and what his statements are to the contrary. You are not looking at evidence. Neither is anyone else that I can discern. Carpenter tells it differently. He says that with the exception of his former wife's file, which was mutually agreed to being sent, all the files he sent to NIDS were redacted. Why should anyone not wish to consider this to be a factor? Certainly his reputation and comportment heretofore has been exemplary. Is all that for nothing in your world view? All of a sudden this man is a criminal? As for MUFON, how do you know what they have or have not done? You are exploring possibilities which in my view, diminish the credibility of NIDS, Carpenter and MUFON. And not all the facts are in. A good lawyer would have a ball with this scenario and a lot of pockets would be well worn in the process. I do not object to the expose', merely to the continuation of and gross exaggeration of the facts, and to the harrassment. It is insufferable. >Mr. Mortellaro, I've been involved with UFO organisations as a >committee member both here in Australia and back in America, and >I can assure you that everyone knows what everyone else is doing >or not doing. I can assure that politics are alive and well in >Ufology. And like it or not, we have to deal with that aspect of >Ufology as honestly and honorably as possible. The stakes are >higher according to the status, influence and funding of the >organisation. I agree. But I hate politics. I am not good at the practice for one thing. For another, those who practice politics frustrate me to no end. There is inuendo, not outright accusation with supporting facts. There is rarely an accurate answer to a question. It's why I left the industrial sector to go into my own business. It may have saved my soul. I know it saved my stomach lining. >So when MUFON and NIDS are invloved with "professional >misconduct", then yes, it's an issue that should concern and >involve all those who consider themselves to be contributing to >the UFO Disclosure Movement. Where is the proof that Carpenter's files were not redacted, other than his wife's file? Where is the proof that his employers were _not_ aware of what he was doing and gave him a caveat that his outside interests must not be as a professional practicioner? Indeed if this is true, then what is the wrong which has been done except to Carpenter et al? The abductees' files, if redacted and blacked out, cannot point to the individuals. Until now, no damage has been done to them in light of the redaction. And who said (except his accusers) that Carpenter was practicing as a LSW? If he was not, then his accountability in this matter is minimized even further, is it not? If all that is true (files redacted and practicing as a non professionl) then where is the guilt, who is harmed and how, and is it all worth the hoopla it is getting (negative to Carpenter, NIDS, MUFON and Bigelow? >And NIDS is involved because Bigelow paid $14,000 for 140 files >that were sold without the permission and foreknowledge of the >abductees. And MUFON is involved because one of their directors, >who has the "keys" to MUFON's abductee file cabinet, was the one >who sold these files to Bigelow. First, the files were not MUFON's files from the MUFON cabinet. They were files from Carpenter's own efforts (I beleive). >Why MUFON and NIDS are letting Carpenter take the fall for this >one is a whole other "can of worms". It is my belief that their attorneys are better than his. The name of the game is to keep one's mouth tightly closed until all the damaging evidence is in. The legal equivelant of, "Run it up the flagpole and see who salutes!" >The fact is, we have not heard specific responses and >clarifications from Bigelow or MUFON on this matter. You would >think that people in these high-profile positions would realize >the importance of explaining their actions and especially their >"professional misconduct". As a community, we are not without >mercy and compassion when everybody puts their cards face up on >the table for all to see! What about the lack of response from other high profile people in this business. Is it because they too, wish to stay away from this fight for fear of making statements which might cause them to be among the guilty parties? Or is it because they think, as I do, that it has gone too far and too personal. When a man's ability to earn a living is jeopardized, it becomes a lost cause for those who do the accusing and to their bank accounts. They are headed for a fall. >The only point you made that needs to be challenged is your >remarks about "disservice to the UFO and Abduction Community". >Mr. Mortellaro, since when is it a disservice to put subjects >on the discussion table that need to be addressed? Since when >is it a disservice to remind all of us of the negative >consequences if we choose to white-wash or cover-up this kind >of issue? You are quite correct, generally. Notwithstanding, a disservice has been done. Can it have been avoided? I do not know. Probably not, however it can have been minimized had it been handled more apporpriately. And the disservice is the induced reduction of faith in the people and organizations which serve us, the abductee community. When you ain't got no faith, then you got unbelief. Do not confuse my angst over this as being against the disclosure. It aint'. It is against harrassment and finger pointing. "Look at NIDS, oooh.... look at MUFON, they mus be Communists." Etc. >And since when is it a disservice to ask the very people who are >responsible for this "mess" to explain their motives and >agendas? >Also, wouldn't it be nice, Mr. Mortellaro, if you could express >your opinions without getting "personal" and attempting to >diagnose my mental state of mind. Or am I treading on your >"sacred cows"! You are again correct. For which I appologize. I was angry and frustrated. But that is no excuse. I am sorry, sir. >Well, get used to it... this ain't over yet! I shall never get used to the Bickersons' on this channel. But I shall do what you wrote as being necessary, I shall voice my opinion. Indeed, the fat lady's ain't come out of the kitchen to sing her song yet. >And by the way, I don't like "Quaaludes", because they make you >lose your balance, which is something you should consider also. I do not take mood altering medications as I was accused of in another post. Except for Prozac, which I discontinued whilst I was a member of AIC. It sounded like a good name to use (Qyaaludes). I usually refer to Thorazine as being adequate, but presumably, this is no longer the drug of choice among shrinks. Information which is given under the aegis of guaranteed security should be sacred. I agree. But I do not agree that the proof is in, regarding Carpenter. I do believe that the proof is in regarding John Velez. I shall discuss the matter of my drug habits further in another post, if indeed EBK deems it appropriate. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Water Geyser Imaged On Mars In 1978? From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 14:30:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:24:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Water Geyser Imaged On Mars In 1978? The URL of the Florida Today article: http://www.floridatoday.com/news/columnists/cox/080900cox.htm The Viking Orbiter images 775A10 and 775A11: http://www.planetarymysteries.com/mars/DiPJPL.html For reference, here is this online book from 1980: NASA SP-441: VIKING ORBITER VIEWS OF MARS http://history.nasa.gov/SP-441/cover.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:59:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:26:43 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:32 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Dennis; >>If you do get a chance to do it over again, though, I suggest >>you trim a few pages off the top of the 8-9 devoted to >>"Derenberger Contact Claims" and add them to the following entry >>on the "Dr. X Case," which is presently represented by only >>three pages, and which, in MHO, is much more interesting and >>influential than Derenberger's erstwhile "contribution" to >>ufology. >Without making stuff up out of thin air, I couldn't have added >anything to the Dr. X case beyond what I wrote. Maybe you have >access to information I don't. >The Derenberger story is so fascinating -- such a bizarre, >colorful spectacle, and so relatively little known -- that I >chose to tell it in full, and I would do so again in the >unlikely event that a third edition of The UFO Encyclopedia is >published. Besides that, it also says something about the >complex human and phenomenological dimensions of contacteeism, >an aspect of the UFO age that most ufologists still don't >understand very well. >Jerry Clark Jerry, I'm still not completely clear as to what the 8-9 pages devoted to Derenberger's contactee claims illuminate us to that we wouldn't otherwise be illuminated to by the inclusion of "Contactees" (pp243-254), along with separate (presumably) biographical entires on contactees George Adamski, Daniel Fry, Orfeo Anegelucci, Howard Menger and others. And then there's that strange entry on the "Solem Contact Claims." Who among us has ever heard of Paul Solem? Yet he gets 3 1/2 pages, and Gotlib and the BAE not so much as a mention. We appreciate your spotlight on the contactee aspect of ufology. As to why you couldn't write more about Dr. X than, say, Paul Solem, I'm afraid that's a question you'll have to answer, not me. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 20:29:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:03:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hart >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:06:15 -0007 >>From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>The published results are there for >>everybody to see. Go to the NIDS web site. In what other scientific literature has NIDS published? There isn't much on your website. >>As NIDS speaks to people in other countries regarding UFO data, >>we are frequently confronted with the question: why do American >>ufologists engage in ritual blood-letting, paranoia etc? We do >>not have the answer. What are you talking about here? Bloodletting, paranoia? Gimme a break. Are you going to insult every US Ufologist that doesn't share your views? >>It is perhaps ironic that the country that is at the forefront >>of research in information technology, biotechnology and most >>other disciplines, languishes in the backwaters when it comes to >>UFO research. The reason for this is the incessant acrimony >>within the research community. There are very few good ethical, truly professional researchers anywhere in the world. Incessant acrimony has nothing to do with our present situation. Actually wrongdoing is the problem. The solution is to recognize improper conduct using our already established codes of ethics or codes of practice and enforcing these. Do you see a problem with this approach or do you agree with it? Need a straight answer here. >>As I alluded to in my previous post, unless the hostility and >>ritual bloodletting that has characterized American UFOlogy for >>over ten years stops, American Ufology may not survive as a >>research discipline. It is sick and needs a fix. I agree. I do not understand your need to refer to anything as bloodletting, etc. Generalities. Your brush is too broad. What are you specifically referring to? NIDS getting caught with unethically obtained material perhaps? >>Finally, the only reason that NIDS receives dozens of calls per >>month with new cases is that we have publicly stated that we >>_never_ release the names, identities or any details regarding >>eyewitnesses, experiencers, ranchers or other researchers who >>contact us with information. We have no intention >>of changing this policy. No, the real reason you get dozens of calls a month is because late last year you sent out 30,000 (Robert Bigelow on Laura Lee) notices to police depts. and media outlets to give you guys a call if anyone sees something strange, something MUFON used to do and should be doing. In fact, what is MUFON doing anyway? I do agree that MUFON should have done a much more professional job of collecting and investigating sightings but my suggestions to area MUFON officials fell on deaf ears. I guess this means NIDS is taking over the collection of public sightings info? Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:52:04 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:08:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident Driving down beautiful Hwy 101 near North Bend Oregon, I noticed a well, unusual sight, a bright flashing in the brilliant sky and, lo! There it was. A Mylar balloon, hung up on a electrical wire on a relatively long string. Exhibiting the very characteristics that the "Best Ever Cheshire Video" object was exhibiting. Flutter, falling leaf, rolling. Hey, I ask you, try this at home. Oh, and make note of the wind speed, time of day etc., it may come in handy. Oh, it was 13:36 hours on August 2nd 2000 at the corner of Newmark and Hwy 101. Didn't have a Camera, darn. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:13:22 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>By now, you should have all seen the Non-Comprehensive Report On >>>The MUFON July 2000 Symposium held recently on July 14 to 16th >>>at the West Port Plaza Sheraton Chalet in Maryland Heights in >>>St. Louis County, Missouri (USA) by Bob Soetebier at: >>>http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m05-004.shtml >>>So am I the only one hearing alarm bells going off?! >>>Please take a close look at the following statements: >><snip> >>Mike, Listers and EBK, ><snip> >>You sir, are not running on all your cylinders. You are not >>thinking. You are just trying to pile more detritus on top of >>detritus to those who would not think for themselves in the >>first place. You damage yourself as well as the entire community >>of sufferers. You create problems where they do not exist. Dear John Velez, Listers and Errol, I met John at about 1998, early in the year. This was just after retiring from business (full time) due to my wife's disability. I then had so much time on my hands, that I decided it was the ideal venue from which I could attempt to unravel the mysteries of my experiences as a perceived abductee. I had spoken with Jeff Rense, Michael Lindamin, Peter Gersten and some others, including Budd Hopkins about my memories. Most of the recommendations I received countered my undergoing regressive hypnosis. I agreed with the advice. It was then that I joined AIC. John Velez went a long, long way towards helping me out at a time when my life was a mess. Still having experiences and very depressed, in a great deal of pain from headaches and other body pain, I was rescured from the abyss by both the information which was available at AIC to members as well as the logic which was a welcome breath of fresh air from John Velez. Something happened to ruin that relationship. But that is not relevant to this post. Suffice to say that I owe John a dept of gratitude for his helping me and for AIC providing me with a place to go, a place where I was welcome, and a place where I did not have to hold back in the telling of stories which wouold otherwise cause me more grief than catharsis. I must admit that I and about twenty others who have also either left or been thrown out of AIC, miss that the most. I say these things because I have nothing against John of a personal nature. But in truth, there is a point at which I must draw a line. That line is now drawn and the truth must be told. Well, some of it anyway. I would never reveal the gore, which appears to be my old and ex-friend's modus operandi. >Isn't it something how sometimes the things we say to others are >the very same things we need to hear the most ourselves. There >is even a name for what you are saying to Mike here; it's called >"projecting." I have already posted a message to Mike, in which I said I was sorry for getting personal. Your comment regarding "projecting" is silly. >I propose that it is _you_ who are damaging yourself and the >entire abductee community by your incessant negative meddling >with the work that is being done in order to get Carpenter to >notify the clients whose files he sold. If it had been you that >Carpenter betrayed that way, we'd never hear the end of the >whining and complaining that you'd do. Every step of the way you >have tried to interfere with the process almost as if you were >on a 'mission'. In your last rant you tell Carpenter that the >reason he should comply and notify the abductees is because you >are sick and tired of reading our postings to him about it. I am sick and tired of reading the continual harrassment of Carpenter. All the evidence is not in. I have done some research of my own, John and I find that asking Carpenter to notify the 140 abductees may be wrong. Why? JC tells me that all the files with the exception of his wife's, were sent redacted. He said that all the names were blacked out. There was no traceability to any of these experiencers. N0 harm has been done to them. What is the point then of notifying people whose cases, not their identity, has been distributed to NIDS? And why indeed is it necessary for me to believe you, Ann or anyone else. You have given your _opinion_ that these people have been hurt, Carpenter has given his _word_ that he never revealed personal information. Heretofore, Carpenter's word and reputation have been unsullied and unblemished. Why should I not believe him? Why should you not believe him? >How selfish, self-centered, and self-absorbed must someone be to >make such an insensitive remark. Why don't you do with the >postings on the Carpenter/files thread what many folks do when >they see one of your postings and simply trash them if they >bother you so much? Why do you not trash mine? As for being self centered, I think not. I am very terribly sorry that Carpenter must endure this harrassment. That is what bothers me. And I have continuously voiced that opinion. Carpenter is not guilty of revealing personal information. He said so. You beleived that since his ex-wife told you that her file was not redacted, then all the files must not have been redacted. That was an assumption on your and others' part. I do not think this to be so. Not unless or until it can be proven. It is not truth until then. >You seem to be having a huge problem understanding why we are >demanding that Carpenter notify the abductees whose files he >sold without their consent. Utter nonesence. My biggest concern is the continous posting of mail telling Carpenter to do what may not be necessary if he is truthfull about how the case histories were sent. >You have worked steadily and with much vigor _against_ the right >of these 140 abductees to know by minimizing and confusing the >issue at every oportunity. We are busting our humps to get >Carpenter to show those abductees the _respect_ that he should >have showed them three years ago _before_ he sold their files; >and you find it all a personal "bother." Utter nonesense yet again. Nothing I write could deter you from your self appointed tasks. I do not find it a bother. That is your interpretation and as usual, it is incorrect. >As an (self-professed) abductee you should be deeply ashamed of >the behavior and running commentary you have made throughout >this whole sad affair. I really feel sorry for you. What other kind of abductee is there other than "self professed?" I preface the word abductee by the word "perceived" every time when it refers to me. Are you not a self professed abductee? Do you know anyone who is an abductee and who has not him or herself "professed" it? What silliness! Just your way of making it sound as if I am not necessarily an abductee. But it does not work. All will have an opportunity of seeing for themselves, what has happened in my life which led me to this conclusion. You will all have an opportunity of judging me. I have nothing to hide. >>People like you (-----). And on the off chance that you are right, >>which is highly dubious, you have only succeeded in dirtying up >>the heretofore good name of those who are committing themselves >>lock, stock and bankroll to the solution of this conundrum. >A "good name" is something that is earned through deeds not >'rap'. Mr Carpenter thought nothing of taking the personal >reports of 140 people who confided in him and trusted him and >sell them to the highest bidder without either notifying the >clients or asking them if it was alright with them for him to do >so. That is a violation of trust, and all accepeted ethical >standards. I and a paltry few others are fighting hammer and >tong to get Carpenter to give these folks the respect they >deserve. This is another mistatement Velez. Since when was there an auction? You imply that Carpenter SOLD the files to the highest bidder! More utter nonesense. He sold them to NIDS. No one else was in on the action. If I am wrong, prove it. Tell us who was bidding for this information. Please! Do it now, as you have missrepresented Carpenter's actions again. Again your words are meant to paint a picture by inuendo. I object to that method of indictment, John. It typifies your style and I cannot understand how much you've changed and why. Very strange. As for giving these 140 souls the repsect they deserve, listen up Velez, according to Carpenter they were given the respect they deserved, their names were BLACKED OUT! There was no way to get to the identity of these individuals. Until the matter is presented to us proving (p.r.o.v.i.n.g.) the opposite, then you are wrong to continue with indictment of Carpenter. >All you've contributed in terms of 'help' is to crap on the >issue and on the people who are fighting for the abductees >rights every chance you get. How can you live with yourself. What help? Help you and the few others continue to trash Carpenter? You bet your respective bippies I will continue to crap that issue. And I shall live with myself quite well, sir. Thank you. >>To you I say what I should have said to some others who wrote >>the same type of detritus, go see a professional and think about >>Quaaludes. >Wow! For someone who eats handfuls of mood altering drugs just >to get through a day you have a lot of crust telling Mike that >he should take Quaaludes. Whether you agree with Mike or not, a >comment such as that is mean-spirited at best. Now here is an interesting falsehood. Hmmm. _Handsfull_ of "mood altering" drugs?? I do not. But this is a very important revelation, John Velez. For the only mood altering drug which you know about is Prozac, which I took while I was a member of AIC. I posted that to AIC. You are, undoubtedly refering to Prozac. Since the only time I mentioned this was under the privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. You have violated a confidence, something that you swore you would never do. And you are after Carpenter? Duplicitous and ill conceived revelation. First of all, let us get some things straight and for the record. I have never taken mood altering drugs and certainly never by the handfull. I took one, 20 mg capsule a day under a doctor's prescription. And, you know this to be true. You also know that I stopped taking Prozac whilst still a member of AIC. I have the post. I saved it. I have in fact, saved every post in which I am mentioned or which I contributed to AIC. And it is now time to inform you that even if it were true that I swallowed handsfull of drugs (and it is not, prove it!) then it was told to you under the aegis of a closed list, under the promise of non disclosure. You broke that code John. Now continue please, with your dissertation about Carpenter. >If someone else on this list told _you_ to go see a shrink and >eat Quaaludes you'd be crying about flames and Name-calling! For >some reason it is perfectly okay in 'your world' for you to do >it though. A little schizzy wouldn't you say? Hmmm, maybe you >ought to see a shrink and take some Quaaludes eh? (Don't sound >so good when you're on the receiving end eh Jimbo?) :) Actually, and for the first time in a while, you are quite correct. I wrote an appology to Mike this afternoon. I am certain that EBK will post it. I did wrong by getting down and dirty. He can handle himself in a dogfight. But when I do wrong, I am man enough to say I am sorry. How about you, John Velez? Did you do wrong over telling something about me out of school? Yup. You sure did. Even if it were something which I posted here or elsewhere, you do not have the right to use things against me which you learned when I was associated with you. You have proven that the suggestion you made to me once, in writing, that you have things on me and others, which could easily injure me, was not made in anger. You meant it. And John, I have that mail. >"Remove the log from your own eye before you point out the >splinter in anothers eye!" Well said. >Your rants are really starting to wear thin. You dig the grave >deeper with each posting. Keep talking Jimbo. I'm sure it's >interesting to others too to see what kind of stuff you're >really made of. <snip> I shall do my best to point to things which I consider unfair. Even if it is I whom I must point to. It is beyond my ken why you insist on thinking that if one is not for you, he is against you. This world is big enough for everyone to voice an opinion. If said opinion is counter to yours, so be it. You accuse me of projecting. I accuse you of personalizing. This is closely related to paranoia. John, the one thing which is very upsetting about your posts to me is that you seem to believe the nonesense you write. It would be better if I could call you a liar. At least then, it would be something I could say which would counter the growing impression that there is a deeper problem within you. i cannot call you a liar. My only remaining choice is to believe that you believe this stuff. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: CPR-Canada News: Crop Circle Quest, International From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 20:46:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:26:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: CPR-Canada News: Crop Circle Quest, International CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 9, 2000 _____________________________ CROP CIRCLE QUEST, INTERNATIONAL DATABASE Judy Arndt, who assisted CPR-Canada and the BLT Research Team with field research of several of the best Canadian formations of 1999 in Alberta and Saskatchewan, has updated her web site containing these reports, now called Crop Circle Quest: http://www.cropcirclequest.com Excellent reports, diagrams and photos available. She is also working on the new web site for the BLT Research Team, currently under construction: http://www.bltresearch.net Also, I have added a searchable interface for international crop circle formations, to the International Crop Circle Reports 2000 page of the CPR-Canada web site, courtesy of Paul Vigay who runs the International Crop Circle Database in the UK (thank you!): http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/intern2000.html You can also link to this page from the News and Reports and Circle Phenomena in Canada 2000 pages on the web site. Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:35:13 -0400 Subject: UpDate: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done Hello All, Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've been properly warned. :) Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of the UFO "community" in general. Why no one seems to see how ignoring this issue will open the doors for more and worse abuses in the future is a mystery and a source of tremendous disappointment to me and others. Apathy is a poison that rots 'communities' of people from the inside out. It is the "cancer" of groups and communities that have come together for any purpose. It rots the soul of the individual as well. Attitudes like; "what can I do? I'm only one person," or "who cares" are an expression, a 'symptom' of a much deeper and deadlier spiritual disorder/disease. Apathy is the progenitor of entropy and death. There is little hope for a community of people that will not unify when it is called for, or police themselves. If the 'system' does not include the active participation of its members in the job of self-correction or self policing the entropy created by the apathy will eventually destroy it from within. The 'effect' of apathy is; people who are in a position to exploit other people begin to realize that there is no 'social' price to pay for serious lapses in ethics or in the treatment of certain groups of people. The perpetrators soon realize that the fears they had (the only internal stops that were in place) of being exposed to their peers as users and weaklings is completely unfounded. That it's "open season" and anything goes. After all, "who cares!" The Jews in Nazi Germany are a prime example of what I'm talking about. Don't ask, don't tell. Who cares about a few miserable Jews? Six murdered Jews turns into six million. 140 abductees are being treated like they don't deserve the time of day by the man they went to for help and counselling. And now by their peers. No one cares. Not the researchers, not the organized UFO groups, not even individuals that are interested in the subject. All that is served in the end is the maintenance of the status quo. That's ok if you're happy with the current state of affairs in ufology. In that case all you need do is simply to keep your mouth shut when you catch somebody with their hand in the cookie jar, and you go along and get along. That is a living death for any group of people. Question: So, who gets screwed in the end? Answer: The abductees of course! And who cares? Well I do for one. I don't care if I have to do this alone. I plan on being a 'burr' under Mr. Carpenter's saddle until those clients have been given the respect that he should have showed them (on his own) three+ years ago. I'm not going to lay down or go away because I don't have a freaking army behind me. I don't need no stinking army! :) Carpenter needs to know that there _is_ a social and hopefully a professional price to be paid for such an abuse of client trust and lapse of ethical behavior. There is simply _no_ defense or justification for not consulting those 140 individuals before he sold their reports. If he is relying on the short memory of the public, or people with short attention spans to get bored and move on to something else and forget him, and those abductees, he's dead wrong. Damn the researchers for remaining quiet. And by their silence condoning the treatment these abductees received at the hands of John Carpenter. Damn everybody who feels outraged at this kind of treatment of witnesses and who also remain silent. If ufology sux it's because _you_ don't do or say anything when you really need to! Your continued silence on this serious issue guarantees that it will be repeated in the future. More people will be hurt, used, and discarded at the whim of those in a position to do so and whose personal ethics allow for such behavior. To all the apathetic members of the UFO community I say, "you deserve exactly whatever you get!" Unlike others I'm not in here just to create breezes by flapping my lips. I'm trying to make this a 'better thing' than it is. The problem is; that many who profess to care are only entertaining themselves or trying to create a little 'persona' for themselves that differs from whatever mundane life thing they are running from. That has nothing to do with ufology. That is something they should be working out on a couch or by spending less time in front of a computer and more time out in the world interacting with people. I bring no such 'personal needs' to the table here. I come as a whole and fairly well grounded individual that wishes to make a meaningful contribution to a field that deals with what I firmly believe to be the most important issue facing mankind. I'm here to work. Not "play" at ufology. I put myself on the line to make you all aware of a serious situation. I have made the notification of those abductees a 'priority' item on my ufological things to do list. You can help to insure that this kind of thing is not repeated or sit on your hands, keep your mouth shut, and let it happen. Either way, I don't care anymore. I'm going to do what my conscience dictates I must do. If my postings to Mr.Carpenter are "bothering" anybody other than the 'docca' I suggest you simply trash my postings when you see them. They are easy to identify. At the end of the subject header will be the name Velez. As long as it takes and as long as EBK puts my posts to Carpenter up, I plan on seeing this through to a successful conclusion to the benefit of the abductees involved. As I have repeatedly stated; I leave Carpenter to the courts and to God. All I care about are those people/abductees. Period. Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Jacobs, Dr. Mack, Mr. Fowler, Ms. Smith shame on you _all_ for your continued silence on this important issue. Shame on all of you who are keeping silent. Apathy kills! John Velez, Lone Wolf -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 05:22:07 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:38:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:57:04 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Open Letter To John Carpenter >To: updates@sympatico.ca Hi Jim, <snip> >(and someone correct me if I am wrong - I just don't see it) >... all that demanding is useless and irrelevant. Because, in my >opinion, it is no longer necessary to inform those whose names >and records were sent to NIDS since there were no names sent.< OK...you're wrong.<g> From my homework, by virtue of John Carpenter being an LCSW, the individuals on that list were protected Ethical Standards/Disciplinary Rules of the Missouri State Committee for Social Workers: "(2) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall inform clients, at the onset of the professional relationship, of the limits of confidentiality. (3) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall keep confidential his/her therapy relationships with clients including information obtained from this relationship with clients with the following exceptions: (A) When the client gives written consent; (B) When the client constitutes a danger to him/herself or to others; (C) When the licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder or registrant is under court order to disclose information; or (D) When required by law." [Source:4 CSR 263-3.100 Confidentiality PURPOSE: This rule is promulgated pursuant to section 337.630.2(15), RSMo and sets forth the ethical standards/disciplinary rules as they pertain to confidentiality.] Now Jim, If you can't see the ethical and moral factor of notifying clients when one's files are going to be transferred, then what about the right of the 120 clients to be able to choose for themselves if they want to file a legal complaint? Do you think those people deserve that right? I think they do. <snip> >I am under the impression that there are thousands of listers >on UpDates. And only a few post on this issue, finding it to be >worth the continued harassment for action on your part. <snip> >Because I for one, am getting sick of reading so many posts >by those focused few. Since you don't understand the basics for the reasons why the 'focused few' on this List want these families notified, it comes of no surprise to me that you're getting sick of reading the posts. It must be this sickness that caused you to have posted your request to John Carpenter loaded with put-downs aimed at those of us who are trying to get these families notified. What's the purpose of that? Even if you don't understand the issue, surely you understand the legal rights of those families. I sent them to you the day before your post came out in UpDates in response to you asking my opinion about Carpenter's wrong doing in an email exchange. Did my email make you sick too? If you don't want to get into it with me here, which is what you told me in your e-mail, then don't insult me or play games with my time. So much for a few days in the woods. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 32 From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:52:05 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:40:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 32 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan@aol.com> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 5, Number 32 August 10, 2000 Editor: Joseph Trainor CHILE BOMBED IN COVERT AIR OPERATION On Friday, July 28, 2000, at 9:30 a.m., a crew of construction workers witnessed the bombing of a remote site in the Atacama Desert by an unmarked and unidentified military aircraft. The incident took place "in an area located to the northeast of the road joining Maria Elena (population 8,000) and Pedro de Valdivia, a mining town abandoned since 1996." Maria Elena is a salt mining community in northern Chile, located 140 kilometers (83 miles) west of Calama. "According to residents of Maria Elena, who claimed having witnessed the event, a large detonation accompanied by a tremor shook the houses of the commune on July 28, 2000. All area residents are accustomed to the sounds produced by the explosions operated (detonated) in the Pampa, and this made them realize something strange was afoot." "This (explosion) coincided with the flyover of of a military aircraft over the area in the early hours of the morning., an event corroborated by several inhabitants. The witnesses are employees of a contractor firm that was engaged in work at a location not far from where the event took place." "According to their testimony, the jet flew past and bombarded an area which had been characterized as Chupacabra nest by men working nearby. The area was filled with small hills and mounds which have eroded into caves suitable for use as shelter by such an animal," i.e. the Chupacabra. "The explosion which could be heard at a distance of several kilometers took place between 8:30 and 9:45 a.m., without anyone having produced an explanation for the event." There was no comment concerning the incident from Chile's Ministry of Defense. The city of Calama, the site of numerous recent Chupacabra reports, is located 300 kilometers (180 miles) north of Santiago de Chile, the national capital. (See the Chilean newspaper La Estrella del Loa for July 31, 2000, "Bombardment takes place in Chile's Second Region." Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico, y tambien Liliana Garcia para esas noticias.) CHUPACABRA TERRORIZES CHILDREN IN MARIA ELENA The bombing of the Atacama Desert followed a sudden surge of Chupacabra incidents in Maria Elena, including cat killings and an incident in which a weird creature confronted three schoolchildren. "The latest case," or Chupacabra sighting "involved three children from the Arturo Perez Canto School who were returning home in the early evening" at 7 p.m. along the Calle Galvarino (street) in Maria Elena. "At that moment, they encountered one of the creatures. They explained that one of them realized that there was an animal on the rooftops, which then jumped off and landed in front of the startled youngsters. According to their story, the animal did not attack, but they found it impossible to move largely due to the fear the event had caused in them." ""When they tried to react by huddling protectively against each other, the creature levitated some 30 centimeters (12 inches) off the ground, continuing to observe them. Only after less than 10 seconds had elapsed were the children able to escape towards their homes, each of them telling parents about the experience. The elders were unable to calm the terrified students down." "Upon discussing the animal's characteristics, they all agreed that it had large yellow eyes, dense black-and-gray hair of a coasrse texture, and standing approximately 1.5 meters (4 feet, 10 inches) tall. They also recognized a penetrating (pungent) odor similar to that of ammonia, which the animal might employ to paralyze its prey or humans who stumble upon it." "Residents of Maria Elena continue finding dead cats and dogs with perforations similar to those of the first (dead) felines appearing in different areas of the commune." (See UFO Roundup volume 5, number 25 for June 22, 2000, "Chileans say alien eggs were found near Calama," page 4.) The dead cats were found with a single wound, an aperture approximately 2.5 centimeters (one inch) in diameter, leading directly into the lung. Blood and portions of lung tissue were missing from the dead cats. Last week dead cats were found in the barrio Las Piscinas (section) of Maria Elena. Residents "claim having received 'third party' warnings urging them to conceal the information." The dead cats are being dumped in a refuse pile in the desert behind Las Piscinas. World-famous ufologist Dr. Virgilio Sanchez Ojedo is now in Calama, interviewing witnesses about the recent Chupacabra sightings. (See the newspaper La Estrella del Loa for July 31, 2000. Otra vez, muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Liliana Garcia para esas noticias.) INDIANA REPORTS TWO NEW UFO SIGHTINGS On Monday, July 24, 2000, at 11:10 p.m., two witnesses were sitting on a farmhouse front porch near Jasonville, Indiana (population 2,200) when they "saw a strange descending object in the western sky." Jasonville is on Indiana Highway 48 about 15 miles (25 kilometers) south of Terre Haute. "The soundless object was first thought to be a falling star (meteor--J.T.) until the two observers realized that it wasn't moving. The motionless object appeared to be in the vicinity of a county road a quarter of a mile from the house, and was said to first appear as a dim gold light that increased in size and brightness." "The two witnesses reportedly walked in the directio of the light for a better view, and then it began to move horizontally before dimming again. The bright gold light disappeared and in its place were several small red and green lights that appeared to be 'circling' the space where the gold light had been." "The object continued to move horizontally in a northeasterly direction and was observed for about five minutes until it dropped from view behind a treeline. The two witnesses waited for the object to reappear from behind the trees but it was not seen again." "'I am not a good judge of height,' said one witness, 'It was not as high up in the sky as the stars when it took off.'" "'We kept staring at it because if we had not seen the golden light in the first place, we would never be able to see these lights in the sky amongst the stars. This did not look like an airplane, which we had seen in the sky this same night.'" (Many thanks to Kenneth Young of Cincinnati UFO Research for this report.) On Monday, Jylt 31, 2000, at 11:50 p.m., Gary Smith had just arrived at his home in Charlestown, Indiana (population 5,900) when he saw a UFO traveling from south to north. "I had just gotten home from work," Gary reported, "I live near a large airport and was watching a passenger or a cargo jet flying direectly over my head from the north. Then, out of the corner of my eye, I spotted a very fast- moving orange orb. It appeared to be about the size of a satellite but moving quicker." "It reminded me of an orb I saw back in 1996, which flew over my parents' home and knocked out the power for a few minutes." "This could have been a meteor, but it had no tail. The sighting was about one or two seconds long, long enough for me to notice that it did not leave a trail.. I did not hear any noise, but there was an airliner going overhead causing a ruckus. It appeared to be in the upper atmosphere and traveling at a speed of 2,000 miles per hour (3,200 kilometers per hour--J.T.)." Charlestown is on Indiana Highway 82 approximately 12 miles (19 kilometers) northeast of Louisville, Kentucky. (Email Form Report) ORANGE SPHERE UFO HOVERS OVER OWENSVILLE, OHIO On Wednesday, July 12, 2000, at 11:30 p.m., Andrew McKee was at his home in Owensville, Ohio (population 1,019) when he spotted a UFO approaching from the Ohio River valley to the south. "It was a small glowing orange object, and it seemed to be stationary," Andrew reported, "But it was slightly moving in a triangular pattern. It came down out of the sky to about 500 feet (165 meters) from the ground. It was a star-shaped object about the size of a quarter," (a USA 25-cent coin--J.T.) held at arm;s length. ""It must have been traveling about five miles per hour (8 kilometers per jour)," he added. Owensville is on Ohio Route 50 about 30 miles (48 kilometers) east of Concinnati. (Email Form Report.) (Editor's Note: Owensville is one of the most notorious UFO hotspots in Ohio.) LUMINOUS DISC FLIES OVER CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND On Saturday, July 29, 2000, at 7:25 p.m., Kevin Emmett and his five-year-old son went out on the back patio of their hillside home in Christchurch, a large city on the North Island of New Zealand, to look at the stars. "This is a regular occurrence as we both love the stars, and I love teaching him," reported Kevin, who works as a private investigator in Christchurch. "Just as we walked to the rear of our house, a bright flash shot across the sky. At first I thought it was sheet lightning, but to our surprise a standard disc-shaped craft flew right over our house and headed towards the port hills." "My son ran off to his mother, scared out of his wits, but I grabbed my binoculars and, after alerting my wife, we watched the craft do a quick U-turn and fly back in the direction from which it came," adding that the UFO made its approach from the east and headed west, then doubled back eastward again. "I have seen many UFOs in and around this city and trying to get some good footage for everyone to see. I have been investigating UFOs for 17 years, and it still puzzles me why we cannot get the truth out." (Email Form Report) HOVERING ORANGE UFO SEEN IN LEIGH, QUEENSLAND On Monday, July 31, 2000, at 6:45 p.m., witnesses reported "a bright orange light" that "appeared over the eastern horizon travelling at an estimated height (altitude--J.T.) of 5,000 meters (16,500feet)." According to Australian ufologist Barry Purvis, the UFO "was just below sparse cloud deck existing at the time." The UFO, he added, was just east of Leigh, a town in Australia's Queensland state, located 575 kilometers (345 miles) north-northwest of Brisbane. "The lights remained steady" while heading "precisely downward for a period of five minutes. As it came almost directly overhead, it remained stationary in position for a further one minute before vanishing." "I would like to know if anybody else has seen this object or has an explanation," he added. (Many thanks to Barry Purvis for this report.) WEST SUSSEX MAN OBSERVES UFOs OVER THE CHANNEL On May 8, 2000, at 2:30 a.m., David Johnson was near the beach in Worthing, West Sussez, UK when he spotted something strange in the sky to the south, out over the English Channel. "I initially saw a bright light out over the English Channel, and it seemed static (stationary--J.T.) for for around five minutes, so I went to get my binoculars to look further at the light as the light was too bright to be either a star or planet and could not be a plane." ""While I viewed through binoculars, I saw the object itself with a pulsating orange light beneath." The light, he added, reminded him of the computerized K.I.T.T. automobile in the TV series Nightrider. "There were smaller red lights coming too from the large object. Then the larger light vanished, and four orange lights remained, triangular in formation with one in the middle. They moved slowly and elegantly and were followed by the other smaller (red) lights, until they went out of range from my binoculars." The UFO formation was traveling due south and seemed to be heading for Deauville, a port city in the Calvados department of France. (Email Form Report) CAT-LIKE PREDATOR CAUGHT ON VIDEOTAPE IN AUSTRALIA The mysterious feline-type predator, known to the Aboriginal people as "the devil dog of the Dreamtime," has been caught on videotape. Since 1880, there have been hundreds of reports of the mysterious black-furred creature around the town of Lancefield in Victoria state, located about 170 kilometers (102 miles) northwest of Melbourne. According to the Kyneton, Vic. Guardian, the unknown predator is often referred to as "the Lancefield Puma." "The first images of the Lancefield 'puma' which has been haunting Victoria for decades allegedly has beent caught on video." "The puma is believed to have been tracked down following recent reports of mutilated sheep. Two local men have been trying to film the animal by following the kill sites." "A plaster cast of the animal's large paw was taken in an attempt at identification." ""The video may be the first evidence to support the existence of the elusive cat-like animal." "Staff at Melbourne Zoo and the Department of Natural Resources have seen the video." "Melbourne Zoo director of conservation and research Peter Temple-Smith yesterday said the video footage was 'intriguing.'" "He said zoo carnivore experts are intrigued from seeing the video but not convinced. He would have expected more evidence from the area, such as feces, urine and claw marks on trees." (Editor's Comment: That's assuming it's a cat. Rex Gilroy theorizes that the animal may be an unknown marsupial predator, closer in kin to the kangaroo and the opossum rather than a feline.) "'It's certainly a black cat, but if you really want to convince a sceptic, you have to have more than a video,' Mr. Temple-Smoth, who viewed the video three weeks ago, said, 'The footprints don't match the cats we have at the zoo. The chap who took the footage seemed genuine. I think you have to treat all these things with some scepticism.'" (Many thanks to John W. Auchettl and Dr. Rob Barnett of Phenomena Research Australia for this report.) SCIENTISTS TRY TO TRAP A LAKE MONSTER IN NORWAY "An international team of monster hunters unveiled a giant trap Wednesday," August 2, 2000, "for catching a fabled serpent reputed to be a cousin of Scotland's Loch Ness monster." "Selma" is the name of the giant lake serpent of Lake Seljord, a glacial lake 15 kilometers (9 miles) long. Seljord (population 1,500), the town at the head of the lake, is 176 kilometers (110 miles) southwest of Oslo, the national capital. "In 1986, the town council changed Seljord's coat-of- arms to portray a sea serpent." "'This is the first serpent trap of its kind in the world,' Jan Sundberg, a Swede leading the team" said. Sundberg told Reuters news service that the team consists of seven Swedes, three Norwegians, a Canadian and a Belgian." "The 6-meter (20-foot) tube-shaped trap, comprising a metal frame with nylon netting, will be lowered into Seljord Lake in south Norway. It will contain live whitefish for bait to catch the elusive beast known to locals as Selma." "'The trap is adapted from a fish trap for eels. If anything up to six meters long swims in one end, the opening closes up, and it won't be able to get out,' said Sundberg, a veteran of several inconclusive high- tech scans of the murky lake." During the next two weeks, the cage will be lowered to depths of 30 to 100 meters (100 to 330 feet) in areas of the lake "where sightings of the monster have been reported." ""Experts on land will also try to track any unexplained movements underwater using" hydrophones and sonar.. This backup crew will be aboard a floating platform which can be towed around the lake. "Sundberg said the team recorded mysterious whale-like noises during a visit in 1995." "'We'll be disappointed if we don't get some kind of results this time...the only evidence scientists would accept is a dead or live serpent,' he said." The first recorded sighting of Selma was in 1570. Witnesses over the centuries have described the creature as "a large serpent with the head of an elk or a horse." (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr.this news story.) THOUSANDS OF FISH FALL ON GREAT YARMOUTH, UK On Sunday, August 6, 2000, "a shower of fresh but dead sprats fell on the North Sea fishing port" of Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK, following a thunderstorm. "'Retired ambulance driver Fred Hodgkins said, 'I thought at first I might have something wrong with my eyes. The whole of my backyard seemed to be covered in little slivers of silver.'" "Meteorological Office spokesman Sean Clarke said the fish shower might have been caused by a small tornado out to sea, known as a waterspout, which trawls up water and any fish near the surface." "''When the tornado touches land, it begins to lose energy and the contents are thrown to the ground,' he said." (See USA Today for August 8, 2000, "There's something fishy in the English air," page 13A. Many thanks to Jim Hickman for this news story.) (Editor's Comment: I have two theories about this Great Yarmouth fish fall. (1) Prince William accidentally caused this magickal event when he changed his coat-of-arms to include three sea shells from the Spencer coat-of-arms of his late mother, Princess Diana. (2) Charles Fort is reminding us that his birthday is coming up this month. Indeed, Fort visited Great Yarmouth during his first trip to UK in 1894.) from the UFO Files... 1954: CIGAR-SHAPED UFO VISITS EASTERN FRANCE The Jura is a region in eastern France just west of the Alps. As author Aime Michel points out, "I have often driven through that ancient and charming province at night on my way to the Alps; nowhere in the world do people sleep more soundly." Indeed they do. But on Wednesday, August 18, 1954, M. and Mme. Pardon were awakened from their sound sleep by a most unusual light. "That night M. and Mme. Pardon were asleep at their apartment in La Carondelet" in Dole, a city in Jura located about 30 kilometers (18 miles) south of Dijon and 225 kilometers (135 miles) southeast of Paris. "Their room, which faces southeast, looks out on roofs and fields around the Doubs River and the Charles V Canal. The window was open." "About 12:45 a.m., M. Pardon awoke with a start, aroused from sleep by an intense light reflected across the room by the windowpane. He went to the window and was astounded by the sight before him; in the sky, under a veil of cirrus clouds, a gigantic mass that seemed to be shaped like a horizontal disk, much larger than a full moon was moving slowly from left to right." "After an instant of amazement, M. Pardon awoke his wife and both watched the rest of the spectacle." "At first giving off an intense blue light, the object soon turned whitem and a red halo appeared at its edges. At that moment the light was so brilliant that that the two witnesses were dazzled and had to turn their eyes away frequently." "With the change in color came a change in shape; the object, nearly circular when they first saw it, became more and more elongated and assumed a vertical orientation." "Mme. Pardon had the impression that it was also moving on its own axis, perhaps rotating rapidly. It moved farther and farther southwest. In the complete silence of the little sleeping town, a sort of buzzing noise, slight but perfectly audible, was heard; this grew fainter as the mysterious object moved away. The two witnesses felt that this buzzing came from the luminous cigar." "In ten minutes the object had passed out of their field of vision. They watched it disappear behind the roofs; for a few more minutes its light was still visible, then everything disappeared." "There was nothing in the sky now but the moon (then in its last-quarter phase--the full moon was on August 14 in 1954--J.T.)--which had been almost invisible a little while before, in the intense light from the object." (See the book Flying Saucers and the Straight-Line Mystery by Aime Michel, Criterion Books, New York, N.Y. 1958, pages 27 to 29.) That's it for this week. Join us again in seven days for more UFO and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you then. UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2000 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. ********************************************************* IMPORTANT Please Read: ====================== The Hunger Site --------------- http://www.thehungersite.com Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site and clicking on a button you can donate free food. There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation - the food is paid for by sponsors. Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference! If you have a web site download a banner and give a link! ********************************************************* E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Louise From: Karoline Louise <KarolineLouise@aol.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 10:04:43 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:43:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Louise Jenny Randles wrote: >As Karoline, I believe knows, she is right about this. >We tend to seek what we want to find in this subject and by >defining the boundaries of the phenomenon in advance we decide >what to describe as the 'alien abduction' and limit what it is >that we consequently uncover. So Jenny - supposing this case I quoted is real after all - what do we do about it? This modern child recalls dreams of owls who take him while his parents are paralysed. He has nosebleeds. He has weird wounds which appear overnight and which resemble chemical burns. Yet, instead of seeing aliens he recalls visiting the distant past and talking to a man who tells him stories. The man can be verified to have existed. And extant plans of the place he lived in can be shown to closely resemble the descriptions the child has given. The man even wrote stories of being visited by a small male child from another world, who looked and talked like the modern boy. What happens to this child and this case? Who wants to investigate it, since it is apparently nothing to do with small grey telegenic aliens doing their so-famous thing? I suspect no one. What do you think? Karoline
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:09:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:47:34 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:59:31 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:32 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dennis, >>Without making stuff up out of thin air, I couldn't have added >>anything to the Dr. X case beyond what I wrote. Maybe you have >>access to information I don't. >I'm still not completely clear as to what the 8-9 pages devoted >to Derenberger's contactee claims illuminate us to that we >wouldn't otherwise be illuminated to by the inclusion of >"Contactees" (pp243-254), along with separate (presumably) >biographical entires on contactees George Adamski, Daniel Fry, >Orfeo Anegelucci, Howard Menger and others. And then there's >that strange entry on the "Solem Contact Claims." Who among us >has ever heard of Paul Solem? Yet he gets 3 1/2 pages, and >Gotlib and the BAE not so much as a mention. My word. You must have a lot of time on your hands. I apologize for not writing The UFO Encyclopedia that Dennis Stacy would have written. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:25:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 20:57:24 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>>>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca Hello Docca, I'm not going to dignify the rest of your posting with a response because you should know by now that no one is 'going after' John Carpenter personally. That has been stated repeatedly and I see no reason to say it all again. I do want to adress one or two things you accuse me of however. You posted: >Since the only time I mentioned this was under the >privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which >should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. Jim, when we first met you mentioned the drugs often. On the phone, in the car, and on the list to the other abductees. At the first IF meeting that I invited you to you whipped out a bottle of multicolored pills and swallowed a handful in full view of those in attendance. When I asked you what you were taking you responded, "painkillers and tranquilizers." So there is no "secret" there. As you know, I only only mentioned it in the context of your mean-spirited remark to Mike about how he should "see a shrink and eat Quaaludes." No "confidences" that I know of were violated there. The only thing that I _did_ promise you was that I would not reveal your identity as an abductee. Again, as we both know you have chosen to be as public as you can be about that. Our relationship was never a professional anything. I maintain a website that contains information about UFO abduction for the general public and an e-mail list for a few abductees. I 'participate' in it just like any of the other members and I have _never_ set myself up as a researcher or as a "leader" of any stripe. All I ever did was to try to be a good friend to you and to offer you the best of what is in me. You also mention that I have "thrown out" yourself and twenty other people from AIC. First, I have thrown out 11 people in three-and-a-half years. You conveniently neglect to mention the reason that you were asked to depart/booted out. You also neglect to mention why the others were thrown out as well. Also, EBK and Greg Sandow have always "monitored" the postings to the AIC since its inception. They are part of a failsafe mechanism I purposely incorporated in case I ever stepped out line in my dealings or communications with _any_ of the abductees that I have ever dealt with on that list. Errol or Greg are free to comment on my conduct and behavior as the moderator of that list if they wish to. I have _never_ unjustly thrown anybody out of AIC. In your case it was a breech of privacy that I could not take any chances with. (Your list of "undisclosed recipients" that kept appearing on posts to AIC) _That_ is why you were taken off the mailing list. Tell it all Jimbo or don't tell it at all. You try to paint a picture of me as a 'dictator' who arbitrarily throws people out of the Magic Kingdom. You know why you were dumped and that it was 'the straw that broke the camel's back.' That last 'foul' of yours was just one of several. I had been more patient and tolerant with you than you deserved. If I lie EBK and Greg will say so, I'm certain of it. >You have violated a confidence, something that you swore you >would never do. All I ever "swore" to you was that I would protect your anonymity to the best of my ability and that your postings to AIC would never be redistributed. I have done both. I will not be responding to any further postings from you. I haven't the time or the inclination. As you are well aware 'time' is a precious commodity to me these days. Good luck in your life. John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:23:34 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:01:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca Greetings John, >Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >the UFO "community" in general. It all boils down to money, John. How many of those researchers have had projects funded by NIDS? What irks me are the so-called _advocates_ who claim to have the best interest of abductees at heart. Their advocacy doesn't amount to a hill of beans because they've maintained their silence. As with John Carpenter, Robert Bigelow and all the others involved in this sordid little affair, they cannot be trusted either. <snip> >Apathy is a poison that rots 'communities' of people from the >>inside out. It is the "cancer" of groups and communities that >have come together for any purpose. It rots the soul of the >individual as well. This _poison_ didn't just spring up with this incident. It's been there all along, waiting to come into the light. Apathy can exist only if there is no conscience. <snip> >140 abductees are being treated like they don't deserve the time >of day by the man they went to for help and counselling. And now >by their peers. No one cares. Not the researchers, not the >organized UFO groups, not even individuals that are interested >in the subject. Wrong. I care. >All that is served in the end is the maintenance >of the status quo. That's ok if you're happy with the current >state of affairs in ufology. I'm not. Never have been. >In that case all you need do is simply to keep your mouth >shut when you catch somebody with their hand in the cookie >jar, and you go along and get along. It's not going to happen. Carpenter et. al. are out of cookies. They know it. You know it. I know it. Everyone reading these posts know it. Carpenter claimed he was on our side. He proved he wasn't. Trust is gone. Period. _So_ I got busy yesterday and started asking questions about the legality of Carpenter's actions. The phone book is an amazing reference book. Did you know that most libraries carry telephone books for various cities around the country? Did you know that there's something called the 'Department of Health, Health Professionals Quality Assurance Division'? Amazing little department that is. <G> <snip> >Question: So, who gets screwed in the end? Carpenter. >Answer: The abductees of course! Not really. We just got caught in the fallout. >And who cares? I do. >Well I do for one. I don't care if I have to do this alone. You're not alone. <snip> >I don't need no stinking army! :) You have one anyway. Being Scorpio, I tend to get furious and then get busy. This isn't over, John. Not by a long shot. >Carpenter needs to know that there _is_ a social and hopefully a >professional price to be paid for such an abuse of client trust >and lapse of ethical behavior. There is simply _no_ defense or >justification for not consulting those 140 individuals before he >sold their reports. If he is relying on the short memory of the >public, or people with short attention spans to get bored and >move on to something else and forget him, and those abductees, >he's dead wrong. Do you have any idea how many UFO groups are out there? I'm finding out. Every single one of them will be notified if it takes me to the year 3001 to do it. >Damn the researchers for remaining quiet. And by their silence >condoning the treatment these abductees received at the hands of >John Carpenter. Damn everybody who feels outraged at this kind >of treatment of witnesses and who also remain silent. If ufology >sux it's because _you_ don't do or say anything when you really >need to! Yep, that just about sums things up, John. >Your continued silence on this serious issue guarantees that it >will be repeated in the future. More people will be hurt, used, >and discarded at the whim of those in a position to do so and >whose personal ethics allow for such behavior. I have to laugh. "Personal ethics" is an oxymoron when used in reference to this scandal. >To all the apathetic members of the UFO community I say, "you >deserve exactly whatever you get!" And to abductees everywhere, If you don't stand up and fight for what's right, the apathy the UFO community has exhibited in this scandal will continue to reign. Stop and think for just a minute and remember how difficult it is to lead a normal life while dealing with your experiences. We still have to take the trash to the curb every week so let's take the trash to the curb and not by boycotting. In my opinion that accomplishes nothing. Let's do it calmly, rationally, legally. If one doesn't stand up and fight for their own civil rights, no one else will either. <snip> >Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Jacobs, Dr. Mack, Mr. Fowler, Ms. Smith shame >on you _all_ for your continued silence on this important issue. >Shame on all of you who are keeping silent. >Apathy kills! Yeah, that's it in a nutshell. Regards, Katherine
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:21:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:13:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 05:22:07 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:57:04 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>To: updates@sympatico.ca Carpenter obviously comes under different regulations because of his profession, but is this forum the proper one in which to pass judgement? You quote from State regulations that have to be tried in a court of law before they have the effect of law, and I'm not sure how those reading this on the Internet are going to make any kind of a judgement except for a moral one (which really doesn't require the regulations in the first place). I would like to see a complaint filed with the Missouri State Board to have this addressed in an official manner, but to my knowledge no filings have been made. If I was an attorney considering this case I'd want to file something quickly and obtain injunctions to prevent the destruction of evidence and obtain statements while the information is fresh in everyone's mind. But, that doesn't seem to be the case here. Let's pretend that Carpenter was not a medical professional, and sold files to NIDS. Should our concerns be any different? I suspect our outrage would be just as harsh if it was proven that he had violated the privacy of his research subjects by providing their identities to the buyer. But, if the files were redacted (i.e. the indentifying information removed) I think most would view this transfer as acceptable. IMO, Carpenter's alleged unprofessional behavior should be dealt with at the State level by the State Board. It is up to those who feel wronged to file complaints and help to prevent others from being treated in this same way. I would also note that the lack of any official complaints, following this on-going debate on the Internet, only lends support to the contention that no wrong has been committed. As I've stated in earlier posts, this has much broader implications for UFOlogy and Abduction research. Research subjects of all types need to understand that their stories have monetary value. Without annecdotal witness statements, most UFO researchers would have very little to write about in their publications. As we know, the names of witnesses are usually changed to afford them some privacy, and I would acknowledge that it would be very unusual for them not to be notified of their inclusion. Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending Carpenter's actions in this, and believe that he made a serious error in judgement. But since this is a UFO forum that is focused on research and the sharing of information, I'm not sure that we should become a kangaroo court and debate the legal ramifications of his actions in regard to Missouri State regulations. On the other hand, I have my delete key handy..... 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:18:34 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello All, >Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >been properly warned. :) >Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >the UFO "community" in general. Actually, Budd Hopkins commented and decided that until all the evidence was in, he would not comment any longer. Look up him post in the archives. He said that his knowledge of Carpenter precluded his belief that Carpenter could do wrong. As for the UFO community in general, there may be good reason for that community not to comment. These are merely guesses on my part, but I shall voice a few... 1) They are not yet positioned one way or another as ... 2) All the evidence is not in 3) There are very few people who wish to go a round or three with you. Once shot at, one throws away one's guns.* 4) You can rant and rave like a champ when you get angry. Who need that for any CAUS? *I got shot at and in fact, shot, and kept my guns. Don't give up that easily. It was when I was an AP in the 47th Pct. in the Bronx, years ago. There was a robbery and shots fired in a pub (Gargan's Pup, never forget it) and I was in the Supervisor's car, getting trained. We pull up and it's WW III. Three bodies on the sidewalk and shooting inside. They see the NYPD car from inside and come out shooting at us. The Sarge pulls me down on the front seat and goes out returning fire. Me? I got out when the noise stopped and noticed I was bleeding. Next thing I know I am waking up in the ER. The Sage died. And I never threw my weapons away. I still volunteer to this day. I owe that man. And his family. I owe you some things too. So I shall endeavor not to act as you have. I owe abductees a lot too. They listened to me when I thought no one could. I said things to them that I said to no one, even my wife. I did that on AIC. Next time you refer to me, think on this. No one should be abused if that person claims to be telling the truth. Not even if the evidence looks bad. The guy what fired the shot that killed the sergeant was out of jail in two years. "Stray shot." Accident. His gun never hit anyone else. To me, there is an apt correlation in this story. We continued to call this man and his murdering fiends, "Suspects" until they were given a trial. We continued to use the word "alleged" until the alleged crimes were deemed real crimes after the judge sentenced them. By law, we were required to guarantee the rights of not just the victims, but the perps. And that was murder. >Why no one seems to see how ignoring this issue will open the >doors for more and worse abuses in the future is a mystery and a >source of tremendous disappointment to me and others. Do you really believe that? And what are the alleged abuses? They are still alleged are they not? And if so, then what is the reason for notifying abductees that their files have been sold if indeed they may not reflect identity of the alleged victims? Do you really think that notifying them that their identities and rights have been violated and later, it is determined that no identity was revealed and no rights were violated, is the correct thing to do? >Apathy is a poison that rots 'communities' of people from the >inside out. It is the "cancer" of groups and communities that >have come together for any purpose. It rots the soul of the >individual as well. Attitudes like; "what can I do? I'm only one >person," or "who cares" are an expression, a 'symptom' of a much >deeper and deadlier spiritual disorder/disease. You call it apathy, I call it wise caution. Fools jump in where angels fear to tread. I know, I am a fool. I remember you telling me that. >Apathy is the progenitor of entropy and death. Death is the progenitor of false accusations and ill timed judgments >There is little hope for a community of people that will not >unify when it is called for, or police themselves. If the >'system' does not include the active participation of its >members in the job of self-correction or self policing the >entropy created by the apathy will eventually destroy it from >within. This is true. >The 'effect' of apathy is; people who are in a position to >exploit other people begin to realize that there is no 'social' >price to pay for serious lapses in ethics or in the treatment of >certain groups of people. The perpetrators soon realize that the >fears they had (the only internal stops that were in place) of >being exposed to their peers as users and weaklings is >completely unfounded. That it's "open season" and anything goes. >Paragraphicus interruptis Do you really believe that after this bruha, that _anyone_ would consider doing something like this again? You do? Oh. >After all, "who cares!" The Jews in Nazi Germany are a prime >example of what I'm talking about. Don't ask, don't tell. Who >cares about a few miserable Jews? >Six murdered Jews turns into six million. Saying the story about the Nazi's and Six Million, etc., against the Carpenter story is supposed to make Carpenter's alleged murders more of a murder? Dear Lord. Guilt by association even if there is no association. Guilt by reason of Nazism. >140 abductees are being treated like they don't deserve the time >of day by the man they went to for help and counselling. And now >by their peers. No one cares. Not the researchers, not the >organized UFO groups, not even individuals that are interested >in the subject. All that is served in the end is the maintenance >of the status quo. That's ok if you're happy with the current >state of affairs in ufology. In that case all you need do is >simply to keep your mouth shut when you catch somebody with >their hand in the cookie jar, and you go along and get along. Seems to this perceived abductee who drinks Quaaludes with his daily glass of Prozac and Heroin, not to mention crack and, uh, methyl whatever... (thank you for exaggerating this point John, it gives me another post on which to scratch this itch), that more than the 140 abductees has been harmed. It seems to me that Carpenter has been harmed as well. By something called premature indictmentation. >That is a living death for any group of people. >Question: So, who gets screwed in the end? >Answer: The abductees of course! There is someone you forgot. Until the proof is in, Carpenter might be innocent. If so, then Carpenter is being screwed in the end. And the end is now. >And who cares? >Well I do for one. I don't care if I have to do this alone. I >plan on being a 'burr' under Mr. Carpenter's saddle until those >clients have been given the respect that he should have showed >them (on his own) three+ years ago. I'm not going to lay down or >go away because I don't have a freaking army behind me. I don't >need no stinking army! :) You have an army. It was of greater strength a few years ago, but you still have an army. I think that if you _truly_ believe in your heart of hearts, that Carpenter should notify the 140 people that their files may have been sold unredacted, and that they were Carpenter's files, not MUFON files, then you should continue to ride in his saddle. Ride, Johny, ride. >Carpenter needs to know that there _is_ a social and hopefully a >professional price to be paid for such an abuse of client trust >and lapse of ethical behavior. There is simply _no_ defense or >justification for not consulting those 140 individuals before he >sold their reports. If he is relying on the short memory of the >public, or people with short attention spans to get bored and >move on to something else and forget him, and those abductees, >he's dead wrong. >Damn the researchers for remaining quiet. And by their silence >condoning the treatment these abductees received at the hands of >John Carpenter. Damn everybody who feels outraged at this kind >of treatment of witnesses and who also remain silent. If ufology >sux it's because _you_ don't do or say anything when you really >need to! >Your continued silence on this serious issue guarantees that it >will be repeated in the future. More people will be hurt, used, >and discarded at the whim of those in a position to do so and >whose personal ethics allow for such behavior. >To all the apathetic members of the UFO community I say, "you >deserve exactly whatever you get!" Unlike others I'm not in here >just to create breezes by flapping my lips. I'm trying to make >this a 'better thing' than it is. The problem is; that many who >profess to care are only entertaining themselves or trying to >create a little 'persona' for themselves that differs from >whatever mundane life thing they are running from. That has >nothing to do with ufology. That is something they should be >working out on a couch or by spending less time in front of a >computer and more time out in the world interacting with people. >I bring no such 'personal needs' to the table here. I come as a >whole and fairly well grounded individual that wishes to make a >meaningful contribution to a field that deals with what I firmly >believe to be the most important issue facing mankind. I'm here >to work. Not "play" at ufology. >Unlike others I'm not in here just to create breezes by flapping >my lips. I believe you. The sound of flapping and the sense of an ill wind then, is ... uh ... truth, justice and the American way? Truth? What is the truth? Justice? To whom? Should not Carpenter grab some of that justice? Innocent until proven, etc.? And the American way. It's quite American to stab people in the back before they've been tried, indeed, before all the evidence is in. Very American. In fact, in the old days of the American West, they used to call it Vigilantism. In factoid, even some of our courts were vigilante inspired. DId you know that? They were called "Kangaroo Courts." >I put myself on the line to make you all aware of a serious >situation. <snip> You've done that. Weeks ago. >Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Jacobs, Dr. Mack, Mr. Fowler, Ms. Smith shame >on you _all_ for your continued silence on this important issue. >Shame on all of you who are keeping silent. >Apathy kills! Premature indictment kills better. >John Velez, Lone Wolf I find it interesting that you did not say, "The Lone Ranger" or something similar. The selection of the word "wolf" is very interesting to me. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 10 UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:11:01 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:22:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Randles >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 10:04:43 -0400 (EDT) >From: Karoline Louise <KarolineLouise@aol.com> >Subject: Re: A Question Of Definition? - Louise >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Jenny Randles wrote: >So Jenny - supposing this case I quoted is real after all - what >do we do about it? >This modern child recalls dreams of owls who take him while his >parents are paralysed. He has nosebleeds. He has weird wounds >which appear overnight and which resemble chemical burns. >Yet, instead of seeing aliens he recalls visiting the distant >past and talking to a man who tells him stories. >What happens to this child and this case? >Who wants to investigate it, since it is apparently nothing to >do with small grey telegenic aliens doing their so-famous thing? >I suspect no one. >What do you think? >Karoline Hi, Investigating cases involving children is an enormous problem. It is easy and tempting to get excited, to pursue them along the lines of ones private interests and not to be aware of the long term repercussions this might inflict. After all to you its another case along the way - one more to add to the data base. To the witness its a life defining moment that may effect their day to day existence long after you have moved on. Who is qualified to handle this? Who is likely to innocently create problems? What beliefs, types of investigation, methods of research will subtly lead the witness astray or into a quagmire as you pursue what to you is 'the evidence'? How can we determine this when we are really only in the data collection stages? Especially with reports that cross boundaries. When dealing with adults who can make informed judgements it is easier to follow a case than with children where we have to adopt far more responsibility towards their welfare. When dealing with physical evidence (especially in the UK where scientific support is very much offered on the QT) a slow progression is necessary. What we can always do - and should do - is collate evidence, document findings and seek patterns that might reveal clues for further exploration. This means persuading science to back us up and explore the evidence out of their own personal quest for knowledge. Its how we (at UFOIN) seek to do things. To be honest, ufologists probably should also do two things rather more than we do. Firstly, look beyond the field within which we normally collect data (thus taking account of anomalous cases such as this one) Secondly, not assume that we are going to solve the UFO mystery single handedly. Deeper research into cases of this sort is often best left to those skilled in the field. As an investigator I would consider my primary duty as to record the details of the case so that others can determine what to make of it. This further requires us to build bridges with science (both hard and soft varieties) so that the relevant people can become as excited as we are about the potential value of incidents like these. And - with their expertise and equipment - delve into them in the right way. But to do that we have to tackle the phenomenon cautiously, rationally and free from presumptions. Sadly this also means taking into account the prejudices many scientists already have about the way things are (or are not). You cannot tell them they have got it wrong. You have to hope they will work that out by virtue of listening to you and recognising your own caution and common sense. Its painful and slow - but it works. That's why I support an organisation such as UFOIN - which seeks to thoroughly document cases and also to try to persuade science that whilst much of the data can be resolved the parts that cannot are strengthened if we seek to apply rigourous standards and eliminate the ones that are not scientifically interesting. These may not be the sort of answers that you seek, but it is hard to come with exact answers because it is frustrating when a case comes along that cries out for exploration but there are not the people or the protocols in place. This is, after all, an amateur profession with very limited resources and a low estimation in the eyes of many of the very people we need to do the kind of research you suggest here. But sometimes (and that is often when children are involved IMO) the wisest step is a step back - not a blind leap forward into a situation that might rapidly go out of control. Just my personal thoughts. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:09:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:15:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Mr. Mortellaro, <snip> >And why indeed is it necessary for me to believe you, Ann >or anyone else. You have given your _opinion_ that these >people have been hurt, Carpenter has given his _word_ that >he never revealed personal information. Heretofore, Carpenter's >word and reputation have been unsullied and unblemished. Why >should I not believe him? Why should you not believe him? Hel-loooo!! The man sold 140 files for a hundred bucks a piece. Some of those files were files of children. You really need to take a step back and consider the laws that were broken here. My advice is for you to call Department of Health, Health Professionals Quality Assurance Division. They can tell you where you can get copies of the rules and regulations governing LCSWs in their states. <snip> >Why do you not trash mine? As for being self centered, I think >not. I am very terribly sorry that Carpenter must endure this >harrassment. That is what bothers me. And I have continuously >voiced that opinion. Carpenter is not guilty of revealing >personal information. He said so. You beleived that since his >ex-wife told you that her file was not redacted, then all the >files must not have been redacted. That was an assumption on >your and others' part. I do not think this to be so. Not unless >or until it can be proven. It is not truth until then. More doublespeak. You said all of the files were redacted. Now you say that the file of Carpenter's ex-wife was _not_ redacted. You can't have it both ways. Make up your mind. Were _all_ the files redacted or not? <snip> >My biggest concern is the continous posting of >mail telling Carpenter to do what may not be necessary if he is >truthfull about how the case histories were sent. Carpenter can't keep his lies straight and you're falling for them. <snip> >What other kind of abductee is there other than "self >professed?" I preface the word abductee by the word >"perceived" every time when it refers to me. I am deeply saddened by your apathy. You claim to be an abductee, yet you do not see the dangerous precedent Carpenter has set. Carpenter's actions, the selling of those files, sanitized or not, leaves every abductee in every city in every country in the entire world open and vulnerable to every UFO researcher, every abductee advocate. We, all of us - even you - were abused beyond belief by Carpenter's actions. Just as we were abused during our experiences, we are now abused by the very same people who profess to be on our side. <snip> >As for giving these 140 souls the repsect they deserve, listen >up Velez, according to Carpenter they were given the respect >they deserved, their names were BLACKED OUT! As you yourself have said in this post, not all the names were sanitized, and you're just as uncaring and unfeeling as John Carpenter. If, as you say, the only file that went unsanitized was Mr. Carpenter's ex-wife, then you're sanctioning abuse. <snip> >Now here is an interesting falsehood. Hmmm. _Handsfull_ of "mood >altering" drugs?? I do not. But this is a very important >revelation, John Velez. For the only mood altering drug which >you know about is Prozac, which I took while I was a member of >AIC. I posted that to AIC. You are, undoubtedly refering to >Prozac. Since the only time I mentioned this was under the >privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which >should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. Who opened the door here? Who suggested Quaaludes? >You have violated a confidence, something that you swore you >would never do. Ah yes. Now I see the M.O. here. How very typical. As long as you're not affected in any way, shape or form, it's okay to sanction the use and abuse others. <snip> > ... you do not have the right to use things against me which you learned when I was associated with you. I submit to you that your anger is misdirected. Carpenter betrayed _every_ abductee worldwide. <snip> >You accuse me of projecting. I accuse you of personalizing. This >is closely related to paranoia. Were you to share in the profits of Carpenter's book? The one, he said, in which the "paranoia of the abductees" was squelching? Oh yes, he did indeed say that. Turn on the lights, Mr. Mortellaro. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident - From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:48:18 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:24:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident - >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:52:04 -0700 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >Subject: Guess What I Saw? - Viz The Cheshire Incident >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Driving down beautiful Hwy 101 near North Bend Oregon, I noticed >a well, unusual sight, a bright flashing in the brilliant sky >and, lo! There it was. A Mylar balloon, hung up on a electrical >wire on a relatively long string. Exhibiting the very >characteristics that the "Best Ever Cheshire Video" object was >exhibiting. Flutter, falling leaf, rolling. Hey, I ask you, try >this at home. >Oh, and make note of the wind speed, time of day etc., it may >come in handy. >Oh, it was 13:36 hours on August 2nd 2000 at the corner of >Newmark and Hwy 101. Didn't have a Camera, darn. >GT McCoy GT Gosh darn, how did you know it was a Mylar balloon? As for the same characteristics hmmm, dodgy ground there mate, it might have been a UFO disguising itself as a Mylar balloon to fool you into thinking that the Mylar balloon in the Cheshire video was a Mylar balloon when in fact it was a UFO disguising itself as a Mylar balloon. Confused? You soon will be <g>. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:22:01 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri These are extracts (and NOT extracted very well, I might add) from the State (Missouri) Committee on Social Workers. I'm not anything but another idiot with a computer (READ: Not a lawyer or even a social worker, however, I am, like Ann Mulvey, somewhat social and sometimes, even a worker), but I do think that these extracts reflect relevant points to this ongoing hullaballo regarding John Carpenter, who is a licensed clinical social worker in the state of Missouri. It was most difficult for me to cut and paste from the Adobe Acrobat reader to this Yahoo!message, and I apologize for the formatting and if anything is out of order. I sort of lost steam somewhere during this cut and paste job and that is why you might find it a little difficult to read -- it is not too much easier to read at: http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/csr/4csr.htm#4-263 but, if you are interested, by all means, read the rules and regulations. I have been unable to reply to much of this debate on UpDates due to a myriad of reasons, but I think a number of you are mistaken -- I won't mention any names. From reading these statutes, I feel a good number of them have been violated, but I'm not in full possession of all the facts. It doesn't matter whether Carpenter was a hobbyist, the fact remains that he is a licensed clinical social worker and he is one 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year (as long as he has that license). It's not like he can turn his license backward and say, today, I'll just not follow the rules. That license elevates the license holders responsibility and duty of care. It also doesn't matter whether Carpenter redacted the information he sold to Bigelow. Ethically, he had no right to sell _any_ information without consent (and _that_ might not even be enough, if you read the following extracts carefully). Ann Mulvey (may God bless her and John Velez) presented, what I believe to be the most horrifying information last week when she said that she had called the State of Missouri and learned that no complaints had been filed against Carpenter. Horrifying, yes. It's absolutely amazing to me that the abductees who know that their information has been sold have not complained to the licensing board, yet, allegedly, they have contacted a lawyer, albeit, unsuccessfully. This says to me that these people are seriously misguided. Go ahead and jump on me, I don't care. But if you feel wronged you go and make a complaint and I would have thought that the lawyer would have seen to that little detail. Instead, you let Carpenter go about his business for years and he has not had to answer to _anyone_ that can prevent him from doing this same stuff again. IF YOU FEEL YOU WERE HARMED FILE A COMPLAINT!!! That should not affect any legal action you might take, in fact, it might even help your legal standing! File it before it's to late, if it's not already! Enjoy, Rebecca Division 263�State Committee for Social Workers Chapter 3�Ethical Standards/Disciplinary Rules 4 CSR 263-3.010 Scope of Coverage and Organization (2) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall not: (A) Violate any ethical standard/disciplinary rule; (B) Circumvent any ethical standard/disciplinary rule through the actions of another; ( C) Engage in conduct which is dishonest, deceitful or fraudulent; (D) Allow the pursuit of financial gain or other personal benefit to interfere with the exercise of sound professional judgment or skills; or (E) Use therapeutic relationships with clients to promote, for personal gain or the profit of an agency, commercial enterprises of any kind. 4 CSR 263-3.040 Client Relationships (1) A licensed clinical social worker, [...] permit holder and registrant shall not enter into or continue a dual or multiple relationship, including social relationship, business relationship or sexual relationship, as defined by the committee, with a current client or with a person to whom the licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder or registrant has at anytime within the previous twenty-four (24) months rendered psychotherapy or other professional social work services for the treatment or amelioration of mental and emotional conditions. [...] (2) Licensed clinical social workers, provisional licensed clinical social workers, temporary permit holders and registrants shall be alert to and avoid conflicts of interest that interfere with the exercise of professional discretion and impartial judgment. (3) Licensed clinical social workers, provisional licensed clinical social workers, temporary permit holders and registrants should make clear to clients the purposes, goals, techniques, rules of procedure and limitations that may affect the professional relationship at or before the time that it is begun. Licensed clinical social workers, provisional licensed clinical social workers, temporary permit holders and registrants shall not provide professional services to clients without being able to justify the basis upon which those services are rendered. [...] (7) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant must inform therapeutic clients about electronic recording of sessions, how such sessions will be used and provide specific information about any specialized or experimental activities in which they may be expected to participate as a condition of service. [...] (9) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall protect clients against physical threats, intimidation and coercion in the provision of social services insofar as is reasonably possible. [...] (11) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant rendering therapeutic services to a client shall maintain professional records that include: (A) The presenting problem(s), assessment, plan of action and progress notes; (B) The fee arrangement; (C) The date and substance of each contact with the client; (D) Notation and results of formal consults with other providers; (E) A copy of all evaluative reports prepared or received as a part of the professional relationship; and (F) A copy of a written communication with the client identifying the date and reason for termination of professional service if the licensed clinical social worker is in private practice. (12) For the purpose of these rules, the licensed clinical social worker and temporary permit holder shall assure that professional records are maintained for at least five (5) years after the date of service is terminated. (13) The licensed clinical social worker, pro-visional licensed clinical social worker, tem-porary permit holder and registrant shall not falsify or permit the unauthorized destruction of client records. [...] 4 CSR 263-3.080 Public Statements/Fees PURPOSE: This rule is promulgated pur-suant to section 337.630.2(15), RSMo and sets forth the ethical standards/disciplinary rules as they pertain to public statements/fees. (1) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tem-porary permit holder and registrant shall not: (A) Give or receive a commission or rebate or any other form of remuneration for refer-ral of clients for professional services; (B) Engage in fraud or misrepresentation; (C) Use relationships with therapeutic or therapy clients to promote, for personal gain or the profit of an agency, commercial enter-prises of any kind; and (D) Render services until assured that clients are aware of the fees and billing arrangements. [...] (6) Without disclosure to the client, a licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall not accept compensation for the professional services from anyone other than the client without dis-closure to the client or his/her legal guardian. (7) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall not accept for professional services any form of remuneration including the bartering of ser-vices which has the effect of exploiting the professional relationship or creating a dual or multiple relationship. [...] 4 CSR 263-3.100 Confidentiality PURPOSE: This rule is promulgated pur-suant to section 337.630.2(15), RSMo and sets forth the ethical standards/disciplinary rules as they pertain to confidentiality. (2) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall inform clients, at the onset of the professional rela-tionship, of the limits of confidentiality. (3) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall keep confidential his/her therapy relationships with clients including information obtained from this relationship with clients with the following exceptions: (A) When the client gives written consent; (B) When the client constitutes a danger to him/herself or to others; (C) When the licensed clinical social work-er, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder or registrant is under court order to disclose information; or (D) When required by law. (4) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant should make every effort to see that the employer provides for maintenance, storage and dispos-al of the records of clients so that unautho-rized persons shall not have access to these records. (5) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall not forward to another person, agency or poten-tial employer any confidential information without the written consent of the client(s) or their legal guardian(s). (6) When providing counseling services to families, couples or groups, licensed clinical social workers, provisional licensed clinical social workers, temporary permit holders and registrants shall seek agreement among the parties involved concerning each individual�s right to confidentiality and obligation to pre-serve the confidentiality of information shared by others. Participants in family, cou-ples or group counseling shall be informed by the licensed clinical social worker, provision-al licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant that there is no guarantee that all participants will honor such agreements. Research on Human Subjects (1) A licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall ensure that the welfare of a client is in no way com-promised in any experimentation and/or that the client is not participating against his/her will. (2) In presenting case studies in classes, pro-fessional meetings or publications, licensed clinical social workers, provisional licensed clinical social workers, temporary permit holders and registrants shall disguise the identity of clients to assure full protection. (3) In conducting any research on human sub-jects, a licensed clinical social worker, provi-sional licensed clinical social worker, tempo-rary permit holder and registrant shall not violate any laws or regulations of this state or the federal government. (4) When planning any research activity deal-ing with human subjects, a licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant shall ensure that research prob-lems, design and execution are in full com-pliance with Protection of Human Subjects as published in the Code of Federal Regulations (45 CFR 46). (5) Licensed clinical social workers, provi-sional licensed clinical social workers, tempo-rary permit holders and registrants engaged in evaluation or research must obtain voluntary and written informed consent from partici-pants without any implied or actual depriva-tion or penalty for refusal to participate, with-out undue inducement to participate, and with due regard for participants� well-being, priva-cy and dignity. Informed consent must include information about the nature, extent and dura-tion of the participation requested and disclo-sure of the risks and benefits in the research. [end]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:20:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:26:43 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:57:57 -0400 >From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] - Brookesmith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Evening Peter, all <snippy snip> >All this said in full sympathetic knowledge of how difficult it >is to edit an encyclopaedia [sic], having done it, and planned >many more than I could lay my reptilian hands on day-to-day. And how difficult it is just to write a book, let alone a reference tome of great import. >best wishes >Pseudococcus D. Macnab >Not Very Influential Either Sean Jones Seriously Influenza Ridden.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:01:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:29:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Jones >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:54:22 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Evening Jerome >>I think the difference between Encyclopaedia and encyclopedia is >>the same difference between colour and color, the same as the >>difference between centre and center. The difference being one >>is spelt the American way and the other the British way. >You are, of course, correct. I was making a somewhat pedantic >point -- in retrospect hardly worth making -- that the word is >spelled "encyclopedia" on the cover of my book. I kinda thought as much, but hey I'm pleading ignorance. <g> >>Please be assured I fully respect your work for I really do own >>a copy of " The UFO Book, Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" >>as it is called this side of the water. >As you may know, that's a condensed version, containing about >30% of the content of the original. Actually I didn't know it was _that_ condensed. The version that I have can be found at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1578590299/qid=965940719/sr= 1-1/002-2033941-7687210 for 17.95 dollars (which cost me twenty five pounds = forty dollars this side of the water) The full version that you are referring to, that includes the references to Peter can be found at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0780800974/qid=965940719/sr= 1-4/002-2033941-7687210 for 140 dollars Being that I am currently a pauper I cannot afford the one hundred and forty dollars that this costs (plus shipping). I will have to wait until either some rich billionaire wishes to purchase my non-existent files on all the abductee's that I have not interviewed or some very generous person donates me a copy. Either that or put it on my Christmas pressy list. <g> >The index to The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, cites >Brookesmith three times (pages 116, 314, 500). The bibliography >mentions three items by him, two books and a two-part magazine >article. I think the lack of entries in my version is because it is the very condensed version. But thank you for pointing out that Peter does in fact have more than one entry. Even if one is as a journalist, and another as a debunker <G>. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:50:47 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity Crop Circles: A plea for sanity This week the British media, via several TV reports, national news, major newspaper articles and ongoing hype have revived the long flagging field of crop circle research through coverage that puts this 'mystery' into the context of UFOs and aliens. Indeed in the Daily Mail (10 August 2000) the noted author Colin Wilson pens an article 'Why I still believe that aliens created crop circles' and includes with it an image of a 'grey' being from an alien abduction book to cement the relationship in the public imagination. UFOIN (the UFO Investigators Network) has in its team many of the pioneer researchers within this field. Chris Rutkowski, who investigated Canadian circles long before they appeared in the UK, Ian Mrzyglod and Marty Moffat, from the only UFO investigation team to study the earliest discovered British circles (l980) and Paul Fuller and Jenny Randles, who produced the first ever circle evidence publication and (with Mike Wootten - our web site designer) arranged the first conference in l985. They also co-authored the book 'Crop Circles: A Mystery Solved' in l990 and were the only UFOlogists invited to attend the one scientific conference ever held to debate circles (in Oxford) and that involved scientists from Europe, Asia and America (its proceedings being published in l991) Given this extensive collective background and a probably unique track record of association UFOIN has decided to issue a statement on the matter. We believe that crop circles are the result of two primary causes. The vast majority - and virtually all circles being reported today - are hoaxes. A very few (mostly simple circles; although occasionally these are found in small groupings) result from a combination of largely well understood atmospheric phenomena. There is no mystery, no strange forces, no aliens, no spaceships and no secret messages trying to persuade the earth to mend its wicked ways. The intergalactic cavalry are not coming. Such claims are wishful thinking that evaporate once the evidence is properly evaluated with objectivity. These are the main reasons why we hold to this opinion after over 20 years of research. 1: Complex, geometric shapes and images only began to appear in crop fields AFTER the onset of media interest in the early/mid l980s. They clearly played to the gallery and were the consequence of an intelligence at work. 2: The choice is between an 'alien' intelligence and a 'human' one. We know that humans exist. We know that they love playing tricks. Aliens are largely speculative and their presence on earth controversial at best. As such good evidence is required to argue that aliens - not humans - are creating circles. There is no such evidence (not even bad evidence). 3: Humans, on the other hand, have frequently displayed a talent for faking convincing crop circles. A body called Circlemakers have proven their expertise and been filmed creating complex formations that defied the verdict of the so called experts. The first hoax exposed was back in l983 when one national newspaper set out to hoodwink another by paying a farmer to fake circles. Since then armies of hoaxers, skeptics, fantastists and jokers have deliberately played games with the media, the crop circle fans and engaged in a battle of wills upping the ante with ever more amazing designs. It has become a challenge that is made worthwhile every time silly media stories take their circles seriously. 4: Other motives also apply. There is a tourist potential to having lots of fine circles in your area every summer. Whilst most farmers are honest and have their land wrecked by wanton hoaxers and unwelcome visitors, some have recognised that circles on their land can be an asset. It is possible to make more money from charging viewing fees than by harvesting crop - especially if it has been trampled on by circle spotters constantly on the prowl for new prey. 5: There is ample evidence for human association with circles. Circles appearing near locations such as 'Fakenham' and 'Littley Green' (where the image that 'Littley Green Men' did it was the obvious intent) are some examples. When English words were spelt out in a field by a hoaxer they were taken seriously by many despite a basic error made by the trickster. The message read 'We are not alone'. Any aliens, of course, would have written 'You are not alone'. 6: However, we also believe that a few circles each year (unfortunately swamped by the circus that goes on) are the result of natural forces. Every indication from study of these suggests that they result from atmospheric forces akin to fairweather whirlwinds and electrostatic fields. Their precise nature has been studied by meteorologists and physicists and attempts to recreate them in the lab have been partially successful. It has even been possible to predict other environments in which to find circles from their physical characteristics. They have in this way been discovered in snow, sand, and even dust within underground railway tunnels. 7: Although the complex (human engineered) circles are a product of recent times simple circles are not. The easiest way to test the 'natural phenomenon' hypothesis is to demonstrate its universal and sustained existence. If aliens were sending us a message they would surely not do so unaltered for centuries. If simple circles result from atmospheric forces then on the other hand they would have always been reported. They have been. We have records of circles as far back as the 16th century. There were reports of them in science journals around the world - for example a case from near Guildford reported by the august journal Nature in 1880. They have featured in other prestigious publications such as New Scientist and these references start long before crop circles or even UFOs were discussed. 8: In addition there is a long track record of eyewitness observations to the creation of a crop circle. These stem from first hand reports dating back to at least the early 20th century. In virtually every case simple circles are all that has been observed under formation. In no case was anything like an alien craft described. Instead these observations are consistent with the premise that atmospheric forces produced the circles. 9: As with all real natural phenomena (such as mirages or comets) circles have even generated mythology. There is a woodcut describing the formation of circles in Hertfordshire in the 17th century and ascribed to the work of the devil. One of our team has even spent time talking to aborigines in Queensland where reed bed circles have been reported for centuries and where they were photographed 20 years before the media interest in circles in the UK even began. It is our opinion that the crop circle phenomenon has been extremely well studied, its nature has been largely defined through scientific methods and the latest revival of it is nonsensical, inappropriate and completely unneccesary - especially given its baseless association with alien imagery. As such the evidence needs to be seen in context. We simply wanted you to have the benefit of our collective experience to see why we do not believe that crop circles have anything to do with aliens and why, in our opinion, this is now a solved mystery. UFOIN
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:17:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:25:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Jones >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >And who cares? >Well I do for one. So do I. But John some of us just aren't as vocal as you. No disrespect mate. I have expressed a concern about Mr Carpenter, as EBK can confirm. I would like to say, for all those who haven't yet, most especially little ole moi, thank you from the bottom of my heart for bringing this matter to public attention. Hopefully something _will_ get done. But like everything else, nothing good ever gets done overnight. >John Velez, Lone Wolf You are not alone, you are just the hombre with the loudest voice <g>. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Will Bueche <willb1d@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:22:31 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:54:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:35:13 -0400 >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >The apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on >the part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part >of the UFO "community" in general. John, you seem to be assuming that everyone is aware of your discussion. Chances are slim that all the researchers you mentioned even surf the net. If you want to make a statement, try something proactive: Get statements from some of the 140 people and publish them. In their own words they can tell how they were wronged and how they are asking for support. Their words will mean a heck of a lot more than any third party. Set up a web site with their words (you are a webdesigner, I seem to recall?), or submit an article for publication. If the latter: If a conflict still exists between your point of view and Carpenter's point of view (perhaps there is no conflict anymore, if he has agreed he was wrong and is going to track down everyone and inform them?), a good magazine would give him a chance to respond to your article in the same issue, which would make the issue clear. You can do a lot to lay out the situation clearly. This mailing list is anything but clear, so I do not see how you can even ask for third-parties to comment at this point. It certainly seems unfair to complain that they have not commented on their 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:34:41 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 06:02:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 02:07:59 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello Ron: >This won't help much, but neither do the incoherent details >given by Mr. Short-Story. Sorry about that... that was my fault... I'm not very good at keeping my promise when I say I'll keep a story short. I also am not very experienced at relaying "sightings", so I just relayed the dialogue as best as I could remember it from memory and my notes. >That doesn't mean nobody else has it of course. You might try >UFOCAT or some other large database. Thanx for the info. I don't have access to a UFOCAT CD, but I did try Peter's NUFORC database and couldn't find a match. >*U* does not list night-light sightings. Understandable, I suppose. >Sorry No problem. Thank you very much for your 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 06:04:29 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello All, >Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >been properly warned. :) >Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >the UFO "community" in general. >Why no one seems to see how ignoring this issue will open the >doors for more and worse abuses in the future is a mystery and a >source of tremendous disappointment to me and others. <snip> Hello John, I can't answer for major abductee researchers but I can answer for my own humble non abductee self. I said nothing because it seemed to be an invitation to get swallowed in the maelstrom. But now feels like the right time as I would like to have these storm winds subside. I agree with Jimbo Morty's position regarding the Carpenter affair. You and Ann had the assumption the abductee files were sold non-redacted. You had not heard from John Carpenter. He has stated that they were redacted and he also stated that he was trying his best to contact the clients. I think he did not do so for three years because he did not think any wrong was done by selling redacted files to NIDS. Quite a while back Walt Andrus stated that those files were from Carpenter's personal research and had nothing to do with MUFON. I don't see where MUFON has any responsibility at this point. They don't have an ethical liability because the files were redacted, according to Carpenter. The onus is on you to come up with evidence that anything is otherwise. I feel that you, Ann, and one or two others went from a whirlwind into a maelstrom by losing any sense of objectivity, going way too far in your accusations, and getting into a dogfight. All of you at the same time trying to rip apart the fabric of John Carpenter like a pack of rabid pit bulls. Things got pretty ugly here. I suspect that is a major reason why many investigators did not jump into this fray. John, I would like to know if you accept John Carpenter's word that the files were redacted? Do you respect NIDS's privacy position? Do you accept that Carpenter said he is trying to notify the people? Until proven evidence appears that would make this incident of selling the files show facts that counter the above, can you folks take a deep breath and ease off this tirade? Thank you, Josh Goldstein A Jew 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:11:55 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 06:24:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:25:37 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>>>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>>>>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello Docca, >Snip >I do want to adress one or two things you accuse me of however. >You posted: >>Since the only time I mentioned this was under the >>privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which >>should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. >Jim, when we first met you mentioned the drugs often. On the >phone, in the car, and on the list to the other abductees. At >the first IF meeting that I invited you to you whipped out a >bottle of multicolored pills and swallowed a handful in full >view of those in attendance. When I asked you what you were >taking you responded, "painkillers and tranquilizers." So there >is no "secret" there. God, John, there certainly is. Anything I told you whilst a member of AIC is confidential. How else could I share the things I shared with you. I trusted you with a good deal of personal stuff, and included in that stuff is my nedication list. As far as the pills, indeed multicolored, I did take out a bottle. However there are _no_ tranquilizers in the lot, as I do not take tranquilizers. And I never stated that. If indeed I did, you are obligated to not mention it anyway. It's personal and private. Is one thing personal and confidential about what a perceived abductee tells you and others not? Of course not. Everything is sacred. Everything which we tell you whilst members. Anything else would make being a member of AIC ludicrous. However I would like to tell you what I did say. I described the medication I took as Blood Pressure meds (hypertension) and not tranquilizers. On that issue, John, you are either lying or mistaken. Judging from the words you chose in your last post (that docca morty was taking mood altering drugs by the handfull), I can only tell this list that something is very, very wrong here. What in heaven's name are you thinking John? Just about the only part you got right was the multicolored part. And for the record, hell, this is in the book, I take Zestril (pink), Prilosec (purple), Provachol and inderal. I also at that time took 5/500 of hydrocodone for my terrible headaches, which I still suffer. All kinds of colors. But not a tranquilizer in the lot. And not a mood altering drug in the lot. All prescribed by my primary care physician. >As you know, I only only mentioned it in >the context of your mean-spirited remark to Mike about how he >should "see a shrink and eat Quaaludes." No "confidences" that I >know of were violated there. The only thing that I _did_ promise >you was that I would not reveal your identity as an abductee. >Again, as we both know you have chosen to be as public as you >can be about that. Anything I tell you or told you about me was under the assumption stated by you many times, that all of what we divulged remained with AIC. You violated this promise to me, John. And there is no crawling out of that hole. >Our relationship was never a professional anything. I maintain a >website that contains information about UFO abduction for the >general public and an e-mail list for a few abductees. I >'participate' in it just like any of the other members and I >have _never_ set myself up as a researcher or as a "leader" of >any stripe. All I ever did was to try to be a good friend to you >and to offer you the best of what is in me. That you did. and I shall be forever grateful. But I cannot abide your using personal information about me on this list or anywhere else. Our relationship was of course, never professional. You are not a professional. You are just a guy who then had a good deal of common sense about my and other AIC members' experiences. Never could I claim otherwise. However you know as well as I do that anything we told on AIC is priviledged and confidential. It is not to be used in any of our debates. Period. I forgive you, John. But you persist in using personal information in your arguments. I do not. And whenever I do, thank God there is Errol there to return my post or send it to you personally. And not post it on this List. >You also mention that I have "thrown out" yourself and twenty >other people from AIC. First, I have thrown out 11 people in >three-and-a-half years. You conveniently neglect to mention the >reason that you were asked to depart/booted out. You also >neglect to mention why the others were thrown out as well. Thrown out, shmown out. None of that matters. And there are 23 people whom I have personal knowledge who are no longer members. I am counting former members, not years. Some deserved to be excised. Some were treated shabbily, spoken to by phone and online in ways I know I could never do myself. I will not mention these here. Not necessary. Not relevant. However it is important for you to know that each of us has been ranted and raved at for things which, even if true, did not deserve the foul treatment. I am not embarrassed to say here, on this list, that you actually had me in tears one night. Me. And not a mood altering drug in my pile - just like a cop, never there when you need it. >Also, EBK and Greg Sandow have always "monitored" the postings >to the AIC since its inception. They are part of a failsafe >mechanism I purposely incorporated in case I ever stepped out >line in my dealings or communications with _any_ of the >abductees that I have ever dealt with on that list. Errol or >Greg are free to comment on my conduct and behavior as the >moderator of that list if they wish to. I have _never_ unjustly >thrown anybody out of AIC. In your case it was a breech of >privacy that I could not take any chances with. (Your list of >"undisclosed recipients" that kept appearing on posts to AIC) >_That_ is why you were taken off the mailing list. Tell it all >Jimbo or don't tell it at all. Yes, I shall. When AOL is used in sending mail (e-mail) if any of the addresses are placed in parenthesis, those recipients are not listed in the mail which you receive. Instead, it will say, "And certain undisclosed recipients!" My email address book is structured to make sure that certain people are never sent mail with their names being shown. On AIC and off, it was in use and it still is. I have done just that in this mail. I have sent it to UpDates and to some others on my mailing list who are bracketed and whose identity is kept secret. >You try to paint a picture of me as a 'dictator' who arbitrarily >throws people out of the Magic Kingdom. You know why you were >dumped and that it was 'the straw that broke the camel's back.' >That last 'foul' of yours was just one of several. I had been >more patient and tolerant with you than you deserved. If I lie >EBK and Greg will say so, I'm certain of it. >>You have violated a confidence, something that you swore you >>would never do. >All I ever "swore" to you was that I would protect your >anonymity to the best of my ability and that your postings to >AIC would never be redistributed. I have done both. >I will not be responding to any further postings from you. I >haven't the time or the inclination. As you are well aware >'time' is a precious commodity to me these days. >Good luck in your life. >John Velez John Velez, I feel terrible that it came to this. I really do. I still admire you. But damned if I will allow you or anyone else to continue to use information which is not relevant, not pertinant, and certainly, should be kept confidential. I must say this again, I do not take mood altering drugs, I do not take tranquilizers and I do not take pain medication stronger than 5/500 hydrocodone, and I certainly do not take _that_ when I am driving. I carry a gold shield, an inspector's shield, given to me by the NYS FOP. I am proud of that and I would never do anything that would cause me to break the law or tarnish the shield. It ain't me. Your use of these "facts" is wrong. And your "facts" are wrong as well. Nothing grieves me more than not having the succor of your friendship and of AIC's place to go. And nothing grieves me more than to rub your nose in it. You are a proud man. So am I. But fair is fair. As much as I love and respect you, I will not tolerate your using such personal data. Greg and Errol have nothing at all to do with this. I shall not drag them into it. To support me or you. It is not fair to them. As long as everyone on this list knows that I do not take drugs by the handful and etc. That is most important to me. Jimmy "Boombats" Mortellaro, It's what you used to call me. And I loved 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:58:40 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 06:17:45 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >the UFO "community" in general. Well, color me confused, but did you not post the following: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m18-022.shtml >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 01:12:54 -0400 >Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:36:36 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter >Much to his credit Budd has responded to the request for a >comment from him on this Carpenter issue quickly. <snip> >Here are Budd's comments on the Carpenter business. <snip> >Thank you for your timely response Budd. :)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Liz Hammond <lizzz@att.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 03:10:53 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:06:46 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Just to keep the record straight, Kathleen and John. I have stopped posting on the Carpenter thread because I feel anything more I said would just be needless repitition. I have, I hope, made it clear that I think Mr. Carpenter may have acted reprehensibly and I hope this whole issue is finally resolved in a timely manner, satisfactory to those people on that List. When I feel there is more of a need, I'll start posting again. For now, I am watching with interest! :( Yours, Liz Hammond
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:37:35 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:09:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:26:03 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca< Mr. Mortellaro, <snip> >As for the UFO community in general, there may be good reason >for that community not to comment. These are merely guesses on >my part, but I shall voice a few... You forgot one. Money. Who was funded by NIDS, Mr. Mortellaro? How many researchers and organizations were or are now funded by NIDS? <snip> >You call it apathy, I call it wise caution. I call it stupid. You are a self-professed abductee yet you stand by someone whose actions seriously jeopardize abductees all over the world. Sanitized or not, Carpenter _sold_ 140 files for $14,000 and set a dangerous precedent. Who will be the next researcher or organization to sell files? What if _your_ file was one of the ones sold? Would you sit on your laurels then? Where is your conscience? <snip> >Do you really believe that after this bruha, that _anyone_ would >consider doing something like this again? You do? Oh. I repeat, Carpenter set a dangerous precedent by selling those files in the first place. Do you really believe, I mean _really_ believe that this is just a one time thing? Rot. A warning to abductees everywhere: Stand up and fight for your civil rights because it _will_ happen again. <snip> >It seems to me that Carpenter has been harmed as well. By >something called premature indictmentation. More rot. Carpenter dug his own grave by _selling_ 140 files! <snip> >There is someone you forgot. Until the proof is in, Carpenter >might be innocent. If so, then Carpenter is being screwed in the >end. And the end is now. There is one simple fact that _YOU_ forgot. Carpenter indicted himself by admitting he sold 140 files for $14,000. <snip> >Premature indictment kills better. Geez louise! You just don't get it, do you? Carpenter indicted himself when he admitted he sold the files for $14,000. Just what part of that sentence do you not understand? Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:53:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:12:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:21:19 -0400 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>< Greetings Steve, >Let's pretend that Carpenter was not a medical professional, and >sold files to NIDS. Should our concerns be any different? I >suspect our outrage would be just as harsh if it was proven that >he had violated the privacy of his research subjects by >providing their identities to the buyer. But, if the files were >redacted (i.e. the indentifying information removed) I think >most would view this transfer as acceptable. Were you aware that some of the files sold were files of children? What if the files were not redacted? Carpenter and his supporters can't even keep their stories straight. Some claim all were redacted but one file belonging to Carpenter's ex-wife. Some say only a few were redacted. Here's a what if for you - what if one of the files that were not redacted belonged to _your_ wife or to _your_ children? That's a horse of a different color isn't it since you're directly involved in this horrid mess. >IMO, Carpenter's alleged unprofessional behavior should be >dealt with at the State level by the State Board. On that we agree. >It is up to those who feel wronged to file complaints and help to >prevent others from being treated in this same way. I would also >note that the lack of any official complaints, following this >on-going debate on the Internet, only lends support to the >contention that no wrong has been committed. There's a logical explanation for that - they don't know. No one told them at the time of the sale (3+ years ago). To the best of my knowledge, 99% of them still do _not_ know their files were sold for $100 a piece. <snip> >Without annecdotal witness statements, most UFO >researchers would have very little to write about in their >publications. As we know, the names of witnesses are usually >changed to afford them some privacy, and I would acknowledge >that it would be very unusual for them not to be notified of >their inclusion. If I had been asked, I would have said no. Fortunately for me (or perhaps I should say 'fortunately for Carpenter'), my file is not in the 140 files that were sold. The civil rights of those whose files were included in that sale were violated. They didn't have the chance to say yes or no. That right was taken away from them by Carpenter. >Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending Carpenter's actions in >this, and believe that he made a serious error in judgement. Understatement alert! <g> >But since this is a UFO forum that is focused on research and the >sharing of information, I'm not sure that we should become a >kangaroo court and debate the legal ramifications of his actions >in regard to Missouri State regulations. Steve, Carpenter set a dangerous precendent by _selling_ the files. He compounded that error by not notifying the 140 - remember there are children in that number - that their files were about to change hands at the bargain basement price of $100 each. Please answer this one question for me: I'm an abductee. Whom do I trust? Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:19:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:15:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Stacy >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:09:31 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:59:31 -0500 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:32 -0500 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dennis, >>>Without making stuff up out of thin air, I couldn't have added >>>anything to the Dr. X case beyond what I wrote. Maybe you have >>>access to information I don't. >>I'm still not completely clear as to what the 8-9 pages devoted >>to Derenberger's contactee claims illuminate us to that we >>wouldn't otherwise be illuminated to by the inclusion of >>"Contactees" (pp243-254), along with separate (presumably) >>biographical entires on contactees George Adamski, Daniel Fry, >>Orfeo Anegelucci, Howard Menger and others. And then there's >>that strange entry on the "Solem Contact Claims." Who among us >>has ever heard of Paul Solem? Yet he gets 3 1/2 pages, and >>Gotlib and the BAE not so much as a mention. >My word. You must have a lot of time on your hands. I apologize >for not writing The UFO Encyclopedia that Dennis Stacy would >have written. >Jerry Clark Jerry, You're absolutely right. I do have too much time on my hands. Enough to realize, at least, that none of my above remarks address you personally, but rather certain issues and emphases of the work in question, which I assume to be fair game. You can address same or not, as you see fit. Or you can make snide and disparaging remarks about me personally, as you've chosen to do (and which take less time). Or you can hypothesize the following situation: Dennis Stacy has just published a two-volume encyclopedia of UFOs with which I can find no quibble, complaint, or suggestion for further improvement whatsoever. In fact, it is precisely the same encyclopedia, word for word, entry for entry, that I (Jerome Clark) would have written had I been in Stacy's shoes. C'mon. Apology not accepted, and no need for same. You know how I feel about your encyclopedia in general and as a whole. If you want to argue or defend certain aspects of same, then just do it, without disparaging me for having raised the original question, or for what you apparently perceive to be personal criticism. Unfortunately, few of us in this or any other field are so thick-skinned as to feel oblivious to criticism, never mind that it may only be passing commentary. This field is full of far-flung fellows. It includes historians and encyclopediasts like yourself, and critics like myself. No, I didn't write the encyclopedia... but I have every right to question it. And to anticipate a civil response as opposed to a personal dismissal. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 11 UpDate: NSA's Plan Backfires From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:06 -0400 Subject: UpDate: NSA's Plan Backfires Greetings list - Source: The Seattle Times http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/nation-world/html98/ufos10_20000810.html Agency's plan backfires as Web site boosts UFO queries by Laura Sullivan The Baltimore Sun Two years ago, the National Security Agency (NSA) began posting previously classified documents on its Web site to deflect the growing number of requests each year for information about flying saucers and space aliens. But the plan backfired. Rather than relieving suspicions that the agency is hiding information about unidentified flying objects, the result has been more people than ever demanding to see UFO documents. A record 36,000 people perused the UFO page last month. What has piqued UFO believers' interest is not so much what the documents on the Web site say - often little or nothing between the blacked-out, censored sections - but their extraordinary volume: thousands of pages of unofficial reports and antiquated radio interceptions from abroad. Among the postings from the files of the nation's most-secret spy agency is a National Enquirer article with the headline, "Take UFOs Seriously or Be Prepared for Sneak Invasion By Space Aliens." All of this is fueling speculation among believers who wonder why, for something that doesn't exist, the NSA has collected a ton of records. The NSA staff, burdened with hundreds of written requests under the Freedom of Information Act, is not amused. The agency hasn't kept exact numbers about UFO requests. But Pamela Phillips, chief of FOIA/Privacy Act Services, said the increase in letters asking about UFOs has been "significant," forcing the office to hire several additional staff members. --- Best regards, - Blair Cummins ufoblair@hotmail.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 16:12:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:06:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >>Crop Circles: A plea for sanity >>This week the British media, via several TV reports, national >>news, major newspaper articles and ongoing hype have revived the >>long flagging field of crop circle research through coverage >>that puts this 'mystery' into the context of UFOs and aliens. ><snip> >>We simply wanted you to have the benefit of our collective >>experience to see why we do not believe that crop circles have >>anything to do with aliens and why, in our opinion, this is now >>a solved mystery. >>UFOIN Hi All, This is great news and well presented as usual by Jenny, I think at this clear up rate UFOIN will soon solve most unexplained mysteries! Well done!! Roy.. " A World of shared opinions helps shape 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 11:37:22 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:06:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Kaeser >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:38:29 -0700 (PDT) >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> >Subject: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri >To: updates@sympatico.ca, rebeccask@yahoo.com >These are extracts (and NOT extracted very well, I might add) >from the State (Missouri) Committee on Social Workers. >I'm not anything but another idiot with a computer (READ: Not a >lawyer or even a social worker, however, I am, like Ann Mulvey, >somewhat social and sometimes, even a worker), but I do think >that these extracts reflect relevant points to this ongoing >hullaballo regarding John Carpenter, who is a licensed clinical >social worker in the state of Missouri. >It was most difficult for me to cut and paste from the Adobe >Acrobat reader to this Yahoo!message, and I apologize for the >formatting and if anything is out of order. I sort of lost steam >somewhere during this cut and paste job and that is why you >might find it a little difficult to read -- it is not too much >easier to read at: >http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/csr/4csr.htm#4-263 >but, if you are interested, by all means, read the rules and >regulations. >I have been unable to reply to much of this debate on UpDates >due to a myriad of reasons, but I think a number of you are >mistaken -- I won't mention any names. From reading these >statutes, I feel a good number of them have been violated, but >I'm not in full possession of all the facts. It doesn't matter >whether Carpenter was a hobbyist, the fact remains that he is a >licensed clinical social worker and he is one 24 hours a day, 7 >days a week, 52 weeks a year (as long as he has that license). >It's not like he can turn his license backward and say, today, >I'll just not follow the rules. That license elevates the >license holders responsibility and duty of care. >It also doesn't matter whether Carpenter redacted the >information he sold to Bigelow. Ethically, he had no right to >sell _any_ information without consent (and _that_ might not >even be enough, if you read the following extracts carefully). >Ann Mulvey (may God bless her and John Velez) presented, what I >believe to be the most horrifying information last week when she >said that she had called the State of Missouri and learned that >no complaints had been filed against Carpenter. Horrifying, yes. >It's absolutely amazing to me that the abductees who know that >their information has been sold have not complained to the >licensing board, yet, allegedly, they have contacted a lawyer, >albeit, unsuccessfully. This says to me that these people are >seriously misguided. Go ahead and jump on me, I don't care. But >if you feel wronged you go and make a complaint and I would have >thought that the lawyer would have seen to that little detail. >Instead, you let Carpenter go about his business for years and >he has not had to answer to _anyone_ that can prevent him from >doing this same stuff again. >IF YOU FEEL YOU WERE HARMED FILE A COMPLAINT!!! That should not >affect any legal action you might take, in fact, it might even >help your legal standing! File it before it's to late, if it's >not already! >Enjoy, >Rebecca >Division 263—State Committee for Social Workers Chapter >3—Ethical Standards/Disciplinary Rules 4 CSR 263-3.010 Scope of >Coverage and Organization <snip> Rebecca, I agree with your observations, and also hope that complaints are indeed filed so that this matter can be heard in the proper setting. Carpenter's actions in this have raised serious questions regarding his professional behavior, which need to be dealt with in an official manner. However, having spoken to several professionals about this situation (in general terms) it isn't always a black and white issue. There are numerous factors that are not contained in that section of the State code that may also pertain to this situation, as well as case law in Missouri that may have bearing on a potential legal case. But complaints have to be filed and witnesses have to be willing to provide testimony to have this unraveled. While I don't know the status of the "official" investigation, I know that MUFON is keeping tabs on what is being said about this case. I would again encourage State and Regional Directors to contact MUFON Headquarters and seek an official position statement regarding this sale in particular, and the sale of abduction files in general. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:15:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:06:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hello All, >>Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >>been properly warned. :) >>Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >>researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >>views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >>apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >>part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >>the UFO "community" in general. ><snip> Josh writes: >Hello John, >I can't answer for major abductee researchers but I can answer >for my own humble non abductee self. I said nothing because it >seemed to be an invitation to get swallowed in the maelstrom. One of the things that literally castrates us and robs us of any opportunity to take effective action has to do with discussions on e-mail lists turning into "maelstroms! From day one trying to keep the focus on getting the abductees in this case informed has been like pulling teeth. "Others" (gary Hart for one) have focused in on Carpenter himself. I have _repeatedly_ stated that my one and only concern here is that (even if it's three years later) the abductees be shown the respect of being informed (by the researcher they reported to) that he had sold their files and that he provides them with a written assurance that their files were properly sanitized. What is wrong with that I'll never know. I have one bandicoot raving about how I'm destroying Carpenter and all of ufology and others accusing me of creating a "maelstrom." Please tell me how my simple but relevant questions and requests on behalf of the abductees constitutes any of the above? I have been every bit as 'vocal' about protecting JC from a public kangaroo court as I have been about asking him to show his clients the respect they deserve. I have fought harder than most to keep this from becoming a personal anything against JC himself. It appears that the "maelstrom" is being created by "others" who nothing other to contribute but disruptive distractions. I'll say it one more time, "Getting Carpenter" is not what this is all about. "Getting the abductees informed" is. They have a right to know and they have a right to (if _they_ choose to) demand assurances from Mr. Carpenter that their anonymity has been maintained. They will also be able to decide for themselves if they wish to pursue any civil action against him. That is _solely_ up to them. They can also choose to do nothing at all. (*Get ready here it comes again!) The _point_ is, the abductees cannot make those choices/determinations for themselves _if_they_don"t_know! All I have been attempting to do is to get Mr.Carpenter to inform his own clients (the people that provided him with the very reports that he sold for cash) that their files have been sold to NIDS/Bigelow and,...that they were _all_ properly sanitized. There seems to be some tremendous "problem" in many people's minds about that. Why anyone has problems with the reasonable requests (as stated above) that I and others have been making is beyond me. >But now feels like the right time as I would like to have these >storm winds subside. Me too. As soon as John Carpenter shows those abductees the respect that he should have shown them three years ago by informing them that he sold their files and providing assurances regarding their anonymity this whole thing can go away as far as I'm concerned. Until then I suggest that you keep your finger poised over the delete button in your e-mail program. Unless EBK slaps a gag on me, JC is going to have to actually 'inform them' before I let this go. >You and Ann had the assumption the abductee files were >sold non-redacted. Not "assumption" - fact! In at least one case (that Carpenter himself has admitted to) a file was submitted un-sanitized. Others (Hart and some of the abductees involved) claim that there are more. I have no proof that there was more than one file that went out that way. There _was_ 'one' for sure though, (as per Carpenter himself.) Which prompted me to ask him: What kind of assurances was he prepared to provide to his other 139 clients that their files were _all_ properly sanitized? He has never acknowledged or responded in any way to that all important question. Note please: I did not indict him or accuse him of _anything._ All I have asked is what kind of assurances he is prepared to provide his own clients. Nothing more, nothing less. Again, _not_ an unreasonable question. >Quite a while back Walt Andrus stated that those files were from >Carpenter's personal research and had nothing to do with MUFON. >I don't see where MUFON has any responsibility at this point. I find it amusing how people will arrive at conclusions that conveniently leave out pertinent information/facts. 1. The fact that JC sold client files at all raises serious questions of ethics and client rights. 2. The fact that he did not ask his clients if it was ok with them if he sells their files to a research institution (and that's giving NIDS the benefit of the doubt) also raises questions involving ethics and client rights to know when such a transaction is being contemplated. 3. More relevant to your comment above: At the time of the sale of the abductee files JC was the "head" of the MUFON Databank project. That raises the question: How do we know that files that were donated to the databank by other resaerchers were not included in the lot of 140? A valid question again- no? Again, I'm not "accusing" JC of anything. I'm merely asking the logical question; How do we know there were no databank files included? Because _he_ says so? Sorry, not good enough. MUFON needs to conduct an internal investigation. It would be appreciated by us "outsiders" if they would share the results of that investigation and how it was conducted with the rest of us, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over waiting for that to happen. >They don't have an ethical liability because the files were >redacted, according to Carpenter. So what kind of assurances is he prepared to provide his clients (written maybe?) that he properly sanitized _all_ of the remaining 139 files? Gee, I guess he'd have to "inform them" first. D'oh! that's what I've been asking for all along!!!!! Beat me!!!!! >John, I would like to know if you accept John Carpenter's word >that the files were redacted? Not at all. The fact that one went out un-sanitized raises the question: "How many others went out that way." He offers the very lame excuse that it was ok that the one file went out that way because it belonged to his ex-wife. (?!) A statement like that coming from a "professional" sets off _my_ alarm even if it doesn't jingle yours. Under different circumstances I "might" take JC at his 'word.' Under these circumstances, no. >Do you respect NIDS's privacy position? Yep. But please don't forget that NIDS/Bigelow has 'historically' been an informational blackhole! 'Now' they are painting themselves as this great public service institution. Until this business came up NIDS had been less than forthcoming with the information that it has gathered, or in terms of "informing the public." NIDS is Bigelow! It is _not_ a public or independent University that is required to publish and has to maintain 'accountabilty' - to answer to review boards. I respect NIDS 'anything' about as far as I can throw NIDS. ;) >Do you accept that Carpenter said he is trying to notify the people? I accept that he "said" it, I have no proof that he is "doing" it however. There is a world of difference between 'saying' something and actually 'doing' it. I'll feel better when he actually 'does' it. >Until proven evidence appears that would make this incident of >selling the files show facts that counter the above, can you >folks take a deep breath and ease off this tirade? Tirade? I think I am (and have been) raising valid and important questions. That's _all_ I have been doing. Not "attacking" JC. You base your assessments on mistaken assumptions. Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 06:17:24 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:08:06 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:06:15 -0007 >From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Reading your post prompted me to go back into the archives for review. Below are excerpts from John Velez's July 13th post to NIDS: >UFO UpDates Mailing List >UpDate: Public Request To Robert Bigelow & NIDS >From: John <jvif@spacelab.net> >Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 16:43:33 -0400 >Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 15:07:13 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Public Request To Robert Bigelow & NIDS >Dear Mr. Bigelow, and to Whom it may concern at NIDS, >(Mr. Alexander?) >Each of the individuals should be notified of the transfer of >personal records and reports and given the option of having >their files returned to them upon request. That cannot happen if >the subjects of the files in question are unaware of the >transfer. I appeal to you as a human being and as an abductee >(there but for the grace of God go I) that the individuals in >question be granted this basic right to know that their files >have been sold. >As the situation stands, the subjects themselves are being >denied the right to know, and the right to choose. It just isn't >very fair to those involved. "Subjects" though they may be, >these are the files of 'People' not guinea pigs and therefore >they are deserving of some respect and consideration in the >matter of the transfer of any personal information or reports. <snip> >To do so would be a morally proper and ethical course of action. >Not to mention _tremendous_ public relations for NIDS and Mr. >Bigelow. >I hope that you will give this request consideration. Many >others are also waiting and hoping for a positive response. >Myself, nor anyone else is trying to paint NIDS as a "bad guy" >in this situation. It would be really nice though if NIDS would >choose to 'take the high road' (don a 'White Hat') and ride in >to the rescue of the very folks who are providing you with the >raw material that you need for your own research/studies. <snip> Following are excerpts from the response John Velez received from Dr. Alexander: >UFO UpDates Mailing List >UpDate: Re: Public Request To Robert Bigelow & NIDS - Velez >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:03:40 -0400 >Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 10:28:08 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: Re: Public Request To Robert Bigelow & NIDS - Velez <snip> >1. The files were purchased by Robert Bigelow as a private >person not as NIDS. That is probaly a small point. >2. The key issue would appear to be, did John Carpenter have the >right to sell such cases. The answer appears to be yes. >3. It is not uncommon for persons other than the principal to >have primary rights. For instance, generally photographers have >rights to pictures, not the person being photographed. >4. Medical records are frequently used for research. That is how >large studies are done and trends are discovered. In most cases >the identity of the individuals are protected. That is the >situation here. >5. If a person wishes to take further precautions, that is >usually their responsibility and done before treatment. >If there is any doubt about how these matters are handled, go >read the fine print any any of the forms you fill out at a >doctor's office. I find no reference by Dr. Alexander to the plea to help the 120 families who remain ignorant that their files were sold without their consent to Mr. Bigelow/NIDS. Lacking is also any assurance from Dr. Alexander that the files Mr. Bigelow received were all received sanitized. Also note #2 where Dr. Alexander comments on John Carpenter having the right to sell the cases being a "key issue". Unless John Carpenter comes up with a signed document from the Ethical Standards/Disciplinary Rules of the Missouri State Committee for Social Workers stating he was able to see these 140 clients as a 'hobby', as he claims, I believe that Dr. Alexander's assumption is incorrect. In the begining of my post to you, I quoted your comment about the lack of professionalism in the field of Ufology in the United States. I would respectfully like to suggest, that unless this community, which includes those 120 families who still remain ignorant of this sale, is shown some assistance by NIDS as suggested in the correspondence of John Velez dated July 13th, NIDS will be contributing to the very lack of professionalism which is appalled by so many, including yourself. Those families have the same rights as your family Mr. Kelleher. The silence of so many on this issue does not negate these rights, and those of us who are speaking out publically are doing so because somebody has to do it. God knows I have better things to do than sit here and feel disgusted, but every time I decide to click off I end up reading a post which lights my Irish. These families have the right to know and if my family were among them I would hope somebody would standup for my rights. Please consider this another public appeal for NIDS to assist these families in being notified. Let us know that NIDS stands against unethical behavior in research. Help put some professionalism back into Ufology in the United States where people died for the very rights and respect that we're asking be given to these families. Nobody likes feeling appalled and hypocrites are even less appealing. Sincerely, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:37:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:04:08 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:22:31 -0700 (PDT) >From: Will Bueche <willb1d@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:35:13 -0400 >>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>The apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on >>the part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part >>of the UFO "community" in general. Hi Will, You write: >John, you seem to be assuming that everyone is aware of your >discussion. Chances are slim that all the researchers you >mentioned even surf the net. Chances are not as "slim" as you think. More people 'read' this List than actively participate on it. ;) >If the latter: If a conflict still exists between your point of >view and Carpenter's point of view (perhaps there is no conflict >anymore, if he has agreed he was wrong and is going to track >down everyone and inform them?), a good magazine would give him >a chance to respond to your article in the same issue, which >would make the issue clear. Yes that's right Will; there "is no conflict anymore!" JC has agreed that it was wrong and that the abductees should be informed. Now, if he'd actually 'do it' and provide them with written assurances that their files were properly sanitized he will have gone a long way to putting things right. I'm fighting to get respect for witness/abductee rights from _all_ self proclaimed abduction researchers. I also wanted to put abductees wise to the fact that they better take precautions to protect themselves and their privacy _before_ entering into a relationship with any of these "researchers." Carpenter, Mack, Hopkins, Smith, Jacobs, et al do not have any 'review board' or regulatory agency that they are accountable to. If we don't speak out on our own behalf (abductees) then these kind of (admitted) abuses will not only continue unabated, but they will worsen in nature as time goes by. More people will be violated in this way and a few we haven't even thought of. >You can do a lot to lay out the situation clearly. This mailing >list is anything but clear, so I do not see how you can even ask >for third-parties to comment at this point. It certainly seems >unfair to complain that they have not commented on their own. I can't be any more clear than I have been. 1. I asked JC to inform his clients. 2. He agrees that this is necessary. 3. I have asked JC to provide his clients with something more substantial than his 'word' that he properly redacted _all_ of their files. (Something he has yet to address) 4. I have not asked for anything else, or raised any other questions. I have stuck to my original purpose which was to get some proper respect shown to these witnesses/abductees whose files he sold without their knowledge or consent. Without providing them with guarantees (written or otherwise) that their identities have been protected. Simple, reasonable, and not as "out of line" as the ranters and ravers paint it to be. I have not once gone after JC personally, or called for it. In fact, the exact opposite is true. No one on this list has posted more than me about not allowing this to turn into a kangaroo court. It has been a titanic struggle to keep this whole thing focused on the issue of client rights and client protection. _All_ of the other indictments, and confusion has come from 'others' interjecting their own (at times opportunistic) 'take' on it. I have very _clearly_ stated my questions, concerns, and purposes. What folks do with it in their own heads after that is beyond my ability to control. Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:45:04 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:05:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Velez >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:17:15 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Jones >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: updates@sympatico.ca ><snip> >>And who cares? >>Well I do for one. >So do I. >But John some of us just aren't as vocal as you. No disrespect >mate. I have expressed a concern about Mr Carpenter, as EBK can >confirm. >I would like to say, for all those who haven't yet, most >especially little ole moi, thank you from the bottom of my heart >for bringing this matter to public attention. Hopefully >something _will_ get done. But like everything else, nothing >good ever gets done overnight. Geez Sean, if I don't bleed to death from all the 'claw scratches' I have recieved maybe something 'good' will come out of all this. The second JC notifies those abductees I will sink back into the woodwork. You've been a member of this list almost as long as me. You know that I never step out onto the list unless I have some thing new, of interest/relevant or newsworthy to offer. I don't like the 'publicness' of posting to lists unless I absolutely have something that needs to be shared. This was one of those. :) >>John Velez, Lone Wolf >You are not alone, you are just the hombre with the loudest >voice <g>. My wife has been telling me that for 31 years! <LOL> Thanks for the note dude, it's appreciated. ;) Regards, John Velez, Outraged abductee
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:46:17 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:08:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hello All, >>Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >>been properly warned. :) >>Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >>researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >>views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >>apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >>part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >>the UFO "community" in general. >>Why no one seems to see how ignoring this issue will open the >>doors for more and worse abuses in the future is a mystery and a >>source of tremendous disappointment to me and others. ><snip> >Hello John, >I can't answer for major abductee researchers but I can answer >for my own humble non abductee self. I said nothing because it >seemed to be an invitation to get swallowed in the maelstrom. >But now feels like the right time as I would like to have these >storm winds subside. >I agree with Jimbo Morty's position regarding the Carpenter >affair. You and Ann had the assumption the abductee files were >sold non-redacted. You had not heard from John Carpenter. He has >stated that they were redacted and he also stated that he was >trying his best to contact the clients. I think he did not do so >for three years because he did not think any wrong was done by >selling redacted files to NIDS. >Quite a while back Walt Andrus stated that those files were from >Carpenter's personal research and had nothing to do with MUFON. >I don't see where MUFON has any responsibility at this point. >They don't have an ethical liability because the files were >redacted, according to Carpenter. >The onus is on you to come up with evidence that anything is >otherwise. I feel that you, Ann, and one or two others went from >a whirlwind into a maelstrom by losing any sense of objectivity, >going way too far in your accusations, and getting into a >dogfight. All of you at the same time trying to rip apart the >fabric of John Carpenter like a pack of rabid pit bulls. Things >got pretty ugly here. I suspect that is a major reason why many >investigators did not jump into this fray. >John, I would like to know if you accept John Carpenter's word >that the files were redacted? Do you respect NIDS's privacy >position? Do you accept that Carpenter said he is trying to >notify the people? >Until proven evidence appears that would make this incident of >selling the files show facts that counter the above, can you >folks take a deep breath and ease off this tirade? >Thank you, >Josh Goldstein >A Jew in Germany Good thinking and good reasons to expend all that energy towards the goal of getting at the truth instead of getting at the object of ones' wrath. Josh, you, sir, are a Mensch. By the way, I spent a tremendous amount of time living in Bavaria. I know Germany quite well. My dear uncle, now deceased, spent half a lifetime there, liberating HO ga. train sets, German made semi-automatic handguns, mostly 9mm, and innocents from the camps. One of which he married. I applaud common sense, as I have not an ounce of it. And then, only unless I am in my cups. Which these days, is quite often, as I have switched from drugs to Gripple'n Cream. Anyway, and in fairness to those involved, apper to be claiming more of a moral criminality than a legal one. This tells me that what Carpenter is alleged to have done is now deadly personal. And that personalizing clouds reason. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Henry From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:50:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:11:10 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Henry >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: Updates@sympatico.ca >Crop Circles: A plea for sanity >This week the British media, via several TV reports, national >news, major newspaper articles and ongoing hype have revived the >long flagging field of crop circle research through coverage >that puts this 'mystery' into the context of UFOs and aliens. >Indeed in the Daily Mail (10 August 2000) the noted author Colin >Wilson pens an article 'Why I still believe that aliens created >crop circles' and includes with it an image of a 'grey' being >from an alien abduction book to cement the relationship in the >public imagination. >UFOIN (the UFO Investigators Network) has in its team many of >the pioneer researchers within this field. Chris Rutkowski, who >investigated Canadian circles long before they appeared in the >UK, Ian Mrzyglod and Marty Moffat, from the only UFO >investigation team to study the earliest discovered British >circles (l980) and Paul Fuller and Jenny Randles, who produced >the first ever circle evidence publication and (with Mike >Wootten - our web site designer) arranged the first conference >in l985. They also co-authored the book 'Crop Circles: A Mystery >Solved' in l990 and were the only UFOlogists invited to attend >the one scientific conference ever held to debate circles (in >Oxford) and that involved scientists from Europe, Asia and >America (its proceedings being published in l991) >Given this extensive collective background and a probably unique >track record of association UFOIN has decided to issue a >statement on the matter. <snip> Are you aware of the scientific studies and anomalous material, etc. uncovered by the BLT team (http://www.bltresearch.net ) here in the US? There is clearly a third source of crop circles (a small number) that cannot be explained away by your 2 causes. I agree that the majority are hoaxes and a few are natural, but that still leaves those cases that defy prosaic explanation. I have seen one personally here in Minnesota that displays many anomalous elements. Details and full analysis can be had from: Nancy Talbot BLT Research Team Box 400127 Cambridge, MA 02140 USA Phone: 617-492-0415 Fax: 617-492-0414 There are records of crop circles here in the US that date back to the 60's and 70's. Most of these are "landing site" types, some with burn marks and deep indentations from a very heavy object. You are doing the same injustice to crop circles that Blue Book did to UFO's when they totally ignored the over 700 unexplained cases in their files. Whitewash doesn't cut it anymore. Joel Henry Minnesota MUFON MN MUFON website: http://www.visi.com/~jhenry/index.html ------------------------------------------------------------------- Minnesota MUFON Field Investigator, Minnesota MUFON Journal Editor, Minnesota MUFON Webmaster Minnesota MUFON Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~jhenry/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:46:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:15:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:34:41 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - Cecchini >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 02:07:59 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Hello Ron: >>This won't help much, but neither do the incoherent details >>given by Mr. Short-Story. >Sorry about that... that was my fault... I'm not very good >at keeping my promise when I say I'll keep a story short. Hi Bob: I wasn't referring to the length so much as the rambling imprecise character of the witness's account. He would have better luck perhaps if he got as many facts as possible down on a single sheet of paper. There are ways to firm up even an imprecise date for example, by association with other events. I'm just sorry I couldn't find any promising listings that compare favorably in time place and description. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Odors from UFOs From: Colm Kelleher - NIDS <nids@earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:08:23 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:19:16 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Odors from UFOs National Institute for Discovery Science - http://www.nidsci.org NIDS has recently posted a comprehensive article on the analysis of odors from UFOs titled "Odors from UFOs: Deducing Odorant Chemistry and Causation from Available Data" on the website at: http://www.nidsci.org. The article, written by Anthony Rullan, an industrial chemist, is perhaps the first rigorous treatment of the subject of analysis of odors from UFOs. The article explores the various possibilities in analyzing the sulfur containing compunds commonly reported from UFOs.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:00:08 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:17:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >To: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Date: 11 August 2000 17:46 >Subject: Re: UpDate: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >Message text written by "Jenny Randles" >>As I havent investigated these cases I cannot really comment fairly - >although quite a few of the cases I saw from this area whilst BUFORA D of I >were aircraft travelling to Europe on the overflight path or climbing up >out of Stansted.< >Hi Jenny, > Thanks for your response. >Let me assure you that the FT sightings to which I refer are not "aircraft >travelling to Europe.....or climbing out of Stanstead" I am referring to >FTs hovering over the three major NP Stations in the South-East of the UK. >I am surprised that you seem to have little or no knowledge of these which >were first reported c. 1989 and which have been continously 'logged' ever >since. >Just two months ago, Project FT's Field Officer, Tony Spurrier and his >group managed to video a FT over one of these sites in Essex. >Unfortunately, one can only distinguish the three apex lights and no craft >in between. They hope eventually to obtain more sophisticated equipment. >In your message of Aug 2nd 2000 you refered to "huge numbers of close >encounters and abductions on record" and of the Bacup - Todmorden area >being the "busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK (possibly in >Europe) >May I enquire as to who is holding these huge records and why they seem to >be unavailable to most researchers in the UK ? >Perhaps you would place your answer on UFO Updates where you made your >original claims, as many list members are interested in your repsonse. >Kind regards, >Victor J. Kean >Project FT Hi, Thats very interesting information. Thanks I will try to help your requests and am perfectly happy to put my reply onto Updates, Victor. Your memo above (dated 11 August) was click replied to automatically. So if that response went only to you then I assume your memo must have been sent to me only as a private message - which is why, of course, my reply was then routed the same way. Theres no other reason. Firstly, with regards to the FT reports in East Anglia, of course I am aware of them. What I said was that I had not personally investigated these reports so could not comment from that perspective. Thats all. Secondly, the Pennine moorland area has generated reports for centuries . There are records going way back to prove this. The annals of UFO investigation groups in the UK establish it clearly as an active focal point and there have been many books and media features about the window area to date. The UKs only live web cam of a window is based there- hauntedvalley in Longendale - and it has featured in two 'Strange But True?' episodes. The Daily Mail had a full page feature on it a few months ago and indeed BBC TV are making a documentary about the levels of activity in this area right now. A UFO centre is being set up with local tourist industry support in Bacup to take advantage of the existence of this level of activity. So I think its fair to argue that there is ample reason to support this as being a highly active window area. Its hard to imagine there could be more close encounters in any other UK window. So it really wasnt an idea that I just made up. Within a few miles of the Bacup/Todmorden area there have been a veritable litany of CE 3 and CE 4 cases - ranging from the famous Alan Godfrey abduction, through the Ilkley entity photograph and including at least a dozen other cases that readily spring to mind. As for 'many list members' wanting to see my response on this and how they would like to know why they cannot see these records. Who are these concerned people? Nobody has asked me such a question that I recall - because if they had I would have told them what I report here. You and I correspond by snail mail from time to time and I dont recall you ever asking me, either. In any case I doubt its easier to access records on records from any other window in the UK than it is for the Pennines. So the idea that people are saying that these files are 'unavailable' is a bit mystifying. I've certainly documented many of the Pennine cases in my books (such as 'The Pennine UFO Mystery' and 'Star Children'.) The magazine I have edited for 26 years (Northern UFO News) has published in effect an ongoing catalogue of much of this activity since l974. I believe that the BUFORA case files (which must contain Pennine data) are accessible to members - but, of course, because of the Code of Practice protecting witness confidentiality, they are not publicly on show. But theres no deliberate restriction beyond the welfare of witnesses (an issue Updates has rightly been concerned about of late and which the voluntary imposition of the Code of Practice in the UK necessarily requires deeper obligations on our UFO community with regards to open access of our records) NUFON (the Northern UFO Network) has a data file collection of many cases from the region collected via assorted local groups since the NUFON alliance was created in l974. Basically these are the cases featured in Northern UFO News (which I know you get Victor and have done now for some years ). This magazine sets out the accessibility of these files - indeed its on the back page of most issues alongside the contact address list - where it explains where these archives are located and how to arrange to see them. These case files have for years been in a city centre (secure) venue in Manchester freely available for study by anyone proving themselves to be a bona fide researcher. Prior arrangement and supervision is necessary - in order to protect witness confidentiality and respect the Code of Practice - but we do try to assist serious research by making the data available and UFOlogists have come from as far afield as the US and Australia to look at data in the NUFON records. So if UK researchers are struggling to find this data its odd that people in New York seemingly are not! But all serious UFOlogists have to do to go see these files is contact NARO - who currently caretake the NUFON files - arrange a supervised visit - and abide by the witness protection restrictions on them. I gather that these files may have to be relocated from their present position soon, but efforts are being made to find a new suitable home that is in the north west and equally accessible to researchers to continue a file access policy that NUFON has operated for decades and which is certainly not what I think anyone could fairly term 'unavailable'. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:46:31 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:29:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:09:01 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Mr. Mortellaro, ><snip> >>And why indeed is it necessary for me to believe you, Ann >>or anyone else. You have given your _opinion_ that these >>people have been hurt, Carpenter has given his _word_ that >>he never revealed personal information. Heretofore, Carpenter's >>word and reputation have been unsullied and unblemished. Why >>should I not believe him? Why should you not believe him? >Hel-loooo!! The man sold 140 files for a hundred bucks a piece. >Some of those files were files of children. You really need to >take a step back and consider the laws that were broken here. My >advice is for you to call Department of Health, Health >Professionals Quality Assurance Division. They can tell you >where you can get copies of the rules and regulations governing >LCSWs in their states. Dear Katherine, Listers and EBK, Carpenter stated to me that he redacted all the files. He also stated to me that the only file which was not redacted was his ex-wife's. And she was the one who submitted it. He also explained why that was. But I shall leave it to him to explain in other venues. I don't need the names and addresses of the various DOH or HPQAD's. My attorney obtained all of which were relevant. And please note that you are stating things which Carpenter countered. The files were _his_, not MUFON's. When gathering these case histories, he was practicing as a UFO Abduction researcher, not an LSW. If you wish to state (and you may be correct from a strictly moral point of view) that Carpenter had a moral obligation to protect the identities of the abductees, then you would be absolutely on the money. But _not_ if the case histories were redacted. Not if there was no traceability to the individuals, children or otherwise. These are my only points, and your post seems to avoid addressing any of them. ><snip> > >>Why do you not trash mine? As for being self centered, I think >>not. I am very terribly sorry that Carpenter must endure this >>harrassment. That is what bothers me. And I have continuously >>voiced that opinion. Carpenter is not guilty of revealing >>personal information. He said so. You beleived that since his >>ex-wife told you that her file was not redacted, then all the >>files must not have been redacted. That was an assumption on >>your and others' part. I do not think this to be so. Not unless >>or until it can be proven. It is not truth until then. >More doublespeak. You said all of the files were redacted. Now >you say that the file of Carpenter's ex-wife was _not_ redacted. >You can't have it both ways. Make up your mind. Were _all_ the >files redacted or not? Please Katherine, read what I wrote not once but probably dozens of times. I wrote that "All the files with the exception of his wife's" were redacted. And to answer your direct question. No. All the files were not redacted. Merely his wife's and at his wife's own hand. All this because of a nasty and bitter divorce. These facts and they are facts, should mitigate your angst. ><snip> >>My biggest concern is the continous posting of >>mail telling Carpenter to do what may not be necessary if he is >>truthfull about how the case histories were sent. >Carpenter can't keep his lies straight and you're falling for >them. Perhaps, Katherine. But I think, I could be wrong about this, but I think that you have addressed only one side of the issue, without looking at the other. ><snip> >>What other kind of abductee is there other than "self >>professed?" I preface the word abductee by the word >>"perceived" every time when it refers to me. >I am deeply saddened by your apathy. You claim to be an >abductee, yet you do not see the dangerous precedent Carpenter >has set. To what apathy do you refer? I am apathetic when it comes to taking a position on this issue. I am not defending Carpenter. I am defending his right to a fair hearing after all the evidence is in. From what I have been told, I choose to believe that Carpenter may very well not be guilty of wrongdoing. I may be wrong in that assumption. But what is right is right. And right now, right is not continuing to waste this man for things which have an explanation. There will be time enough later, to waste him, if indeed he is found guilty. >Carpenter's actions, the selling of those files, >sanitized or not, leaves every abductee in every city in every >country in the entire world open and vulnerable to every UFO >researcher, every abductee advocate. We, all of us - even you - >were abused beyond belief by Carpenter's actions. Just as we >were abused during our experiences, we are now abused by the >very same people who profess to be on our side. Katherine, again think please, on my position in this matter. I will not continue to repeat my views on the selling of case histories which have no traceability to the abductees. That part of the debate is over, as we have the word only of a very angry ex-wife who had promised to ruin her ex-husband. You never saw any of the evidence, evidence of which you ignore even the possibilty of existing, evidence which requires such harrassment as he has been getting should be there for all to see. It is not. Who thsn is wrong here? And who are wronged? Carpenter? Maybe. But the people who are wronged _big time_ are you and I. The abductees. All of us have asked researchers to share case histories and work together and now, all of that is pretty much trashed. Gonzo. Maybe for a long time. If so, and if Carpenter is innocent, then there are a lot more people who have been injured in this matter than just him. >>As for giving these 140 souls the repsect they deserve, listen >>up Velez, according to Carpenter they were given the respect >>they deserved, their names were BLACKED OUT! >As you yourself have said in this post, not all the names were >sanitized, and you're just as uncaring and unfeeling as John >Carpenter. If, as you say, the only file that went unsanitized >was Mr. Carpenter's ex-wife, then you're sanctioning abuse. I don't think so and I don't think anyone else thinks so either. ><snip> >>Now here is an interesting falsehood. Hmmm. _Handsfull_ of "mood >>altering" drugs?? I do not. But this is a very important >>revelation, John Velez. For the only mood altering drug which >>you know about is Prozac, which I took while I was a member of >>AIC. I posted that to AIC. You are, undoubtedly refering to >>Prozac. Since the only time I mentioned this was under the >>privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which >>should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. >Who opened the door here? Who suggested Quaaludes? I already apologized for doing that. Was there reason to share personal information and _false_ personal information about me to boot? What about the fact that any information given to AIC was priviledged and confidential How can you not see that there exists with AIC, the same thing which it's webmaster has accused Carpenter of doing? He shared confidential information which was falsified and expanded in order to make a point and denigrate me. Is it OK because John was working as an advocate and had to play hard ball? Come on girl. Get a grip on some reality here. I am working as an advocate for fair play. The losers, my dewar angry lady, in this matter are we who perceived that we have been abducted by funny-lookin short dudes with big heads and large almond eyes. We will always be the losers too. Even if Carpenter is found innocent or guilty or not found at all. We will lose. And you had better understand that I am really pissed over that. >>You have violated a confidence, something that you swore you >>would never do. >Ah yes. Now I see the M.O. here. How very typical. As long as >you're not affected in any way, shape or form, it's okay to >sanction the use and abuse others. On the contrary. Had you taken the time to carefully read what I wrote, in it's entirety, I said that I forgave John. And I do. What I did was to point to a duplicity which is not salved by his anger over the damage done to the abductees in this case. In heaven's name, please read my post carefully. In truth I have always respecte John Velez for his work. He is tireless, he has given up considerable income opportunities to devote his life to being an advocate for us. And he helped my ass out of an abyss. But if I perceive that he is wrong or on the wrong track, I am obliged to say so. This was intended to help him and all of us but it was perceived to be a challenge and obstacle to his work and to him. It was the wrong perception. Silly. I am affected. Which is why I am involved. Don't you think that I am placing myself in a very unpopular position here? If not then try harder. ><snip> >>... you do not have the right to use things against me which you >learned when I was associated with you. >I submit to you that your anger is misdirected. Carpenter >betrayed _every_ abductee worldwide. ><snip> >>You accuse me of projecting. I accuse you of personalizing. This >>is closely related to paranoia. >Were you to share in the profits of Carpenter's book? The one, >he said, in which the "paranoia of the abductees" was >squelching? Oh yes, he did indeed say that. >Turn on the lights, Mr. Mortellaro. Truth is the light of life. It's gotten pretty dark inside of Mobile, with the Memphis blues again. OK, OK. So shoot me for quoting Dylan again. But just what the hell is one to say over such meaningless words as I have just read? With great respect for you, Ann, John and some others. Jim PS: Have you or anyone else traced the potential relationships between and among the antagonists in this play? No, not the debators, but those who did the deeds... John C., his wife, others? When the truth comes out, you are gonna be one surprised little lady.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 19:06:41 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:31:38 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Josh, <snip> >I feel that you, Ann, and one or two others went from >a whirlwind into a maelstrom by losing any sense of objectivity, >going way too far in your accusations, and getting into a >dogfight. All of you at the same time trying to rip apart the >fabric of John Carpenter like a pack of rabid pit bulls. Things >got pretty ugly here. I suspect that is a major reason why many >investigators did not jump into this fray. Where have I gone way too far in my accusations? In the early stages of my participation in this discussion, I learned the lesson that verification of what is being posted was essential. If you think I've accused anybody of anything here that wasn't backed up with information that I verified, I'd like to know where it is. <snip> >Until proven evidence appears that would make this incident of >selling the files show facts that counter the above, can you >folks take a deep breath and ease off this tirade? What is so hard to understand here? 120 families have the right to know that their files were sold. They have the right to know this so that they can exercise their legal options along with contacting the Missouri State Committee for Social Workers. If they don't know they can't exercise their rights. Even if Carpenter sold them sanitized, the above issues are still valid. What more is required to be able to speak out and support these families? For further clarification of this, I suggest you go back and read Rebecca's message which goes into greater detail on the ethical expectations of Licensed Clinical Social Workers in the State of Missouri. Meanwhile, know that I would appreciate any criticisms that you have concerning me, coming directly to me. This message is "proven evidence"' that I would offer you the same respect. Thanks, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 00:14:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:36:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:53:08 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:21:19 -0400 >>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>< >Greetings Steve, >>Let's pretend that Carpenter was not a medical professional, and >>sold files to NIDS. Should our concerns be any different? I >>suspect our outrage would be just as harsh if it was proven that >>he had violated the privacy of his research subjects by >>providing their identities to the buyer. But, if the files were >>redacted (i.e. the identifying information removed) I think >>most would view this transfer as acceptable. >Were you aware that some of the files sold were files of >children? What if the files were not redacted? Carpenter and his >supporters can't even keep their stories straight. Some claim >all were redacted but one file belonging to Carpenter's ex-wife. >Some say only a few were redacted. Here's a what if for you - >what if one of the files that were not redacted belonged to >_your_ wife or to _your_ children? That's a horse of a different >color isn't it since you're directly involved in this horrid >mess. If the files were not redacted this becomes an entirely different issue. I've seen only one post from Carpenter regarding this matter so I'm not sure where the multiple stories you reference are coming from. If there is any proof that the files were not redacted, it would be of interest. >>IMO, Carpenter's alleged unprofessional behavior should be >>dealt with at the State level by the State Board. >On that we agree. >>It is up to those who feel wronged to file complaints and help to >>prevent others from being treated in this same way. I would also >>note that the lack of any official complaints, following this >>on-going debate on the Internet, only lends support to the >>contention that no wrong has been committed. >There's a logical explanation for that - they don't know. No one >told them at the time of the sale (3+ years ago). To the best of >my knowledge, 99% of them still do _not_ know their files were >sold for $100 a piece. We really don't know if they know or not, but I suspect more are aware of this than we've seen in this discussion. Assuming that those who worked with Carpenter are aware of that fact, they can also probably assume that their file was among those sold. I agree that Carpenter should make every effort to contact those individuals and let them know that their information has been included in the NIDS archive. But, a number of those involved in abduction research have expressed how difficult is becomes trying to track down former research subjects. We are a very mobile society and often the ties between researcher and subject are very limited. I appreciate that some have indicated that it's very easy to locate people via the Internet, but it's often not that simple for those who cannot access specialized databases that are inaccessible to the public at large. ><snip> >>Without anecdotal witness statements, most UFO >>researchers would have very little to write about in their >>publications. As we know, the names of witnesses are usually >>changed to afford them some privacy, and I would acknowledge >>that it would be very unusual for them not to be notified of >>their inclusion. >If I had been asked, I would have said no. Fortunately for me >(or perhaps I should say 'fortunately for Carpenter'), my file >is not in the 140 files that were sold. >The civil rights of those whose files were included in that sale >were violated. They didn't have the chance to say yes or no. >That right was taken away from them by Carpenter. I'm not sure what rights we're talking about here. The right to privacy would be covered if the files are redacted. The story and information contained in the files is gathered by the researcher, and his interpretation gives it added value. In Carpenter's case there are regulations that pertain to Social Workers, and he may have additional requirements regarding the sale of information he has gathered. But this is a legal interpretation that should be handled by the State Board. >>Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending Carpenter's actions in >>this, and believe that he made a serious error in judgment. >Understatement alert! <g> >>But since this is a UFO forum that is focused on research and the >>sharing of information, I'm not sure that we should become a >>kangaroo court and debate the legal ramifications of his actions >>in regard to Missouri State regulations. >Steve, Carpenter set a dangerous precedent by _selling_ the >files. He compounded that error by not notifying the 140 - >remember there are children in that number - that their files >were about to change hands at the bargain basement price of $100 >each. >Please answer this one question for me: I'm an abductee. Whom do >I trust? Carpenter's sale of files to NIDS is the first sale that we are aware of that specifically involves abductees, but the UFO Museum in Roswell has purchased UFO archives in the past and who knows what other information has changed hands for cash in this field. UFO archives often contain witness testimony from individuals who don't want their identity disclosed, as well as statements by children given with permission of their parents. Researchers will usually honor a privacy request for publication, but the files usually contain as much identifying information as possible to aid in follow up research. As for your question regarding "Trust", let me begin by stating that (to my knowledge) I am not an abductee. As a result, I am hesitant to give advice to someone who has experienced an event that I cannot even begin to imagine. Trust, for me, has always been something that is earned, and not granted to someone merely because of their training or status. Abductees (more often than not) already believe they have lost some control over their lives and have been violated, and I would imagine that developing trust might become even more difficult with that experience in one's past. Carpenter's sale of files has underscored that lack of control in the eyes of many, which I believe is one reason why this has developed into an Internet discussion. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Meiners From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:44:06 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:41:16 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Meiners >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:11:55 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:25:37 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>I do want to adress one or two things you accuse me of however. >>You posted: >>>Since the only time I mentioned this was under the >>>privacy of the AIC list, then you are divulging something which >>>should have stayed in your files, not tauted out your mouth. <snip> I have been reading and reading everything that comes through my e-mail. There is a huge division here and it just isn't accomplishing anything. Nothing at all except for friend turning on friend. Remember the saying, divided we fall; united we stand? It is very applicable here. The very core of our safety and anonymity is at stake. No matter how you look at it, the individuals need to be told about a breach, whether for monetary gain or what whatever reasons. The reaction should be theirs, the indignity for everyone, ours. But before we can go anywhere, we need to start together, in the same direction, not necessarily someone's throat. A lot of feelings have been hurt, a lot more are about to be hurt. Trusts have been violated. We need to heal before we have nothing left...it may be what they want, but do we? We need whatever friends we have... we cannot jeopardize that because of someone's indiscretion. We need to heal, and that healing has to start with Carpenter. He needs to start it, then those that can give a helping hand in keeping it going. We need to stop beating our heads against the wall. Lets get to the door, and then heal. Private opinion only... this is beginning to look like our family site which is 87% kids! The only thing they can agree on is knocking someone around, even though they may need it, it doesn't have to be us to do it. But, we do need to go forward and we do need to heal. Okay, Carpenter... ollie, ollie oxen free! Come out! Come out, wherever you are! Jean
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 05:09:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:42:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Mulvey >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:38:29 -0700 (PDT) >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> >Subject: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri >To: updates@sympatico.ca, rebeccask@yahoo.com Hi Rebecca, >It was most difficult for me to cut and paste from the Adobe >Acrobat reader to this Yahoo!message, and I apologize for the >formatting and if anything is out of order. I sort of lost steam >somewhere during this cut and paste job and that is why you >might find it a little difficult to read -- it is not too much >easier to read at: >http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/csr/4csr.htm#4-263 I appreciate you going to this trouble. I know it was a pain from the portions I saved and copied to my word processing program. You are indeed a worker.<g> >It doesn't matter whether Carpenter was a hobbyist, the fact >remains that he is a licensed clinical social worker and he is >one 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year (as long >as he has that license). It's not like he can turn his license >backward and say, today, I'll just not follow the rules. That >license elevates the license holders responsibility and duty of >care. >It also doesn't matter whether Carpenter redacted the >information he sold to Bigelow. Ethically, he had no right to >sell _any_ information without consent (and _that_ might not >even be enough, if you read the following extracts carefully). Thanks for putting this all in one sensible post. Hopefully this will eliminate further drama regarding these issues putting the spotlight on the people who need it most - those remaining families who still don't know. <snip> >It's absolutely amazing to me that the abductees who know that >their information has been sold have not complained to the >licensing board, yet, allegedly, they have contacted a lawyer, >albeit, unsuccessfully. This says to me that these people are >seriously misguided. I haven't called back since I last checked, but I did repeat what the gal on the phone said for clarification. The answer at that time was "none". She sounded equally surprised at the surprise in my voice. Maybe others have called since then. >Go ahead and jump on me, I don't care. You're in good company. Thanks again for your efforts and for the blessing. Can't get enough of those these days. ;) 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: NSA's Plan Backfires - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 07:35:13 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:45:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: NSA's Plan Backfires - Kaeser >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:50:19 -0700 (PDT) >From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com> >Subject: NSA's Plan Backfires >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Greetings list - >Source: The Seattle Times >http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/nation-world/html98/ufos >10_20000810.html >Agency's plan backfires as Web site boosts UFO queries >by Laura Sullivan >The Baltimore Sun >Two years ago, the National Security Agency (NSA) began posting >previously classified documents on its Web site to deflect the >growing number of requests each year for information about >flying saucers and space aliens. But the plan backfired. Actually, the NSA was directed to publish commonly requested FOIA documents in electronic format under guidelines established by the Clinton Administration. Other E-FOIA sites include those of the FBI and the Joint Chiefs, and all were established in 1997 shortly after the Presidential directive was issued. For the agencies there is some hope that the public's curiosity will answered without additional requests, but as the article notes that hasn't been the case. <snip> Anyone interested in seeing the NSA documents being discussed can go to: http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo.html 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 09:46:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:47:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:19:47 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:09:31 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:59:31 -0500 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE - Clark >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:21:32 -0500 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:19:19 -0500 >>>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>>>>Subject: Re: Gotlib & BAE [was: Selling Files] >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>My word. You must have a lot of time on your hands. I apologize >>for not writing The UFO Encyclopedia that Dennis Stacy would >>have written. Dennis, >You're absolutely right. I do have too much time on my hands. >Enough to realize, at least, that none of my above remarks >address you personally, but rather certain issues and emphases >of the work in question, which I assume to be fair game. You can >address same or not, as you see fit. I have already addressed all of the issues you have raised, everything from Gotlib to Dr. X to Derenberger and contactees. To no avail, it appears. >Or you can make snide and disparaging remarks about me >personally, as you've chosen to do (and which take less time). You may disagree with my decisions, but your refusal to accept my good-faith answers to your questions, or even to acknowledge that I have made them, is wearying and even a tad offensive. On the whole I'm satisfied with the way The UFO Encyclopedia turned out. Were I to do it over again, I would probably change a few things here and there. But none would be along the lines you suggest. In the areas we've discussed, I have no problem with my treatment, and you are not going to change my mind or make me feel defensive, if that's your purpose, about my choices. You've already expressed your views, and I have expressed mine in turn, and I fail to see what purpose is served by our continuing to beat this dead horse. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 11:24:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: Updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >It is our opinion that the crop circle phenomenon has been >extremely well studied, its nature has been largely defined >through scientific methods and the latest revival of it is >nonsensical, inappropriate and completely unneccesary - >especially given its baseless association with alien imagery. >As such the evidence needs to be seen in context. >We simply wanted you to have the benefit of our collective >experience to see why we do not believe that crop circles have >anything to do with aliens and why, in our opinion, this is now >a solved mystery. <snip> Hi Jenny, From my personal experience I agree with much what you have written, and in the context of this a proverb comes to my mind: It is bad if you are blind,it is worse if you don't want to see. On the other hand, I would like to address the same proverb to you (or to the ones who wrote the UFOIN statement). All scientific approaches to solve the mystery have failed, there you are right. Science looked for known phenomena, found some, some fit in, some apparatus worked, some not. So science compared to what was known and to what could be explained - and explained it, as you did. So we are back at Dr. Meaden's time. Are we really? You must have recognized that the Phenomenon down there in Wiltshire (as the centre)has changed, has increased in quality. If you don't, please read on. Hans-Juergen Kyborg and I are studying the Phenomenon since more than ten years and on the spot in England and in Germany. As you might know, we have done (and will do so in 2001) an experiment every year we've been there. First,in 1991,we created a pictogram and encoded a question. The base of this question was pure astronomy. We received an answer within three days, accompanied by paranormal (not meteorological)phenomena in the area, witnessed by many. At that time hoaxing was in its child's shoes and not comparable to what it is nowadays. Our answer pictograms Preshute Down and Barbury Castle and another unknown small circle in Alton Barnes were never claimed by any hoaxer team. Do you remember the rumors about and the search for the legendary "Alpha Team" which was the synonym for the genuine Force? With the help of this answer we were able to do something reasonable and identified a special region in the sky - it is a long but fascinating story which I will avoid here to tell because of limited space. (Meanwhile we have written a book about that (in German: "Die Antwort des Orion")). The next year, the term "Energy" was brought to our attention by our next experiment. Since that year the Phenomenon went to the next stage and stopped laying down crops and manifested only by energy structures - which were dowsable. Again: the subtile energies of the real crop circle Phenomenon can only be deteced by Dowsing Rods -- or to say more clearly: by humans who hold two antennas - a perfect biological receiver. This is both something old and new. Current scientific methods and acceptance must fail at the moment because science has not yet developed enough. Something was introduced by an unknown Intelligence which is incompatible to the momentary scientfic understanding: humans can detect and interact with electromagnetic fields to which no human build device is able to respond to. Hoaxers are part of this Phenomenon and you can't be shure that some formation's idea wasn't _implanted_ into some of the team's minds. Could you accept that? By the years, under continuous communication and cooperation with the genuine energy circle makers, it was shown to us and we have learned that the Intelligence out there used fine and deliberate energy grids inside which many of the reported phenomena happend. These grids are _more-dimensional_ structures with various qualities and functions. We all are embedded in those grids which seem to represent the basic structure of the Cosmos. Our brain seems not to be the place where memory is located. Memory seems to be embedded in these grids, everything that happens produces a change in the surroundig grid which itself is nothing else than spacetime. Our brain is a fine device to tune in these grids at any time and to recall these memories. Memory is saved outside. Stimulation of various centres of brains in the laboratories produced results. This must not mean that the informaton the probant reported was stored in his brain, the part of his/its brain was switched on (like a radio, to take that picture) and received waves (like a radio,)was tuned in for a moment to the grid where the person related information is stored. Because we all live in "Network Worlds" it is easy (with a little practice)to get information from everywhere -- and to go anywhere. These are only a few results of our research of a phenomenon that you have declared "to be solved". With all respect to you as a well known and experienced researcher, maybe we have looked a bit deeper inside and then (!) -- other than you -- from the inside outwards. For us, the "UFOIN statement" is a Flatland Bulletin. Best wishes and forgive my poor English, Joachim Koch & Hans-Juergen Kyborg, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Another MJ-12 Source From: Bob Huff <bobhuff@tidalwave.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 12:34:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:53:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Another MJ-12 Source Hi, Met another person who worked at the TRW facility in Reston, Va who had been briefed into MJ-12. The individual's career started with the CIA's Directorate of Operations for a brief while before being employed by a variety of contractors working classified programs. His exposure to MJ12 was minimal. While at TRW, he was tasked to work on a classified proposal. Before he could proceed he was briefed on the recipient - MJ12. Based upon the nature of the proposal, a facet of MJ12 is dedicated to providing secure, 'indistinguishable' clandestine communications and surveillance devices to agents in the field. Apparently, we have the ability, for example, to modify a laptop PC that can encrypt and communicate a message to a satellite. However, the cool thing is that the laptop is in all aspects _indistinguishable_ from a normal PC. The PC could fall in an experts hand and it would virtually impossible to discern it's clandestine mission. In the example spoken to, the individual would enter a certain keystroke, a window would appear, the message type, encrypted and sent to a satellite at a certain time. Sounds very much like the manner Dan Sherman communicated his comms as described in his book 'Above Black' - www.aboveblack.com. The individual agree with the other TRW's person's account of MJ12 and its missions. I still believe that MJ12 is a NSA program buried in the Agency's 'C' Group. The 'C' Group is response for offense and defensive communications systems. So though they may be headquartered at NORAD, NSA is still the controlling agency. I believe that some of the current MJ12 projects are being worked under the cover of ongoing project named 'Air Glow' at the Reston, VA facility. Other bits of data: - Each day at Buckley AFB about 5-6 Terabytes of data is downloaded from space-based platforms - The US routinely asks Canada or Great Britain to monitor US citizens in CONUS - Black project budgets can be huge. Individual knew of a $40B, 10 year black program being worked for the Navy. SOSUS II? Best Regards, Bob Huff "Given a choice between two theories, take the one which is funnier."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - De La Vega From: Egio Hernan De La Vega Buonanno <egiohern@idirect.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 14:46:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:59:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - De La Vega >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: Updates@sympatico.ca >Crop Circles: A plea for sanity >This week the British media, via several TV reports, national >news, major newspaper articles and ongoing hype have revived the >long flagging field of crop circle research through coverage >that puts this 'mystery' into the context of UFOs and aliens. <snip> You know that I have never sent not even one comment to your List, but I enjoy a lot the diversity of points of view and opinions on the UFO subject and other extranormal phenomena and events that the readers kindly offer to a large attending multitude. In the last few years I have considered and analyzed messages whose authors really were able to show how deeply they had understood the complexity and also simplicity of these phenomena. I have also read other messages whose authors do not hesitate to submerge themselves into the most ridiculous stupidities, abandoning elementary scientific and logical procedures when analyzing those interesting phenomena. I am very surprised and also very sorry to hear from Jenny Randles that she believes the crop circle presence and inherent complexity can be explained away by miserable hoaxes, kind of a gigantic Doug and Dave unprofitable intensive-work enterprise, and the cooperation of normal atmospheric phenomena. To assert with a straight face such an illogical and unscientific statement, absolutely disregarding all available evidence, says a lot about the person and his/her " baggage of knowlege." The size, permanence, frequency and geographic extension of the crop circles would require, from the point of view of organization and personnel, and enormous number of workers, carrying out their job under the control of a secret and invisible and powerful logistical infrastructure, with long international tentacles. It would be something like a Microsoft for crop circles. On top of it, as per Mrs. Randles, part of the circles are produced by " normal atmospheric phenomena", so we must now find a good cause for men and women working very hard together in the lonely fields and in the middle of the night, and in some way being able to keep permanently the cooperation of "plasmas" and "vortices". But that is not all. Now, Her Majesty Queen Mathematics is entering the room, and starts showing us how whoever is working on the grass, not only is a great artesan, but he is capable also of bending the stems so delicately in such a fashion that the greatest mathematical truths, especially the trascendental ones, are being drawn very softly on the meadows. Let's think about it. Not only the images are geometrically perfect, but within the geometric net you find mathematical relationships of extraodinary importance in nuclear and quantum physics. A calm review of the different factors and effects involved in the production of crop circles, lead the investigator (s) to an unavoidable conclusion : the crop circles are produced by technical means and by an intelligence which is independent of the human race. And yes, those who know which are the vincles among mathematics, geometry, logic, and information also must be aware that the crop circles contain a message and a warning. My certainty has a powerful foundation: the high mathematics on the grass can not and are not produced by any human hand. All of you, tourism promoters, trampling the grass with your sloppy boots, ruining the crops, and trying to imitate the girations of the Fibonacci series on the helpless stems, go to Mrs. Randles and complain that you do not have the slightest idea how to walk on the green and make your tracks leave behind a beautiful spiral shouting to everybody the Golden Section. It is not given for the fools to play with mathematics. As simple as that. And where is the simplicity of the whole thing? It would not be irrational at all, on the contrary, quite logical, to propose that the intelligence behind the crop circles might be the same one that uses the ufos as vehicles. How many know that Mr. Ockham had a razor?? Hernan P.S The lightbulb-shaped, buglike-eyed alien, commonly called "Gray" in the U.S. and Canada whose face we can see everywhere, has never been reported by any human witness . Travis Walton described a being white or light gray, large black eyes , features aprox. human. Betty and Barney Hill described gray beings with large black eyes, but still aprox. human features.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Keith From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:02:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Keith >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:53:08 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>IMO, Carpenter's alleged unprofessional behavior should be >>dealt with at the State level by the State Board. >On that we agree. Me too, me too! However, _our_ complaining, more than likely, will not do any good. It's the abductees, who know their files were sold, who need to complain! The fact that they haven't simply amazes me. Maybe they don't feel so bad about it. What else is one to assume? I do think it is very wrong to transfer any files, but it's becoming hard for me to get worked up about it when I hear that _not_one_ person has complained to the state of Missouri! I believe Steve mentioned that the state might attempt to contact the people who don't know their files have been sold. I believe that to be true. I know they would have to do some sort of investigation. Without an official investigation, I think everyone's just spinning their wheels. Sorry folks, many of you worked very hard, but beside warning others of the dangers of dealing with investigators, what have you accomplished? Despite the way that question sounds, I do applaud your efforts. Carpenter's files were sold without his client's consent. IMO, That's wrong, whether redacted or not. Not only that, apparently, the names of his clients have fallen into the hands of people who, I believe, aren't authorized to have them. IMO, That's wrong, too. Those wrongs, along with any others, are for the state of Missouri to decide. However, there's nothing to decide, if no one complains. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Russo From: Edoardo Russo <e.russo@cisu.org> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 19:19:37 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:05:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Russo >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:11:25 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Research Enquiry >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >In the somewhat murky early history of the UK government's >involvement with UFOs it is often mentioned (latterly by Good & >Redfern) that the whole cover up kicked off with a study from >WWII. This study was allegedly carried out by someone called >General Massey name. In trying to track this story down all >roads seem to lead back to Frank Edwards' 'Flying Saucers >Serious Business' book. But Edwards doesn't reference his >source [...] >So, does anyone out there have any other sources >for this tale about >'Massey' and his foo-fighter study [...] Our own UFO historian, Giuseppe Stilo (whom I turned your message over to), advises me that the first known source for the Massey tale was not Edward's 1967 book but a 1960 military memoirs book by an American author, Martin Caidin: "Black Thursday", published by Dutton. We got a copy of the Italian edition, but would be interested in getting a photocopy of the relevant pages in the USA edition (if anybody reading this can get a copy of it). Also, it would be interested to learn more about that author. All we know is that he was in the air industry,after WWII, but before his death he'd claimed he had taken part in a flying saucer investigation by "USAF Continental AIr Command" as early as 1948. Does this sound as a known or as a new fact to our US fellows more versed in government files? Can anybody check? Best regards Edoardo Russo Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici CISU, Casella postale 82, 10100 Torino tel 011-3290279 - fax 011-545033 http://www.cisu.org e-mail: e.russo@cisu.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:02:39 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:11:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Gates >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:28:39 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 07:12:38 +0100 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>At a recent social function I met a mature titled gent who >>claimed to be a friend of a British intelligence agent who had >>visited Area 51. >>Apparently, this agent had seen parts of extraterrestrial >>technology being manufactured at the infamous site. "There are >>spacecraft there," I was informed. "But why then are they >>keeping this a secret," I asked, to which my new friend reported >>that steps had been taken to inform the public, which was to be >>announced by President Clinton. >>However, when Clinton became involved in the sex scandals it was >>decided that the truth might not be taken seriously and >>therefore should be saved until they had a president more >>capable of dealing with it. >>The name of the president elected to enlighten the world in the >>new millennium, is, I am told, George W Bush! Is that foresight? >>We shall wait and see - but if it transpires, you read it here >>first! >Georgina and listfolk: >I love stories like this one, even if -- as here-- they often >don't make a whole lot of sense. >First, if there was anything that would have distracted the >electorate's (and the world's) attention away from President >Clinton's personal failings, it would have been an announcement >of an extraterrestrial presence on earth. Martians will trump >Monicas anytime. If such an announcement was available to >Clinton, surely he would have used it at some point during the >ordeal that led to his impeachment. I would disagree with Jerry on this point. If an announcement was/is made of the so ET presence on earth, it would have generated a weeks worth of headlines, then the issue would have died off in favor of the latest very human disaster that will have likely happened on planet earth, not to mention the carping and bitching from people who would have wanted to know how much money the government has spent on the ET project over the years and how that would have been better used in various welfare and social programs for the people on earth. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:12:54 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:14:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I propose that it is _you_ who are damaging yourself and the >entire abductee community by your incessant negative meddling >with the work that is being done in order to get Carpenter to >notify the clients whose files he sold. If it had been you that >Carpenter betrayed that way, we'd never hear the end of the >whining and complaining that you'd do. Every step of the way you >have tried to interfere with the process almost as if you were >on a 'mission'. In your last rant you tell Carpenter that the >reason he should comply and notify the abductees is because you >are sick and tired of reading our postings to him about it. In the endless discussion of JC, we still haven't been told how JC ended up with at least one of Budd Hopkins files. When I raised the issue, it was totally ignored. John has admitted that he was given files by other researchers, so since Budd has publicly stated that he didn't sell any files, _he_ never has publicly stated that he didn't give any files away. If JC is fair game, shouldn't we also be asking Budd and other abduction researchers for a list of all files they either sold or gave away to other researchers for any researcher for any reason. As I recall JC admitted that he got a number of files from other researchers. As was suggested this may end up to be 60 of the 140. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:43:42 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:18:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:37:11 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >Carpenter, Mack, Hopkins, Smith, Jacobs, et al do not have any >'review board' or regulatory agency that they are accountable >to. If we don't speak out on our own behalf (abductees) then >these kind of (admitted) abuses will not only continue unabated, >but they will worsen in nature as time goes by. More people will >be violated in this way and a few we haven't even thought of. I'm as certain as I can be without digging thru the archives that in a recent Updates post it was noted that Hopkins had an oversight committee (self-imposed perhaps?) that included psychotherapists. And that committee had in fact commended him on his professional approach to his work with abductees. While that isn't a formal regulatory board, it sure sounds like the man at least tries to offer accountability to somebody. Also, Drs. Mack and Jacobs are affiliated with universities, to which I'm sure they could find themselves severely accountable if serious complaints arose about unethical behavior. When it comes to professional reputations, I suspect peer cognizance and pressure are nearly as effective as overt regulation. My 2 cents, -Brian Cuthbertson
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:37:15 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:17:06 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Gates >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 05:22:07 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:57:04 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hi Jim, ><snip> >>(and someone correct me if I am wrong - I just don't see it) >>... all that demanding is useless and irrelevant. Because, in my >>opinion, it is no longer necessary to inform those whose names >>and records were sent to NIDS since there were no names sent.< >OK...you're wrong.<g> >From my homework, by virtue of John Carpenter being an LCSW, the >individuals on that list were protected Ethical >Standards/Disciplinary Rules of the Missouri State Committee for >Social Workers: >"(2) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed >clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant >shall inform clients, at the onset of the professional >relationship, of the limits of confidentiality. Naturally the claim will be made by Jim and others that it was not a _professional_ relationship, only a hobbiest type relationship. By the same token some fool could make the claim that they only had a hobby relationship with their spouse because they didn't actually pay them to have sex. >(3) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed >clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant >shall keep confidential his/her therapy relationships with >clients including information obtained from this relationship >with clients with the following exceptions: Again, not professional, just hobbiest. >(A) When the client gives written consent; > >(B) When the client constitutes a danger to him/herself or to >others; > >(C) When the licensed clinical social worker, provisional >licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder or >registrant is under court order to disclose information; or >(D) When required by law." >[Source:4 CSR 263-3.100 Confidentiality PURPOSE: This rule is >promulgated pursuant to section 337.630.2(15), RSMo and sets >forth the ethical standards/disciplinary rules as they pertain >to confidentiality.] >Now Jim, If you can't see the ethical and moral factor of >notifying clients when one's files are going to be transferred, >then what about the right of the 120 clients to be able to >choose for themselves if they want to file a legal complaint? Obviously Jim's theory in life is that he believes everything JC says...which is OK, as long as he admits it. Jim would claim that JC is claiming a hobbiest type relationship which would exempt him from the law. Jim would likely further claim that since it was a hobby type relationship and the files were redacted at least according to JC so everything is still allright. Naturally we will ignore the fact that Jim (in his support of JC) chooses to disbelieve Gary Hart in his 247 page documented report has supposedly documented 6 or 7 abductee files came back from NIDS with all personal information intact. And we still haven't heard from Budd to tell us why JC ended up with at least one and perhaps more of Budd's files. Not to mention other abduction researchers. <snip> >It must be this sickness that caused you to have posted your >request to John Carpenter loaded with put-downs aimed at those >of us who are trying to get these families notified. What's the >purpose of that? I was always under the impression that Jim was a defender to the death of JC and the sale of the files, so his postings are no huge surprise..to at least me. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 12 UpDate: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 From: xxx xxxx <xxx.xxxx@xxx.xxx> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:38:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:33:30 -0400 Subject: UpDate: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 Hello, Errol, Below is a post regarding the ongoing John Carpenter debate, and the question of whether he sold unexpurgated files to Bigelow. Would it be possible for you to run this anonymously, deleting my header and identifying information? I'd like the information to be posted, but do not want my name/address attached. Thanks very much _______________________ To UFO Updates: I am one of the abductees whose file was sold by John Carpenter to Robert Bigelow approximately 4 years ago. I am also one of the original litigants on the legal proceedings versus Carpenter regarding his sale of the files. There has been quite a bit of conjecture here on UFO UpDates regarding whether or not Carpenter sold unexpurgated files to Bigelow, or whether the files were sold with names, addresses, and identifying information deleted. I would like to throw in just a bit of information for everyone to ponder. At the time of our then-pending lawsuit, our legal counsel contacted Bigelow, requesting that he return all the files he had purchased from Carpenter. Bigelow's response (via his attorneys) was that he would return -only- the files of the persons filing suit upon receiving a list of our names and a form signed by each of us releasing him from any culpability in the transaction. If the identifying information and names were not intact on the files Bigelow purchased, just how would he be able to send _only_ ours back? My file consisted of written documents, drawings, and oral tape recordings. The information contained in the documentation included names, addresses, and identifying information of not just me, but my spouse, family members, friends, and co-workers. Multiply that by 140 persons, each with files containing similar information -- information that could be detrimental, at the very least, to their livelihood. I went to Carpenter for assistance because he carried the initials of a medical professional. Because of his profession, and because of his expressed confirmation to me, it was my understanding that the information I divulged to him was privileged, and fell under the protection of the therapist/client relationship. Evidently, that relationship has no guarantees or assurances. Sincerely, One of the 140
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:59:31 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:08:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hubbell >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT) >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Keith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>< Greetings Rebecca, First of all, thank you for all that hard work pulling information on Missouri's rules and regs for LCSW. <snip> >However, _our_ complaining, more than likely, will not do any >good. Reluctantly I must agree. But there's something inside of me that just must keep fighting. The next files sold could be mine. >It's the abductees, who know their files were sold, who >need to complain! The fact that they haven't simply amazes me. >Maybe they don't feel so bad about it. What else is one to >assume? That they don't know their files were sold. Carpenter says, on one corner of his mouth, that he is notifying the clients in question. On the other side, he's whining about virtually impossible it is to notify everyone because of this, that or the other thing. He has spoken with forked tongue before so, for me, it's difficult to believe him. >I do think it is very wrong to transfer any files, but it's >becoming hard for me to get worked up about it when I hear that >_not_one_ person has complained to the state of Missouri! Again, chances of them being aware of the sale are slim and none. >I believe Steve mentioned that the state might attempt to >contact the people who don't know their files have been sold. I >believe that to be true. Trying to get Carpenter to do the right thing and notify his clients is, probably, not likely to happen. If the state takes the task upon their shoulders, I would be satisfied. That would mean that there is some kind of on-going official investigation by the state. >Without an official investigation, I think everyone's just >spinning their wheels. Sorry folks, many of you >worked very hard, but beside warning others of the dangers of >dealing with investigators, what have you accomplished? FWIW, that's what the Nixon White House told Woodward and Bernstein. <G> What have we accomplished? On the surface it doesn't look like much, does it? I don't believe that. I know there are abductees out there, possibly some who are directly involved in this scandal, who are taking a long, hard look at the quality of investigators in this arena. I believe Carpenter's finished. If MUFON doesn't take an official stand soon on one of their field investigators, over and above Gary Hart, what used to be a bright light in this field will soon dim. Sadly, however, there are only a few who are vocal in the extreme. Perhaps it's my generally Pollyanna-ish nature that chooses to believe abductees are working quietly behind the scenes and voicing their opinions loud and long. <SNIP> In the long run, a great deal of good will come of this, and oddly enough, we will have Carpenter's faux pas to thank for it. Instead of abductees relying on the confidentiality of field investigators, organizations and others, the abductees themselves will be setting the rules and regulations. >Despite the way that question sounds, I do applaud your efforts. Thanks. > However, there's nothing to decide, if no one complains. We must be realistic and understand this is may be a strong possibility. OTOH, the global family of abductees is now awakened to the fact that there are charlatans out there and will be (hopefully) far more circumspect in their dealings with field investigators, organizations and others, and get it in writing that their files are not to be sold or transferred without their express permission also in writing. It's a small start, but a good one. Regards - Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 19:44:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:10:27 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Kaeser >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT) >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Keith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I believe Steve mentioned that the state might attempt to >contact the people who don't know their files have been sold. I >believe that to be true. I know they would have to do some sort >of investigation. Without an official investigation, I think >everyone's just spinning their wheels. Sorry folks, many of you >worked very hard, but beside warning others of the dangers of >dealing with investigators, what have you accomplished? I can't take credit for that thought (if I'm the Steve mentioned above), but I would agree that the State might take efforts to contact those who were affected by an illegal sale of their files. But Rebecca is correct in that it will take a complaint to the State by the abductees to trigger an official probe into the sale. If improper behavior is indicated, then I think the State could step in to help make sure that all of the abductees are aware of the situation. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:22:28 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:12:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Randles >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 14:46:44 -0400 >From: Egio Hernan De La Vega Buonanno <egiohern@idirect.com> >Subject: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - De La Vega Buonanno >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >You know that I have never sent not even one comment to your >List, but I enjoy a lot the diversity of points of view and >opinions on the UFO subject and other extranormal phenomena and >events that the readers kindly offer to a large attending >multitude. In the last few years I have considered and analyzed >messages whose authors really were able to show how deeply they >had understood the complexity and also simplicity of these >phenomena. I have also read other messages whose authors do not >hesitate to submerge themselves into the most ridiculous >stupidities, abandoning elementary scientific and logical >procedures when analyzing those interesting phenomena. >I am very surprised and also very sorry to hear from Jenny >Randles that she believes the crop circle presence and inherent >complexity can be explained away by miserable hoaxes, kind of a >gigantic Doug and Dave unprofitable intensive-work enterprise, >and the cooperation of normal atmospheric phenomena. To assert >with a straight face such an illogical and unscientific >statement, absolutely disregarding all available evidence, >says a lot about the person and his/her " baggage of knowlege." Hi, Just to say that UFOIN will respond to the postings about our crop circle memo such as the one above. I simply here wanted to note that turning what was clearly issued as a statement by the UFOIN team into my personal plea (as alleged in the above posting) is misleading. If it were my personal plea then I would have issued it onto this list as such and I clearly did not. The statement we posted indicated that it was issued by UFOIN (a team of 20 experienced ufologists - half of whom are highly published in the field and most of whom are well known to fellow ufologists). The team includes several pioneer researchers in the crop circle field. That is an important difference from this memo being issued as my personal plea. Indeed, because it is NOT my plea for sanity, but UFOINs,I have to collate responses from the rest of the team rather than simply issue my personal reaction here. But I will post responses - and they will be comments by the team. So please bear with me - and do appreciate that my name is there on the memo only because I posted it onto this list... Although I should emphasise that I do, as it happens, personally support the memo that we issued. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:43:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:14:08 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles >From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Date: 11 August 2000 20:56 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >Are you aware of the scientific studies and anomalous material, >etc. uncovered by the BLT team (http://www.bltresearch.net ) >here in the US? There is clearly a third source of crop circles >(a small number) that cannot be explained away by your 2 causes. >I agree that the majority are hoaxes and a few are natural, but >that still leaves those cases that defy prosaic explanation. I have >seen one personally here in Minnesota that displays many anomalous >elements. >There are records of crop circles here in the US that date back >to the 60's and 70's. Most of these are "landing site" types, >some with burn marks and deep indentations from a very heavy >object. You are doing the same injustice to crop circles that >Blue Book did to UFO's when they totally ignored the over 700 >unexplained cases in their files. Whitewash doesn't cut it anymore. >Joel Henry >Minnesota MUFON Hi, Firstly, let me make clear this is a private reply. The statement was a UFOIN statement. So I am not here speaking for UFOIN by responding to your message. But to clarify, UFOIN was talking about the 'crop circle phenomenon' - which is a very specific type of ground effect - swirled, gently rotated patterns akin to catherine wheels that have been found in various mediums but are best known in cereal crops. These are the phenomena that have generated widespread media interest in the UK for 15 years. We are not in any way debating the merits or demerits of other kinds of ground marks - such as landing traces, burn marks, indentations or the sort of aftermath related to some UFO encounters. So we are certainly not attempting to do a Blue Book and explain all UFO landing mark cases as hoaxes or atmospheric forces. Our report is about crop circles in their properly defined manifestation. Nothing more and nothing less. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 19:46:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:16:20 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:37:15 -0400 (EDT) >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 05:22:07 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Robert, I snipped my response to Jim in this post because I'm too pooped to format it. >Naturally the claim will be made by Jim and others that it >was not a _professional_ relationship, only a hobbiest type >relationship. By the same token some fool could make the >claim that they only had a hobby relationship with their >spouse because they didn't actually pay them to have sex. I love this analogy. You made me laugh! I didn't think it was possible to correlate these discussions with that sound. My facial muscles had begun a conditioning process associated with receiving email. How nice to experience this alternative! <snip> >I was always under the impression that Jim was a defender to the >death of JC and the sale of the files, so his postings are no >huge surprise..to at least me. According to 'Brian River' who emailed both Jim and I and many others from what I've learned, we are among many other things, naive.<g> Take care and thanks again for the giggle. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-12-00 From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:52:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:18:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-12-00 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Week Ahead 8-13-00 thru 8-19-00 Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories From sightings.com Jeff Rense E-News is distributed exclusively by Free Subscription. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * GUEST CORNER * Pros and Cons of Life Existing Elsewhere By Dennis G. Balthaser I recently wrote an editorial entitled "Are We Alone?" and decided maybe I should follow it up with a similar editorial, since the question of life elsewhere in our universe continues to plague us. For honesty purposes, this editorial will probably be somewhat biased, because as a UFO researcher, I think the possibilities are overwhelming in favor of life elsewhere. In fairness, I will try (using others thoughts), to give a "for" and "against" view on the subject. Before deciding what to write, I checked my trustworthy "Random House Dictionary of the English Language" to see what the definition of life really is. I was quite surprised with the number of definitions given for the word "life". Basically it comes down to this; "Life is the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally". If I am interpreting that correctly, it supports my theory, that life on other planets would not have to be "life as we know it", as many scientist indicate when discussing the possibility of life on another world. Obviously, life has the ability to adapt to whatever conditions are present, with those changes originating internally. I grew up being told and believing we are all there is and accepted it as fact. After all what information did I have to question it? A few years later however, when word about flying saucers, (UFOs), started filtering into my learning process, the "fact" began to become questionable. As my interest in ufology strengthened, and science began to take a closer look at the possibilities of life elsewhere, and discover previously unseen things in our universe, I became more aware to the fact that, surely we are not all there is, in this gigantic universe. I for one cannot be that egotistical to think that life only exists on earth. Is it life as we know it elsewhere? No one knows that yet, but I would wager, probably not, and I see no reason why it would have to be. We are tremendously limited in our ability to think in ways not familiar or "comfortable" to our teaching and method of thinking. The case against life elsewhere: Since (in my opinion), this will be the shorter of the two responses, I've chosen to discuss it first. As with all research related to ufology, there are always two sides to every lead, investigation and theory. Recently two professors at the University of Washington, Peter Ward, with impressive credentials in paleontology and Donald Brownlee, a noted astronomer, co-authored a book, (Copernicus Books), entitled, "Rare Earth", (Why Complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe). They based some of their findings on a study of how life formed on our planet and how several things had to happen at specific times and precisely so, in order for life to evolve over several billion years. They are careful not to rule out life on other planets as a possibility, but state life may exist as microbes and not much more. Some of the reasons they give for their observation are as follows: Our moon stabilizes the earth's axis and helps control our climate. The location of our solar system in our own galaxy prevents over exposure from our sun. Most stars in the universe are smaller than our sun and that would require planets to orbit closer to their sun to obtain necessary heat. Since Jupiter's orbit is in the same solar plane as our earth, it protects us from being hit by many things such as asteroids and comets. Having only one sun in our system provides a more stable orbit by the earth around the sun. Our distance from the sun is such that an atmosphere and liquid water can form and be maintained. So these two professors, at no fault of theirs, are making assumptions based on the only planet we know anything about that has intelligent life---our earth. I can't fault them for that, since that's all any of us have to work with. For those serious about ufology or astronomy, I would recommend their book. The case for life elsewhere: In the above mentioned book "Rare Earth", Frank Drake's Equation is taken to task as assumptions. Are those two authors not also assuming that life on other planets would have to develop the same way as it did on earth, since that is all they can base their information on? The Drake equation ( N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL) was developed in 1961 and it is also based to some extent on guesswork, but the more we learn about the universe, the more accurate the results obtained with the equation will become. Based on the Drake equation, the following is currently believed to be fairly accurate: The number of stars in our galaxy are around 200 billion (that's billion with a "B"). Also used in the equation is the number of stars that would have planetary systems, how many of those planets could support life, and on how many of those planets would life evolve, with an intelligent life. Our space program and those of other nations have been for several years, sending probes out into our solar system, and among other things being accomplished, they are looking for other life on those adjacent planets to ours. The Hubble telescope has given us glimpses at objects that a few years ago no one dreamed we'd ever be able to see. I think many of us would like to know (and probably even hope), that we are not the only living thing in the universe. Our knowledge is so limited however, that we are still searching our closest neighbor for that information. I'm not implying that we haven't had success in some of our ventures, but when you think of the possibility that there may be 200 Billion stars just in our galaxy, according to Drake's equation, surely some of which can have planets similar (or not similar) to ours, the odds are pretty high for finding other life forms. I envy those being born today for what they may learn in their lifetime, while on the other hand, I hope that we leave that opportunity for them to learn. Technology is proceeding forward at a faster rate than it ever has in our existence on this planet. Some researchers indicate that our planet earth is about 4.6 billion years old. The oldest known direct evidence of life on earth is a fossilized bacteria found in 3.5 billion-year-old rocks from Western Australia, as announced by J. William Schopf of the University of California at Los Angeles in 1993. The technology we enjoy today has only been developed in the past 100 years, so can we imagine what will be forthcoming in the next 100 years? We are unique in the location of our planet with in our solar system and galaxy, which surely had a vital affect on it being habitable. What we have developed into has been our choice. What we leave for our children and grandchildren is also our choice. I hope we make the right decisions. I really don't believe the contact from other life forms will come to us by means of radio communication as that seems, to me, to be a primitive means of communicating. Rather I'm hopeful that actual physical contact will take place. We might have to prove to "them" that we're worthy of being contacted, however, and I'm not sure at this point that we are. Dennis G. Balthaser Email truthskr@roswell.net http://www.truthseekeratroswell.com ------------------- Opinions presented in Jeff Rense E-News are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent those of Jeff Rense, Sightings, sightings.com or the newsletter editors. Past and present guests: to be showcased in "The Guest Corner", please email mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=Guest_Corner --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?" -- George W. Bush, Jan. 11, 2000 --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Uncommon Sense The Real American Manifesto Uncommon Sense discusses the American Revolution, Socialism, Gold, Money, and Inflation, The Federal Reserve System owned by stockholders that control governments. It is changing the destiny of our country. http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index106.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * TOP STORIES * Just a few of last week's most intriguing! http://rense.com * NSA's Plan Backfires As Web Site Boosts UFO Queries * NY Court Orders Use Of Ritalin On Child - Parents Medicating Out Of Fear * Growing Taiwan Fears Over Missile Threat From China * Amazing Footage Of Lightning Strike On Large Commercial Jetliner * USS Hornet - Staff And Visitors Report Seeing And Hearing Strange Things * General Says US Military Too Small For Commitments * Harry Mason: EMF/Plasma Weapons Seen In Oz * Stealth Tech: An Explanation For Disappearing Aircraft & Persistent Contrails? * Amazing - Anglo-US Scientists Unveil Tiny Motors Made Out Of DNA * Man Disfigured In Boat Accident Given New Titanium Face * Pentagon Still Under Assaut From Hackers * Jesus' Second Coming Through Cloning Proposed * The Significance Of Bohemian Grove Owl Worship * Bohemian Grove Photos Of Bush, Cheney, Greenspan, Etc * Doc Uses Patient's Amputated Foot In A Crab Trap * Beware Lieberman * Greece And France Order Destruction Of Genetically Engineered Cotton * Plan To Build Pyramid To Hold 300,000 Human Remains * More Orbs And Discs Showing Up In Chemtrail Photos * Has West Nile Virus Jumped All The Way To Iowa? * 'Cat Box Disease' May Change Human Personality And Lower IQ * Ten More Planets Discovered - Total Now Over 50 * Bizarre Fishfall In England * Seafood Is Biggest Cause Of Food Poisoning In US * Is Mad Cow/BSE In Milk And Milk Products? - Study Ordered * Abused Women Equals An Abused Nation * Western US Wildfires May Rage Until October * Victims Of Holocaust Were Sinners Says Rabbi Read these stories and more at http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Learn Remote Viewing Discover the real paranormal!! Developed by the U.S.Military for espionage. Ascertain information with no distance, space or time limitations. See if you've got what it takes to become a "remote viewer". History, articles, examples, resources, training. http://www.rvsystems.inuk.com/enter1.htm --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS * 8-13-00 thru 8-18-00 (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can change due to late breaking stories, etc). SUN 8-13 Larry E. Arnold: Spontaneous Human Combustion MON 8-14 Ed Fouche: Flying Triangle Technology Recovery Of Confederate Sub H.L. Hunley TUE 8-15 Ted Phillips: UFO Landing Trace Cases WED 8-16 Al Cuppet: Update On NWO Plans THU 8-17 Dr. Louis Turi: Divine Astrology Readings FRI 8-18 Diane Harrison: UFO Report From Oz Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Hollow Planets By Jan Lamprecht They said the world was flat. They were wrong. Now they say it�s solid. Are they wrong again? http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index25.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * PROGRAM INFORMATION * Program Show Times Live Coast-To-Coast-now broadcast nationally over the Talk Radio Network a total of over 200 hours a month. Monday-Friday 7-10 pm Live 10-1 am Immediate Rebroadcast 1-3 am First 2 hours of prior night's show Saturday 9p-3 am Best Of Rense - 2 shows Sunday 8-11 pm Live Call in Line: 800 TRN 4123 Sightings Artwork/Digital Illustration & Webdesign http://www.anc.net/~neff/ Program Audio Tapes 888 456-4340 Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives http://www.sightings.com Advertising-Over 3 MILLION visitors to sightings.com each month Cost effective exposure for YOUR product or service http://www.sightings.com/adv.htm Sightings.com info/email center http://www.sightings.com/1.mail/infocenter.html Free Greeting Cards featuring the artwork of James Neff: http://www.immunotex.com/rense/cards/cards.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Share with your friends! Please feel free to forward this issue of the Jeff Rense Weekly E-News to any and all who are interested... but please forward in its entirety and do not modify it in any fashion without permission. Thank you! Past issues are archived at http://www.egroups.com ------------------------- To subscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-unsubscribe@egroups.com -------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News is independently produced by TGS in cooperation with Jeff Rense. The material and views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Jeff Rense, sightings.com, or the Jeff Rense - Sightings Radio Program, except for the *Jeff's Desk* segment. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- We thank eGroups for providing this tremendous service to us.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:07:45 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:21:41 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:15:27 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >>From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Hello All, >>>Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >>>been properly warned. :) >>>Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >>>researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >>>views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >>>apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >>>part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >>>the UFO "community" in general. >><snip> >Josh writes: >>Hello John, >>I can't answer for major abductee researchers but I can answer >>for my own humble non abductee self. I said nothing because it >>seemed to be an invitation to get swallowed in the maelstrom. >One of the things that literally castrates us and robs us of any >opportunity to take effective action has to do with discussions >on e-mail lists turning into "maelstroms! From day one trying to >keep the focus on getting the abductees in this case informed >has been like pulling teeth. "Others" (gary Hart for one) have >focused in on Carpenter himself. I have _repeatedly_ stated that >my one and only concern here is that (even if it's three years >later) the abductees be shown the respect of being informed (by >the researcher they reported to) that he had sold their files >and that he provides them with a written assurance that their >files were properly sanitized. >What is wrong with that I'll never know. >I have one bandicoot raving about how I'm destroying Carpenter >and all of ufology and others accusing me of creating a >"maelstrom." Please tell me how my simple but relevant questions >and requests on behalf of the abductees constitutes any of the >above? I have been every bit as 'vocal' about protecting JC from >a public kangaroo court as I have been about asking him to show >his clients the respect they deserve. I have fought harder than >most to keep this from becoming a personal anything against JC >himself. It appears that the "maelstrom" is being created by >"others" who nothing other to contribute but disruptive >distractions. >I'll say it one more time, "Getting Carpenter" is not what this >is all about. "Getting the abductees informed" is. They have a >right to know and they have a right to (if _they_ choose to) >demand assurances from Mr. Carpenter that their anonymity has >been maintained. They will also be able to decide for themselves >if they wish to pursue any civil action against him. That is >_solely_ up to them. They can also choose to do nothing at all. >(*Get ready here it comes again!) The _point_ is, the abductees >cannot make those choices/determinations for themselves >_if_they_don"t_know! All I have been attempting to do is to get >Mr.Carpenter to inform his own clients (the people that provided >him with the very reports that he sold for cash) that their >files have been sold to NIDS/Bigelow and,...that they were _all_ >properly sanitized. >There seems to be some tremendous "problem" in many people's >minds about that. Why anyone has problems with the reasonable >requests (as stated above) that I and others have been making >is beyond me. >>But now feels like the right time as I would like to have these >>storm winds subside. >Me too. As soon as John Carpenter shows those abductees the >respect that he should have shown them three years ago by >informing them that he sold their files and providing assurances >regarding their anonymity this whole thing can go away as far as >I'm concerned. Until then I suggest that you keep your finger >poised over the delete button in your e-mail program. Unless EBK >slaps a gag on me, JC is going to have to actually 'inform them' >before I let this go. >>You and Ann had the assumption the abductee files were >sold >non-redacted. >Not "assumption" - fact! In at least one case (that Carpenter >himself has admitted to) a file was submitted un-sanitized. >Others (Hart and some of the abductees involved) claim that >there are more. I have no proof that there was more than one >file that went out that way. There _was_ 'one' for sure though, >(as per Carpenter himself.) Which prompted me to ask him: What >kind of assurances was he prepared to provide to his other 139 >clients that their files were _all_ properly sanitized? >He has never acknowledged or responded in any way to that all >important question. Note please: I did not indict him or accuse >him of _anything._ All I have asked is what kind of assurances >he is prepared to provide his own clients. Nothing more, nothing >less. >Again, _not_ an unreasonable question. >>Quite a while back Walt Andrus stated that those files were from >>Carpenter's personal research and had nothing to do with MUFON. >>I don't see where MUFON has any responsibility at this point. >I find it amusing how people will arrive at conclusions that >conveniently leave out pertinent information/facts. >1. The fact that JC sold client files at all raises serious >questions of ethics and client rights. >2. The fact that he did not ask his clients if it was ok with >them if he sells their files to a research institution (and >that's giving NIDS the benefit of the doubt) also raises >questions involving ethics and client rights to know when such a >transaction is being contemplated. >3. More relevant to your comment above: At the time of the sale of the >abductee files JC was the "head" of the MUFON Databank project. That >raises the question: How do we know that files that were donated to >the databank by other resaerchers were not included in the lot of 140? >A valid question again- no? Again, I'm not "accusing" JC of >anything. I'm merely asking the logical question; How do we know >there were no databank files included? Because _he_ says so? >Sorry, not good enough. MUFON needs to conduct an internal >investigation. It would be appreciated by us "outsiders" if they >would share the results of that investigation and how it was >conducted with the rest of us, but I'm not going to lose any >sleep over waiting for that to happen. >>They don't have an ethical liability because the files were >>redacted, according to Carpenter. >So what kind of assurances is he prepared to provide his clients >(written maybe?) that he properly sanitized _all_ of the remaining 139 >files? Gee, I guess he'd have to "inform them" first. D'oh! that's >what I've been asking for all along!!!!! Beat me!!!!! >>John, I would like to know if you accept John Carpenter's word >>that the files were redacted? >Not at all. The fact that one went out un-sanitized raises the >question: "How many others went out that way." He offers the >very lame excuse that it was ok that the one file went out that >way because it belonged to his ex-wife. (?!) A statement like >that coming from a "professional" sets off _my_ alarm even if it >doesn't jingle yours. Under different circumstances I "might" >take JC at his 'word.' Under these circumstances, no. >>Do you respect NIDS's privacy position? >Yep. But please don't forget that NIDS/Bigelow has >'historically' been an informational blackhole! 'Now' they are >painting themselves as this great public service institution. >Until this business came up NIDS had been less than forthcoming >with the information that it has gathered, or in terms of >"informing the public." NIDS is Bigelow! It is _not_ a public or >independent University that is required to publish and has to >maintain 'accountabilty' - to answer to review boards. >I respect NIDS 'anything' about as far as I can throw NIDS. ;) >>Do you accept that Carpenter said he is trying to notify the >>people? >I accept that he "said" it, I have no proof that he is "doing" >it however. There is a world of difference between 'saying' >something and actually 'doing' it. I'll feel better when he >actually 'does' it. >>Until proven evidence appears that would make this incident of >>selling the files show facts that counter the above, can you >>folks take a deep breath and ease off this tirade? >Tirade? I think I am (and have been) raising valid and important >questions. That's _all_ I have been doing. Not "attacking" JC. >You base your assessments on mistaken assumptions. Hello John, I should have been more specific with my points. When I stated "a whirlind turning into a maelstrom" what I meant was that after you wisely posted your initial alarm regarding these files, a whirlwind developed over the seriousness of this issue and other listmembers' concerns. It was turned into a maelstrom by several other people attacking Carpenter to the point I thought that they went over the line. When I referred to a tirade I was referring to the above situation, not to you. I assumed that when Carpenter would notify the abductees that he sold the files he would let them know that they were redacted. To me he seemed forthright in his response posted on this list. Perhaps you should contact him directly and request that he does the above and provide a written statement. By the way, as a Jew in Berlin I feel very comfortable. The German people have done a tremendous job of trying to atone for the evils of Nazism. Jews are the most honored people here these days. There is also great German - American friendship. The neo-nazi skinheads are a very tiny group of people in what used to be East Germany. The German government is seriously dealing with that. If you check the amount of anti-semitic attacks on synagogues in the United States it would worry you. Sincerely, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:19:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:22:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:43:42 -0500 (CDT) >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Cuthbertson >To: updates@sympatico.ca Greetings Brian, >I'm as certain as I can be without digging thru the archives >that in a recent Updates post it was noted that Hopkins had an >oversight committee (self-imposed perhaps?) that included >psychotherapists. And that committee had in fact commended him >on his professional approach to his work with abductees. While >that isn't a formal regulatory board, it sure sounds like the >man at least tries to offer accountability to somebody. Carpenter is an LCSW in Missouri and as such bound by state rules and regulations. >Also, Drs. Mack and Jacobs are affiliated with universities, to >which I'm sure they could find themselves severely accountable >if serious complaints arose about unethical behavior. By the same token, wouldn't Carpenter, an LCSW in the state of Missouri, be accountable for "unethical behavior"? >When it comes to professional reputations, I suspect peer >cognizance and pressure are nearly as effective as overt >regulation. The silence of Carpenter's "peers" makes me wonder if they, all of them, feel that abductees are just silly and halucinating, and nothing more than fodder for the foolish. In fact, at this point, I am even more outraged - if that's possible - at the silence of Carpenter's "peers". Carpenter himself, and in public in an earlier UpDates post, described the "paranoia of the abductees" as putting a serious dent in his plans to publish a book. What kind of monster refers to clients like that? And where is the outrage of Carpenter's "peers" when they read a statement such as that? What's the matter with them anyway? >My 2 cents, Worth a lot more in my opinion. - Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:30:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:24:52 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Hubbell >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:44:06 -0600 >From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Meiners >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>< Greetings Jean, >The very core of our safety and anonymity is at stake. No matter >how you look at it, the individuals need to be told about a >breach, whether for monetary gain or what whatever reasons. The >reaction should be theirs, the indignity for everyone, ours. Thank you!!! Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I am indignant. Yes, I feel my safety and anonymity is at stake here even though I am not directly related to this debacle. <snip> >We need to heal, and that healing has to start with >Carpenter. He needs to start it, then those that can >give a helping hand in keeping it going. We need to stop >beating our heads against the wall. Lets get to the door, >and then heal. There's is a lot of water under the bridge here and it's raging, white water. Carpenter can begin to undo what he started by being a stand-up guy, by taking his lumps and most of all by _notifying those clients_ whose trust and confidence he betrayed when he sold those files. But that may be a pipedream. He's had more than 3 years to gloat over his coup. I don't think he's sorry he did it, but he is certainly sorry he was found out. Regards, - Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Keith From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:26:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Keith >From: xxx xxxx <xxx.xxxx@xxx.xxx >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:38:05 -0500 >Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:33:30 -0400 >Subject: UpDate: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 >I went to Carpenter for assistance because he carried the >initials of a medical professional. Because of his profession, >and because of his expressed confirmation to me, it was my >understanding that the information I divulged to him was >privileged, and fell under the protection of the >therapist/client relationship. Evidently, that relationship has >no guarantees or assurances. Dear One Of The 140, I think you did the right thing by going to a professional. However, it is too bad that the professional might not be so professional. If you feel harmed, why haven't you filed a complaint with the State of Missouri? I am hopeful that it is not too late to do that. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:15:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:27:52 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Hart >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 05:09:55 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I haven't called back since I last checked, but I did repeat >what the gal on the phone said for clarification. The answer at >that time was "none". She sounded equally surprised at the >surprise in my voice. Maybe others have called since then. >Ann Ann, My primary effort is to tune and strengthen the JC case MUFON received so that it can be taken to the MO board as a complaint. This may take two months. While individuals can complain themselves, it will be most effective to have one complete case using the largest, most accurate body of evidence to present to the board. One focused effort. As usual, legal cases take time. This time is no exception. I respect the need of those involved to get something done in a timely manner so the work to accomplish this is in progress. ~Gary H
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Crop Circles Puzzle Farmer From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 05:17:48 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:29:21 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Crop Circles Puzzle Farmer Source: Calgary Sun via C-News, http://www.canoe.ca/CalgaryNews/cs.cs-08-12-0035.html Stig *** Saturday, August 12, 2000 Crop circles puzzle farmer By CP ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP, Ont. -- A central Ontario farmer refuses to believe aliens or Star Wars weapons are responsible for three, neatly-formed circles that have appeared in his grain field. "I try to live in the real world," Garnet Horne, 59, said yesterday. At first, the family suspected the three circles -- 23, 15 and 12 metres in diameter -- were a prank. "I figured some jackass tramped it down to get our goat," Horne's older brother, Donald, said. But there was no pathway leading to or from the three circles. "We got right down and looked for footprints," said Garnet. "Not a heel mark, nothing. It isn't human. It's got me beat." Inside each circle, the barley and oats have been flattened to the ground in a symmetrical, counter-clockwise swirl. Around the circular edges the flattened grain meets a perfectly upright wall of unharmed oats and barley. "It's not aliens and it's not somebody tramping it down, said Garnet. "I can't explain it." Garnet first spotted the circles while driving by the field at dusk Thursday. "It scared the wits out of me," he said. This is not the first time crop circles have appeared west of Orillia, Ont., near Bass Lake. In 1992 and 1993, circular patterns appeared about 3 km north of the Horne farm in a corn field. * Copyright � 2000, Canoe Limited Partnership. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Think You Saw a UFO? Think Again From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 05:38:01 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:30:12 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Think You Saw a UFO? Think Again Source: Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/science/081100/satellites.sml Stig *** Think You Saw a UFO? Think Again Friday, August 11, 2000 By Philip Chien * NASA has recently bragged that the International Space Station will be "large enough to see with the naked eye." While that may be true, it's not the only visible thing circling the Earth. AP/Wide World [Image: A giant radar, built during the Sputnik era, is still tracking shuttles, satellites and space junk.] * Any relatively dark location with clear skies is adequate for viewing satellites. If you can see the brighter stars, you can see these manufactured, orbiting items. Some are fairly steady points of light, others flash unpredictably. Finding them is just a matter of knowing when, where and what to look for. Right now, Russia's Mir space station is the brightest manmade object in the night sky. ISS will surpass Mir's brightness as more components are added. But hundreds of objects in space � live satellites, dead satellites tumbling out of control and spent rocket bodies � are visible with the naked eye. At first many are mistaken for airplanes, but satellites don't have running lights. Sputnik: The Beginning Satellite observing goes back to Oct. 4, 1957, with the launch of Sputnik 1. Astronaut Frank Culbertson said, "Sputnik was the spark that ignited the space program today. I remember being taken out in the backyard by my dad [when I was 8] and being shown Sputnik as it flew overhead." Today, some of the most-tracked objects are classified military satellites. Satellites � including 'top-secret' classified ones � obey the same laws of physics as everything else, so as amateur satellite observer Sean Sullivan says, "Anything the size of a school bus is going to be pretty bright when it's lit up by the sun." In 1983, the decision was made to classify orbital tracking data from U.S. military satellites, data that was publicly available throughout the most intense portions of the Cold War. [Image: An unclassified National Reconnaissance Office photo of an imaging satellite. Satellite tracking analysts believe that this is the so-called 'Lacrosse' model.] Ironically, the U.S. government's decision to keep military satellite information hush-hush has only encouraged amateurs to concentrate on them. And many concentrate on the U.S. photo reconnaissance satellites. A series of Navy satellites, often referred to as "White Cloud," fly as a trio of satellites in a triangular configuration, which has resulted in them often being mistaken for UFOs. Like crumbled aluminum foil, two of the satellites flash in irregular patterns. A series of large radar satellites is called "Lacrosse"; they are distinctly red because of their insulation. Who's Watching So widespread is military satellite tracking that their names are always in question. Since names are changed when they become known publicly, a satellite which may have been originally called "Lacrosse" will now be something else, though it'll be just as visible to a seasoned observer. Some military experts say amateur efforts to track classified satellites undermine national security and violators should be prosecuted. The National Reconnaissance Office has taken a more laid-back attitude: "There's a lot of Web pages which indicate how to view what they claim are military satellites which may or may not be accurate. That's just fine with us," said spokesperson Rick Oborn. [Image: The 'Angry Alligator,' designed for the Gemini 9 spacecraft to practice docking in space, was so nicknamed after a shroud jammed.] And tracking doesn't have to involve logging on, said satellite observer Ted Molczan: "If any foreign government wanted to track classified military satellites, it would be fairly simple. Just assign embassy personnel around the world with binoculars and stopwatches to take observations each night the sky's clear." But what's classified and what isn't? There are contradictions. In many cases the locations of military satellites are publicly available and even coordinated with international organizations, but their orbital information isn't publicly available. What one branch of the military keeps secret is freely available on another government Web page. Among unclassified satellites, the Hubble Space Telescope is fairly bright and occasionally brightens quickly as it maneuvers to aim at its targets. The Iridium satellites can flare brighter than the planet Venus when their super-reflective antennas catch the sun just right. Good Heavens The easiest way to track satellites may be the Web site Heavens-Above.com. Its database includes over 2 million locations worldwide. It will show all of the relatively bright satellites visible each evening and morning from any given location. And, if you're lucky, you can one night see the space shuttle after it has dumped excess water overboard. But you might mistake it for a comet. * � Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. � Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. � News Digital Media 2000. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 04:54:19 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:31:18 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton Regarding: >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:08:23 +0000 >From: Colm Kelleher - NIDS <nids@earthlink.net> >Subject: Odors from UFOs >To: List Member <updates@sympatico.ca> Colm wrote: >NIDS has recently posted a comprehensive article on the analysis >of odors from UFOs titled "Odors from UFOs: Deducing Odorant >Chemistry and Causation from Available Data" on the website at: >http://www.nidsci.org >The article, written by Anthony Rullan, an industrial chemist, >is perhaps the first rigorous treatment of the subject of >analysis of odors from UFOs. The article explores the various >possibilities in analyzing the sulfur containing compunds >commonly reported from UFOs. Colm, In addition to the historical accounts Rullan cites, I recently came across two cases which might be of interest to him (I'm sure there must be many others) and are reported online at: http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/ufosnmw/reports/mi1.html http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/ufosnmw/reports/leian.html Also noted on this web site, which seems to be little known and is an absolute goldmine of data, was an intriguing report related to a 'cattle mutilation' incident: http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/ufosnmw/reports/org.html I wondered if this could be connected with a known case, or whether it was previously undocumented. Incidentally, there was what seems a comparable 'cattle mutilation' incident published in the UK 'Farmers Weekly' magazine. Although I had obtained a copy of the original article, it has since unfortunately gone amiss. However, my notes record that the October 14, 1994 issue of Farmers Weekly reported how in August 1994, at Bodmin Moor near Launceston, England, a new-born calf was found with a clean, bloodless cut in its throat that had severed its windpipe, and the upper and lower hide of its nose and lips had been "almost surgically removed". The color photograph included with this story depicted a 'perfectly clean' calf lying on its left side with only the hide-deep excision of tissue from its jaws. That aside, also perhaps worth mentioning is the video footage at: http://members.xoom.com/ufosnmw/reports/ufo-6599.html and a Hudson Valley' report: http://members.xoom.com/ufosnmw/reports/cord.html This web site claims to have "over 1,400 sightings" reported during the past five years. I've been looking at many of the reports, maybe only 200 or so, and already bookmarked over 30, especially typically detailed 'triangular UFO' close encounters, which seem to come into the category of 'surely must be investigated further'. Fortunately, some of the claimants have provided contact email addresses and I will follow up those I can. Outwith this genre, a particularly intriguing report is one where the person writing was amongst a group of friends who observed a 'circle of lights' moving towards them (this seems to be an extremely common feature of many reports). Her brother apparently confided to a friend shortly afterwards how he got out of the car to look at the light, now directly overhead, and "then I [the writer] went from being in front of him, with my friend, to being off to his left. I was dishevelled & he thought, perhaps, I had been raped". Did her brother 'next remember' his sister had changed position in the car and she was somewhat 'dishevelled', if not distraught? What had happened in-between to cause this and was it related to those aerial lights? Maybe yet worth some enquiries - given there were several participants - and an email address is given. It's understandable why NIDs or any other organisation interested in UFO reports are requesting new sightings, however, it seems there are already vastly more than anyone is able to investigate! There may have been a time, although this is debatable, when 95% of UFO reports were explainable, yet that tends to be based on a relatively small sample, typically from 'Project Blue Book', or such-like. The entire perspective has evolved over subsequent years and the means, plus the climate, for reporting observations has significantly advanced. In my experience, which encompasses analysing the large number of (additional) sightings reported to the National UFO Reporting Center, the facts are somewhat different. 95% of UFO reports are never explained. If I'm mistaken, then given the number of reports we know are made each year, can someone please let us know where 95% of them are in fact documented as definitely/probably resolved. This would save me a lot of research, and I'm sure others as well. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:33:44 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:06:15 -0007 >From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Colm, I have a couple of general questions since you have been posting lately. I am not asking detailed questions, or specific questions about individuals since I am sure that could get into privacy issues. I tried to keep the questions simple yes/no answers so you wouldn't have to waste alot of your time. 1) Have you actually, with your eyes, seen or examined any or all of the 140 files that were sold to Bob/NIDS? 2) If you have seen them, was the personal information redacted out of the files, or was it still in the files? Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Interesting Sightings In Hessdalen From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 06:26:14 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:31:56 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Interesting Sightings In Hessdalen News from the famous Norwegian hot spot. More information is be found if you follow the link at the end of this mail. Source: "alt.alien.research". Stig *** Subject: Hessdalen phenomena Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 11:28:37 GMT From: "Svein Utne" <Utne@msoft.no> Organization: Tele2 Norway AS Public Access Newsgroups: alt.alien.research * Yesterday I was attending a meeting in Hessdalen, Norway, with the local chairman, and a group of scientists from several countries. They have had a lot of special equipment put up in the valley to film and monitor the Hessdalen phenomena. The phenomena are mostly lights. They are now also planning to build a $3million UFO center there to also attract the tourists and make some money on these phenomena. The day before the meeting several of the scientists had been in the valley at two different locations when the phenomena appeared. This time the scientists had radio connections between them, so they all could look at it at the same time from two locations 1000 meters apart. What they claim to have seen were three lights in a triangular pattern. The lights were about 100 meters apart, and all three lights were moving and slowly rotating. The group closest to these phenomena also claim to have seen a triangular shaped object, but it was dark and the only light was from the three lights in perfect formation, so the second group that was further away from the phenomena (about 2000 to 2500 meters) could not see the object, only the lights. These lights were not in front of the automatic cameras that are working in Hessdalen and automatically putting pictures out on the Internet, and the scientists want to be regarded as "serious" scientists, so I do not think any of them will make any report. Some of the scientists estimated that only 1 of 50 of the phenomena in the Hessdalen valley will be caught on film, but they have more then 150 pictures taken during the last two years this station has been operational, and now with more equipment and better cameras to take stereo pictures of the phenomena, I hope we soon can get more information. If you want to look at the Hessdalen project go to: http://www.hessdalen.org/ -- Svein Utne M.Soft Object Oriented Software AS www.msoft.no
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Young From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 01:00:44 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:35:14 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Young >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:43:42 -0500 (CDT) >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Cuthbertson >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:37:11 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >><snip> >>Carpenter, Mack, Hopkins, Smith, Jacobs, et al do not have any >>'review board' or regulatory agency that they are accountable >>to. If we don't speak out on our own behalf (abductees) then >>these kind of (admitted) abuses will not only continue unabated, >>but they will worsen in nature as time goes by. More people will >>be violated in this way and a few we haven't even thought of. >I'm as certain as I can be without digging thru the archives >that in a recent Updates post it was noted that Hopkins had an >oversight committee (self-imposed perhaps?) that included >psychotherapists. And that committee had in fact commended him >on his professional approach to his work with abductees. While >that isn't a formal regulatory board, it sure sounds like the >man at least tries to offer accountability to somebody. >Also, Drs. Mack and Jacobs are affiliated with universities, to >which I'm sure they could find themselves severely accountable >if serious complaints arose about unethical behavior. Do we have anything in writing that states that the various universities approve of the abduction research being done by people on their staff? Last I knew Harvard was claiming Mack was doing it on his own time, i.e. personal hobby. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Another MJ-12 Source - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:41:10 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:40:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Another MJ-12 Source - Gates >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 12:34:14 -0400 >From: Bob Huff <bobhuff@tidalwave.net> >Subject: Another MJ-12 Source >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hi, >Met another person who worked at the TRW facility in Reston, Va >who had been briefed into MJ-12. <snip> >In the example spoken to, the individual would enter a certain >keystroke, a window would appear, the message type, encrypted >and sent to a satellite at a certain time. Sounds very much like >the manner Dan Sherman communicated his comms as described in >his book 'Above Black' - www.aboveblack.com. Bob, Just curious. According to your sources whatever happened to the Spring 2000 solar flare the PPD were preparing for? Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:54:43 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:46:04 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - Gates Question for EBK. The first thing 'some' people are going to instantly claim is that the below message is from Carpenters ex wife and is just another effort to 'smear little ole innocent John.' Are you able to tell us for sure that this is not from Carpenters ex-wife? Thanks, Robert >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:38:05 -0500 >From: xxx xxxx <xxx.xxxx@xxx.xxx> >Subject: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello, Errol, >Below is a post regarding the ongoing John Carpenter debate, >and the question of whether he sold unexpurgated files to >Bigelow. Would it be possible for you to run this anonymously, >deleting my header and identifying information? I'd like >the information to be posted, but do not want my name/address >attached. >Thanks very much >_______________________ >To UFO Updates: >I am one of the abductees whose file was sold by John Carpenter >to Robert Bigelow approximately 4 years ago. I am also one of >the original litigants on the legal proceedings versus Carpenter >regarding his sale of the files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 05:13:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:24:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mulvey >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:46:31 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:09:01 -0400 >>From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Jim, You're frustrating me.<g> I'm only going to stick to just one point as I'm sure others will fly in to address the others. You said to Katherine: >>When gathering these case histories, he was practicing >>as a UFO Abduction researcher, not an LSW. Pure Poo Jim. John Carpenter has plastered his LCSW badge all over the UFO Field! Abductees _sought him out_ because of his professional training. Here are several examples of his LCSW blanketing the internet: **************** [Source:http://ufoinfo.com/ukufon/73.html] May, 1997: "Hello, UFO fans! This is UFO Abductions researcher John Carpenter writing to you. I wanted to let you know about two NEW RELEASES from the video production team at Carpenter Research. These two new research videos are just jam- packed with great information on UFO abductions --- both from the U.S.A. and Australia (a FIRST !!).... NEW VIDEO RELEASE !!!!!!!! MULTIPLE PARTICIPANT ABDUCTIONS" by John S. Carpenter, MSW, LCSW" <snip> Experience for yourself this important area of abduction research asyou meet the participants, view drawings, paintings, and photographs from their experiences, and hear the professional analysis by psychiatric therapist John Carpenter. 115 minutes - $29.95 NEW VIDEO RELEASE !!!!! "ENCOUNTERS IN AUSTRALIA" by John S. Carpenter, MSW, LCSW The "Land Down Under" <snip> And Jim, he advertises his talks at UFO Conferences ...... If it's not accurate, I'm sure he would retract.<g> **************** [source: http://www.jps.net/drboylan/00ufocfs.htm] -Mar. 05-11 International UFO Congress - Laughlin, NV; presenters: Whitley Strieber, Dr. Nick Begich, Michael Hesemann, John Carpenter, LCSW, <snip> same conference - different source [http://www3.eu.spiritweb.org/News/1999/50/945581415.html] Mar. 05-11 International UFO Congress - Laughlin, NV; presenters: Whitley Strieber, Dr. Nick Begich, Michael Hesemann, John Carpenter, LCSW, ****************** His listing as seen on a resource page: [source:http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin/TAP.html] JOHN S.CARPENTER, MSW ACSW, LCSW 4033 S. Belvedere Springfield, MO 65807 E-MAIL: STARMANJC@AOL.COM FIELDS OF INQUIRY: UFOs, abductions AFFILIATION: MUFON FIRST KNOWN YEAR: 1992 **************** Carpenter's "Alien Zoo" interview: a small portion - [source]http://www.alienzoo.com/features/w/200003280001.html "I had been in the field of psychiatry, as a social worker and clinical therapist for a number of years. Then I read that professionals were helping with hypnosis for people who had missing time experiences." ********************** Here's an interesting response to a question from a mental health professional who was a member of CS UFO Forum [Source: portion of Compuserve UFO Forum transcript 960430.txt, Experiencers/Contacts Library] <snip> Question from forum member:| John, as a fellow mental health professional, I often have wondered what am I doing spending hours exploring alien abductions, etc. What do you feel is your reason for involvement in this area? Please elaborate. Response: John Carpenter:| Wow. Someone like me..... well, I find it fascinating and certainly involving a set of experiences that affect people -- hence our profession. <snip> **************** Jim, do you understand at least this much now? Between this and the copies of the Missouri Code of Social Workers, I would think that you have enough information to at the very least understand that your friend John Carpenter _really_ screwed up - and then he tried goofy get outs when snagged. Please Jim - get on with it. Do the right thing and put your energy towards those families who haven't even been told that Carptenter sold their files without their permission. Push your friend John Carpenter to do the ethical thing now and contact those families. It would appear my last suggestion to him in getting NIDS to help him locate people, might be just the ticket. Apparently, they have the information. Those families need to be the focus. You understand that right? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 05:21:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:25:48 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:55:01 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Jim Oberg, List: >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:01:10 +0200 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >>Subject: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >>To: updates@sympatico.ca, >>Source: space.com >>http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/russian_ufo_report_000808.html ><snip> >>Exclusive: Russian UFO Research Revealed >>By Jim Oberg > >>Special to SPACE.com >>posted: 02:34 pm ET 08 August 2000 >>In an special report obtained by SPACE.com, two of Russia's leading UFO >>investigators have summarized the results of the Soviet Union's official >>13-year study of UFO reports. ><snip> >>The official investigators also point out a striking absence of >>certain types of reports from their files. "In contrast to >>numerous descriptions of various kinds of contacts with aliens," >>they write, "there has not been obtained, within the framework >>of the project which involved the great observational potential >>of the army and civilian organizations, any message about UFO >>landings, any message about contacts with pilots of UFOs, any >>message about the abductions of individuals by UFOs." >Or, astronomical phenomena. >>"This means," they conclude, "that either the territory of the >>USSR was, due to any reasons, closed for alien visitations >>during, at least, 13 years, or that the hypothesis of an >>extraterrestrial origin of UFOs is inconsistent. Any serious >>investigator of the problem of UFOs should, at least, face this >>reality." >Or, that astronomical education among the public was at such >a high level that misidentified sky objects were invisible within the >Soviet Union. Unlikely. Were final unkowns being referred >to, here, or all reports? Astronomical stimuli were the largest >category in Condon, and I believe, remain high in other western >studies. It seems a puzzle why they are missing, here. >Clear skies, >Bob Young Very puzzling indeed Bob. Is anyone aware of any published account(s) of Russian abductee cases? Todd Lemire Michigan UFO CENTRAL http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html -- "But I must point out that we have much better eyewitness evidence available for UFOs than I have for the Christian religion." Barry H. Downing, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 05:39:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:26:53 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:34:41 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? - Cecchini >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 02:07:59 -0700 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >>Subject: Re: '76-'78 Garden City/Long Island, NY Sighting? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>That doesn't mean nobody else has it of course. You might try >>UFOCAT or some other large database. >Thanx for the info. I don't have access to a UFOCAT CD, but >I did try Peter's NUFORC database and couldn't find a match. Ron, I checked UFO CAT 2000. Latest dates listed for cases in Garden City(s) are 1974. I also checked the MUFON CD Database and no listings appear for any Garden City(s). Todd Lemire Michigan UFO CENTRAL http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html -- "But I must point out that we have much better eyewitness evidence available for UFOs than I have for the Christian religion." Barry H. Downing, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:56:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:28:55 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 19:19:37 +0200 >From: Edoardo Russo <e.russo@cisu.org> >Subject: Re: Research Enquiry - Russo >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:11:25 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Research Enquiry >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>In the somewhat murky early history of the UK government's >>involvement with UFOs it is often mentioned (latterly by Good & >>Redfern) that the whole cover up kicked off with a study from >>WWII. This study was allegedly carried out by someone called >>General Massey name. In trying to track this story down all >>roads seem to lead back to Frank Edwards' 'Flying Saucers >>Serious Business' book. But Edwards doesn't reference his >>source >[...] >>So, does anyone out there have any other sources >>for this tale about >'Massey' and his foo-fighter study >[...] >Our own UFO historian, Giuseppe Stilo (whom I turned your >message over to), advises me that the first known source for the >Massey tale was not Edward's 1967 book but a 1960 military >memoirs book by an American author, Martin Caidin: "Black >Thursday", published by Dutton. We got a copy of the Italian >edition, but would be interested in getting a photocopy of the >relevant pages in the USA edition (if anybody reading this can >get a copy of it). >Also, it would be interested to learn more about that author. >All we know is that he was in the air industry,after WWII, but >before his death he'd claimed he had taken part in a flying >saucer investigation by "USAF Continental AIr Command" as early >as 1948. Does this sound as a known or as a new fact to our US >fellows more versed in government files? Can anybody check? >Best regards >Edoardo Russo >Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici >CISU, Casella postale 82, 10100 Torino >tel 011-3290279 - fax 011-545033 >http://www.cisu.org e-mail: e.russo@cisu.org Hello Edoardo and Andy: This may not help much. Browsing for Martin Caldin merely revealed another book by him: Marooned ( in space ) a SF novel, reviewed below "The novel MAROONED by Martin Caldin (Bantam Books) was first published in 1964 shortly after the configuration of the command module was finalized. The movie appeared in theaters in early 1970. During the rescue of Apollo 13, the movie was showing in Houston,TX. Many events in the movie ironically paralleled the rescue of the Apollo 13 crew in April of 1970." A browse for Black Thursday brought up the 1929 stock market crash plus other unrelated stuff, and one little surprise, the Raid on Schweinfurt Germany. The military history web page below describes one such raid in detail, as Black Thursday. Schweinfurt was known to produce ball bearings, a notable mil-industrial target. http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/black.htm There is no direct mention of Foo Fighters, but there may be a few other leads. The text is taken from : Castles In The Air by Martin Bowman, Patrick Stephens Publishing, 1984 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Open Request to Researchers From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 13:39:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:32:35 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Open Request to Researchers Robert Gates wrote in The MUFON-NIDS Coalition thread: >If JC is fair game, shouldn't we also be asking Budd and >other abduction researchers for a list of all files they either >sold or gave away to other researchers for any researcher >for any reason. As I recall JC admitted that he got a number >of files from other researchers. As was suggested this may >end up to be 60 of the 140. < Early on, there were emotional requests for statements from other researchers but to date, we've only heard the one from Budd via John Velez and Jenny's thoughtful comment about her own philosophies and the UK Ethics Code. It's been six weeks. Now is the time for statements be issued by other researchers. Being afraid of getting into the web of emotion that's been posted here isn't a valid enough reason to not make a statement, given the level of responsibility here. Your continued silence is harmful. Reseachers, in this extreme crisis, you do have a responsibility to communicate with us, regardless of the passion you've read or the emotions that you may be feeling. If any of you have provided John Carpenter with cases, the right thing to do would be to contact those clients immediately, and please communicate with us that this was done, as the continued focus on the neglect of these families is an ongoing issue that will not disappear. If you've sold files to Robert Bigelow, received permission slips to do so and sanitized them, let us know that. We may not agree with this action, but we will at least know that you value your client's privacy and trust. If there was any variation of the above, please contact those clients immediately. John Carpenter's unmasking has unmasked us all but the lucky skeptics. It's left this community in a state of upset, paranoia and pain. You are the leaders. You write the books and lecture about the experiences that those who trust you, share. In those mediums you have even told us your 'truths' on this phenomenon. Now you are obligated to tell us the human truth of how abductees records are treated, their privacy and rights valued. Now is the time to come forward. We need to know how you conduct your business with the abductee community and your system of ethics in doing so. We need your voice. We need it now please. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 14:10:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:37:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact Hello, Moderator of UFO UpDates... Perhaps you will not consider this relevant (and feel free to not post it to the list, or to excerpt is as you see fit), but today I have had a little exchange with Peter Gersten (the 'UFO Lawyer') that shows that he has little regard for truth or actual historical fact, and is perfectly happy to spread long-discredited tales as historical fact. It may seem a small thing, but he has done this sort of thing before, and it does not speak well for his intellectual rigorousness or respect for fact. This annoys, disturbs and concerns me greatly, as he has so much visibility (with his lawsuits, relentless pursuit of funds, publicity, self-proclaimed champion of the "CAUS" of truth, etc.) In his "Non-UFO" Sunday" edition of August 13, 2000, Gersten relates the long-discredited urban legend concerning Alexander Fleming (discoverer of penicillin) and Randolph Churchill (father of Winston). (For reference, this is the tale) THE FARMER'S SON His name was Fleming, and he was a poor Scottish farmer. One day, while trying to eke out a living for his family, he heard a cry for help coming from a nearby bog. He dropped his tools and ran to the bog. There, mired to his waist in black muck, was a terrified boy, screaming and struggling to free himself. Farmer Fleming saved the lad from what could have been a slow and terrifying death. The next day, a fancy carriage pulled up to the Scotsman's sparse surroundings. An elegantly dressed nobleman stepped out and introduced himself as the father of the boy Farmer Fleming had saved. "I want to repay you," said the nobleman. "You saved my son's life." "No, I can't accept payment for what I did," the Scottish farmer replied, waving off the offer. At that moment, the farmer's own son came to the door of the family hovel. "Is that your son?" the nobleman asked. "Yes," the farmer replied proudly. "I'll make you a deal. Let me take him and give him a good education. If the lad is anything like his father, he'll grow to a man you can be proud of." And that he did. In time, Farmer Fleming's son graduated from St. Mary's Hospital Medical School in London, and went on to become known throughout the world as the noted Sir Alexander Fleming, the discoverer of Penicillin. Years afterward, the nobleman's son was stricken with pneumonia. What saved him? Penicillin. The name of the nobleman? Lord Randolph Churchill. His son's name? Sir Winston Churchill. Someone once said what goes around comes around. Thinking that perhaps Mr. Gersten (somehow!) did not know this to be just an "urban legend," I informed him of same and received a curious answer: Me: How can anyone take seriously anything you say when you persist in spreading long-discredited legends such as this? Gersten: "I think you miss the point. It's the the message of the story that matters, not the participants. But I can understand your frustration in needing everything perfect, so I will remove you from my list. Sorry to have upset you. But I can't think of the answer to your question. Maybe its all just your projection of your own imperfection?" Huh?? This is a person -- a lawyer yet! -- who purports to be a champion of truth? Every list from which I have ever received one of these "inspirational tales" that I know to be an urban legend, I have informed of the fact. In every case, other than Mr. Gersten, a correction/clarification was immediately sent to the list. (This happened several times recently in the "Man without a face - Mel Gibson" legend that made the rounds -- in fact, I think Mr. Gersten sent that one around, too. Of course, he never sent a correction.) It's laughably easy to find out the truth behind this legend: http://www.snopes.com/spoons/glurge/fleming.htm For reference, here are some excerpts: The facts of none of these versions jibe with what we know of these people's lives. No Churchill biography we've found mentions young Winston's chance encounter with a Fleming, father or son. Alexander Fleming was born in a remote, rural part of Scotland and lived on an 800-acre farm that was a mile from the nearest house -- not the sort of place where a vacationing Winston would have been likely to wander, or to be discovered by anyone if he had. As well, Winston was seven years older than Alexander, so young Alexander would probably have been too small to physically rescue the older and larger Winston from drowning. But we don't have to speculate about those matters to disprove the tale. Alexander Fleming did not leave the farm to rush off to medical school to become the doctor he had supposedly always longed to be. In fact, young Alec (as he was then known) departed for London when he was 14, where his older brother Tom had studied medicine and opened a practice. Alec attended the Polytechnic School in Regent Street; after graduating, he entered the business world at the urging of his brother, worked as a clerk for a shipping firm for a few years, then joined a Scottish regiment when the Boer War broke out. It was not until after all of this that Alec decided to try his hand at medical school, and even then it was the encouragement of his older brother that was the deciding factor, not a lifelong yearning on Alec's part to become a doctor. Additionally, Alec's medical school education was financed with a � 250 inheritance from a recently-deceased uncle, not an endowment from a grateful Randolph Churchill. Nor is the other end of this tale true. Winston Churchill did come down with a sore throat and a high fever while in Tunis (on the way home from his December 1943 meeting with Roosevelt and Stalin in Tehran), and the diagnosis of the medical team called in from Cairo by his personal physician (Charles Wilson, later Lord Moran) was pneumonia. According to Wilson's biography, Churchill was treated with sulphonamide (an antibiotic, but one unrelated to penicillin) and digitalis (for his heart) and sent to bed to rest. By the time a specialist, Professor John Scadding, was flown in from London, Churchill was already well on his way to recovery. In short, Alexander Fleming was neither present nor consulted when Churchill was diagnosed with pneumonia, nor was penicillin used to treat the British prime minister. I send this note only because I am really tired of self-proclaimed "ufo spokespersons" making the whole field look ridiculous. If one cannot be bothered to report the truth about a urban legend -- once notified of the undisputed facts -- what credibility can one reasonably claim in anything else? Purrrrrs.... (and hissssses to ignorers and distorters of truth) Wendy Christensen
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Crop Formations - Some Informed Opinions From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 14:31:15 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:39:23 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Crop Formations - Some Informed Opinions There's been a great deal of comment along the usual lines this week resulting from the announcement by Colin Andrews that complex formations are the work of human circlemakers. This comes as little surprise to me because he is on record as having said that if the Julia Set formation was man-made then he'd call it a day! The Julia Set was man-made but still Colin persists in his investigations - and why not given a juicy grant by the Rockefellers, of all people... I have received many phone calls this week from people convinced that Andrews has been "got at". I'm really not sure although three years ago he was quoted by John King in the now defunct UFO Reality magazine as having been approached by the intelligence services with a view to dropping out of crop formations research. So maybe the Rockefeller money is a bribe or, even better, the best way to finance and debunk any possible alternative theory on crop formation's formation from hitting the mainstream media. (I'm not sure I believe this but anyway...) Pat Delgado, erstwhile colleague of Andrews, appears to believe that the former Test Valley engineer has been targetted, or so it was reported to me by a colleague who'd spoken with Pat yesterday... CROP FORMATIONS AND HIGH STRANGENESS? Too many people, especially those claiming to have knowledge based upon their limited investigations of earlier formations of the early 1980s, are talking about things they have little experience of. For instance, I know that paranormal phenomena are to be experienced within and around crop formations: my wife Lynda and I have experienced this in West Lancashire at locations near the River Douglas where these things tend to appear. I know of another couple who experienced pretty much the same thing. I know of many circlemakers who privately tell of their concerns that they've experienced "missing time" and other unusual phenomena whilst laying down their formations but who fear to go public for fear of encouraging more wild theories about the "real circlemakers". BALLS OF LIGHT IN THE FIELDS Similarly, and Andy Buckley showed us the footage at the BUFOSC Conference at Warrington earlier this year, there is NO doubt, none whatsoever, that daytime footage and photographs of small silvery orbs seen and known to operate in the fields of Southwestern England exists - for real. This footage is bona-fide, the witnesses have seen this and there is a real phenomenon there. There is some tentative evidence that military helicopters from the nearby (for the SW formations at least) Middle Wallop facility (a major AAC helicopter base, some of the aircraft are even black, oooeer) have seen these strange silvery orbs, call 'em UFOs if you like, and hovered over or very near them. Again, for the skeptics, this footage is available to see and I'm sure that others can produce similar if not better evidence for the above. HOW TO MAKE A FORMATION It IS possible to make highly complex formations using simple tools. I've made simple, large-ish circles, up to 120ft, with assistance from one other person in a couple of hours using a simple 4ft board arrangement. A plastic roller can also be used. So can various sticks. (One thing is for sure; your formation always looks better from a distance...) In order to confuse the researcher one can either dowse or employ an electronic meter or measuring device to try and put your formation down in an area of electromagnetic disturbance. Nick Nicholson, Editor of the ever-excellent Circular Review, knows a great deal more about these devices than I do. (Nick is the most honest and down-to-earth croppie that I know..) The very complex formations HAVE been shown to be made under the cover of darkness by a small team with minimal pre-planning but for the approximately 150 formations that appear in the UK - and which are documented by people like the Crop Circle Connector - there must be at least - at a guess - 12/15 teams working, if not more. I'm afraid I don't buy the alien theory in this case though (they're out there alright), nor the "earth energies create crop formations" theory nor Freddy Silva's "low hertz resonance/cymatics" theory either. But something unusual is going on and it's really not just to do with belief systems - although people believe all kinds where crop formations are concerned and that's OK - or wishful thinking. Ask a farmer. He'll tell you about the silvery and golden orbs that fly above fields bearing crop formations. These are seen during the day and night and, as I said before, have been filmed. As a point of detail, many formations never see the local, regional nor national media attention. Are they "practice" formations or something much more profound? Some fascinating cases were investigated by a colleague of mine in Norfolk in 1990. All kinds of strange phenomena came to be associated with three formations that were never reported in any media... So maybe these formations are being under-reported? THE CIRCLEMAKERS - HUMAN TYPE. They believe that theirs is a Sacred Art - they probably hope that their efforts will be seen - just like Damien Hurst and co. No severed cows in formaldehyde here though: Each year they outdo themselves - and each other - and a few teams, Lundberg/Russell/Dickinson included, get "commissions" from advertisers (we've all seem examples), TV programmers (like Channel 4 and Sky. Ch. 4 just commissioned Russell and Lundberg to put down a 218 ft design in a field near Farm World outside Wrexham, North Wales that my friends Steve and Dave of MAPIT have investigated.) AND ALSO FARMERS - the main culprits seeking to make as much money per crop formation acre as possible. In the recent past, many thousands of pounds have been made for farmers by circlemakers - who have also taken their percentage. So the researcher's claim that ALL farmers are "angry" and/or "mystified" is not supportable. Sure, there are many farmers who'd dearly love to get their hands on the circlemakers and never do. Having said that, their crops CAN still be harvested... FORMATIONS NOT HOAXES There appears to be some controversial and still-to-be-fully-reviewed scientific research, Levengood etc., that suggests "genetic changes" - and so on - to the various crops, particularly wheat. I understand that this research is far from perfect and that there is still some confusion. Given that this is perhaps the most important area of debate, perhaps NIDS should stump up some money for a research programme whereby samples are taken from fields over a period of time and then rigorously analyzed. In any case, whomever - or whatever, depending upon your experiences - is producing these formations are/is not hoaxing. They are real, intended and the human circlemakers I have conversed with claim to be "artists", or enthusiasts, but not hoaxers in the sense that they are trying to encourage a belief in aliens. Some that I have spoken to both on four summers worth of trips down South (Eric Morris has been visiting Wiltshire for 22 years, his first experience of crop circles being an offer from the Sunday Express to stand in an early circular formation and tell the readers that "alien spacecraft" had landed there. He was offered �1,000 and turned it down point blank. So much for chequebook Ufology...) and numerous conversations with circlemakers. One thing is for sure; initial and limited interest in circlemaking can lead to addiction! So, as ever, the elusive Paranormal phenomena that fascinate us and which we know to real in every sense are now part of the crop formations debate. Something very unusual is going on and there is sufficient interest to get to the bottom of this in time. In the meantime, I'll continue to listen to both sides, play my small part and know that there is rather more to this than "hoaxing" and bits of board and rope... Tim Matthews - British UFO Studies Centre Tel; (07944) 047195 Attend the MAPIT Conference in Ellesmere Port Strange But True! Final Disclosure - The Alien Threat. 16th September Starting 11:00 am.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Better BUFOSC UFO Footage Being Kept? From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 16:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:41:15 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Better BUFOSC UFO Footage Being Kept? I found an interesting message on compuserve's UFO Forum from Eric Morris which was entitled 'Best Ever UFO Footage'. Eric Says.... "We will carry on investigating cases, infact BUFOSC have better footage than this Cheshire case only we are not making it public as yet." Why have Tim Matthews and Eric Morris been promoting the Cheshire case as the 'best' footage when they are openly claiming they have better undisclosed footage from another case? We may have an answer. Two weeks prior to the alleged landing in Cheshire last year Eric Morris reportedly enetered the same UFO forum asking if anyone knew about a landing in Cheshire. Note: two weeks prior to the case that Tim Matthews and Eric Morris exposed as a hoax. Perhaps BUFOSC are priming the market for even better footage prenegotiating the rates for the 'best' UFO footage, or Eric Morris has mastered the art of Remote Viewing and confidently predicts what footage/cases they will receive in the future, or he just talks more than Tim Matthews realises. To see Eric Morris' message visit the Forum yourself go to... http://go.compuserve.com/UFO Search message number 390430 and see for yourself that BUFOSC have better footage... or so they say! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:27:54 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:42:25 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton Regarding: >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: Updates@sympatico.ca Jenny wrote: >This week the British media, via several TV reports, national >news, major newspaper articles and ongoing hype have revived the >long flagging field of crop circle research through coverage >that puts this 'mystery' into the context of UFOs and aliens. >Indeed in the Daily Mail (10 August 2000) the noted author Colin >Wilson pens an article 'Why I still believe that aliens created >crop circles' and includes with it an image of a 'grey' being >from an alien abduction book to cement the relationship in the >public imagination. Jenny, Reminds me of discussions on CompuServe a few years back. Michael Hesemann's book, 'The Cosmic Connection' featured on the front cover one of Billy Meier's myriad 'flying saucer' photographs and a crop circle which had more of a connection with Rob Irving - see: http://www.ufomind.com/catalog/pub/85860/017/ Rob noted he wouldn't be seeking royalties, "although a small thank you would be nice". It was no more appreciated by Hesemann than my suggestion his book should perhaps have been called 'The Comic Connection'. Rob was the guest of two CompuServe conferences during that time and with permission of all concerned, I compiled a summary of the insightful content. It's still on my web site at: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/crop_cir.htm For those who retain an earnest belief in their capabilities to discern 'genuine' corn imprints, UFOIN's laudable plea for common sense will fall on deaf 'ears'. ;) James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 21:41:14 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:45:36 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:43:42 -0500 (CDT) >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Cuthbertson >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:37:11 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >><snip> >>Carpenter, Mack, Hopkins, Smith, Jacobs, et al do not have any >>'review board' or regulatory agency that they are accountable >>to. If we don't speak out on our own behalf (abductees) then >>these kind of (admitted) abuses will not only continue unabated, >>but they will worsen in nature as time goes by. More people will >>be violated in this way and a few we haven't even thought of. >I'm as certain as I can be without digging thru the archives >that in a recent Updates post it was noted that Hopkins had an >oversight committee (self-imposed perhaps?) that included >psychotherapists. And that committee had in fact commended him >on his professional approach to his work with abductees. While >that isn't a formal regulatory board, it sure sounds like the >man at least tries to offer accountability to somebody. >Also, Drs. Mack and Jacobs are affiliated with universities, to >which I'm sure they could find themselves severely accountable >if serious complaints arose about unethical behavior. >When it comes to professional reputations, I suspect peer >cognizance and pressure are nearly as effective as overt >regulation. >My 2 cents, >-Brian Cuthbertson Dear Brian et al, Mr. Hopkins does have at least one psychologist present, psychologists who volunteer their time and services on his behalf, during all serious conversations with perceived abductees. I was impressed with the modus operandi as I saw it in use by Budd Hopkins, thank God. Which is why I admire him. Actually, Mr. Sandow is most qualified to answer your post, and I hope you do, sir. I am also very certain that he can, after all the years of his service to IF, can can determine the pattern which is helpful in defining who is nuttier than aunt Martha's fruitcake and who is not. Having had sufficient time with me, I am also certain that I have been certified as a Pils man. Yes, I do mean Pils. Nope, I take that back, the only certified Pils man I know is, Lawrence of Hatch. Although I never had a purple Pils in my life, I'll bet you my gold shield that my friend Wilbur, I mean Larry Hatch, may have had one. He's had all sorts of Pils. Larry, has there ever been a purple pils? I do know that there is a purple Glue Vine. I had about six, one gold winter's night whilst at the Christmas crafts fair in Nuremburg. I was fine until I got to my friend, J.P. Neckabruck's Mercedes. Once inside, I began to have visions of dancing grays in my head. Each was wearing a Santa hat, which promptly changed into a saucer and whisked us away on a cloud. Good thing that J.P. Broken Neck (his relative was hanged by his until deceased) was the designated drunk. I was in no condition to drive. My name? Doctor Morte- (death) -llaro. That's right! Dr. Death. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 22:01:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:47:47 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Hubbell >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:38:05 -0500 >From: xxx xxxx <xxx.xxxx@xxx.xxx> >Subject: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 >To: updates@sympatico.ca< Greetings, Thank you for your post. I applaud your willingness to come forth. And I can understand the stress and despair this situation has caused you and your family. <snip> >At the time of our then-pending lawsuit, our legal counsel >contacted Bigelow, requesting that he return all the files he >had purchased from Carpenter. Bigelow's response (via his >attorneys) was that he would return -only- the files of the >persons filing suit upon receiving a list of our names and a >form signed by each of us releasing him from any culpability in >the transaction. >If the identifying information and names were not intact on the >files Bigelow purchased, just how would he be able to send >_only_ ours back? Interesting question. Perhaps Mr. Carpenter would care to answer? Not! For what it's worth, you have my support. Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:49:23 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >It is our opinion that the crop circle phenomenon has been >extremely well studied, its nature has been largely defined >through scientific methods and the latest revival of it is >nonsensical, inappropriate and completely unneccesary - >especially given its baseless association with alien imagery. >We simply wanted you to have the benefit of our collective >experience to see why we do not believe that crop circles have >anything to do with aliens and why, in our opinion, this is now >a solved mystery. Jenny, you post as if you are addressing a junior class. Of all the bragging put out lately concerning how many cases you claim to have solved, this one has to beat them all! Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a lighthouse, is silly. Your claim of having solved the famous 1956 Lakenheath case (for which you still have not offered the proof requested by many) is equally silly. Colin Andrews and many other fine researchers have not just written books about the circles - they have spent considerable time and effort investigating the phenomena. What exactly is your proof that that this is now a mystery that is solved? Please don't tell me you are going to put it up on your web site because I am still waiting in anticipation for the material you were supposed to be posting up almost a year ago concerning your Lakenheath proof. Georgina Bruni
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:50:49 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" - Bruni >Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:28:39 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Bush Says Cheney "Knows" >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I love stories like this one, even if -- as here-- they often >don't make a whole lot of sense. >First, if there was anything that would have distracted the >electorate's (and the world's) attention away from President >Clinton's personal failings, it would have been an announcement >of an extraterrestrial presence on earth. I agree Jerome. However, Clinton and his party may have loved the opportunity but I doubt it would have suited those who take the subject very seriously. >Second, who "elected" George W. Bush at this stage to give us >the word about the ET presence? The only people who can elect >the younger Bush to office are American voters, and they won't >be speaking till November 7, at which time Bush's elevation to >the Presidency is by no means assured. I know, I know, that's why I thought it was so odd. I did some background searching and you might like to know that the person who passed me this extraordinary message is alleged to be a former MI5 agent - well, according to Gary Murray, who wrote "Enemies Of The State, A Sensational expose of the security services by a former MI5 undercover agent," that is. His name is mentioned in the book linked to the investigation of the abduction (not alien) and murder of Hilda Murrell of Sizewell fame. One never knows who one might bump into these days..... Georgina
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy/Damage Done - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 21:24:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:52:32 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy/Damage Done - Hart >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Quite a while back Walt Andrus stated that those files were from >Carpenter's personal research and had nothing to do with MUFON. >I don't see where MUFON has any responsibility at this point. >They don't have an ethical liability because the files were >redacted, according to Carpenter. >Thank you, >Josh Goldstein Josh, To my knowledge one and only one file has come back and it was not redacted. There may be others but I am not aware of them. I can't prove that all files were or weren't redacted so the case can ride on two other issues: 1) Does MUFON allow officers, board members and members to declare that all their case work is "personal" so that MUFON's Code of Ethics does not cover their activities? This would seem a hole large enough to drive a truck through so why have a Code of Ethics in the first place but to deceive everyone if this is the true? Shouldn't John accept the Code of Ethics controls as a condition of his office as Director of Abduction Research or is this too much to ask? Isn't trust between abductees and his office essential? I make this point because he violates several sections of the Code of Ethics whether he acts as a hobbyist or not. He can take his choice, though perhaps not legally, but he can't escape clean in any case. He violates clear ethics procedure with both choices. I've read the Code. How many here have to see if this is the case? 2) Carpenter does have a legal responsibility connected with his medical license which supercedes any other process. This issue will be decided by someone other than MUFON. As I read everything legal I've seen, Carpenter is exactly like a medical doctor in that he cannot disclose files at least without the person's consent. John never had them sign any form of any kind. He in effect tried to take control of personal mental health information, for that is what rooting around in someone's subconscious with hypnosis becomes, without a patient's consent. Don't you start by giving abductees control over what might come out of their session especially since it may cause an enormous fear to know what happened during missing time? How about the abductee's who said they did not want their material sent anywhere for any reason as a condition for their participation in having hypnosis done on them? Do we just run over them without a second thought? It seems that is what some of you are suggesting and this leave me mystified as to what we need to violate anyone's rights to do research? All statements by MUFON officials to-date were made without all the evidence in hand. I had to provide a stack of it to them as MUFON refused to get involved at any level before I came along and forced the issue. So much for responsibility to abductees and their needs. This is the lesson. Anyone's future contact with MUFON and NIDS will be in full knowledge of these facts. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 22:07:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:53:47 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 11:24:47 -0400 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: Updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >This is both something old and new. Current scientific methods >and acceptance must fail at the moment because science has not >yet developed enough. Something was introduced by an unknown >Intelligence which is incompatible to the momentary scientfic >understanding: humans can detect and interact with >electromagnetic fields to which no human build device is able to >respond to. Hoaxers are part of this Phenomenon and you can't be >shure that some formation's idea wasn't _implanted_ into some of >the team's minds. Could you accept that? >By the years, under continuous communication and cooperation >with the genuine energy circle makers, it was shown to us and we >have learned that the Intelligence out there used fine and >deliberate energy grids inside which many of the reported >phenomena happend. Joachim, You need to soak your head in a bucket of beer. Alternatively, if that's what you're already doing, you need to stop and sober up. Crop circles are a dead end. This way leads to madness. Etc. Dennis PS: And yes, I've been there, done 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Bryant Asks The Board Of MUFON To Resign From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 22:23:43 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:56:09 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Bryant Asks The Board Of MUFON To Resign FYI, Larry Bryant, who is MUFON Director of Governmental Affairs, has requested the resignation of the extant board. The following is the mail notification I received just moments ago. More to follow as well as John Carpenter's comments in another mail... 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Carpenter Speaks Out... From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 23:02:04 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:59:00 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Carpenter Speaks Out... Here are comments from John Carpenter himself as received from a friend of his, relayed to me. I also have a copy of Carpenter's comments regarding the "revelation" by one of the abductees, of wrongdoing. I shall send this out in another mail. Best regards to the list .... ========================> ************************************************** John Carpenter Addresses Claims And Rumors: By John S. Carpenter In recent months confusing stories have been circulating around the Internet about my activities as a UFO abductions researcher. Because I serve on the Board of Directors for MUFON as Director of Abduction Research, I feel that I owe the membership, abductees, and anybody else several clarifications so as to reassure them that I have not grown fangs and degenerated into some kind of unethical criminal. A number of assumptions have evolved from the Internet rumors. (1) It is stated that I have sold all of my abduction files to a wealthy Las Vegas billionaire, (2) It is assumed that this man, Robert Bigelow, is a shady character with secret ties to the government just because he has a great deal of money as well as tight secrecy, (3) It is claimed that I sold a list of client names to Robert Bigelow as well, (4) It is stated that I have broken the confidentiality of these cases and exposed these people to harmful scrutiny, (5) It is stated that I do not know anything about psychology and am a charlatan when it comes to hypnosis not to mention claims of sexual affairs during sessions. As is true with any circulating gossip, the truth gets lost among the more interesting additions that develop naturally through distortion. BACKGROUND First of all, UFO abduction researchers share information with each other all the time. When we get together privately or at conferences, we need to compare notes about our cases (because we are scattered around the country) in order to learn more from each other towards understanding the UFO Abduction phenomenon. We have shared cases at public conferences in an effort to educate people and encourage understanding instead of ridicule. Without comparing cases with each other we could not see the important patterns of similarity worldwide. We have kept information confidential to protect those abductees and their families. We have simply been pioneers collecting data while begging science to take a more serious examination. Many professionals and scientists have been afraid to be involved with what has appeared to be a fringe science fraught with hoaxes and oddballs with outrageous claims. But we have needed these great minds to help us research and resolve this mystery. One example of this sharing and compilation of private information is MUFONs Abduction Transcription Project. Around 900 transcripts of hypnosis sessions from hundreds of abductees were offered by at least 20 different abduction researchers. Audiotapes were mailed out to less than 50 volunteers across the country who transcribed these hypnosis sessions, deleting identifying names and giving every transcript a code number. These transcripts were then fed into a computer system which could then retrieve the data in various ways over numerous variables and key words. To the best of our knowledge confidentiality was maintained. Robert Bigelow, the wealthy Las Vegas developer, has been a kind and helpful resource to the field of UFO research over the past 10 years, quietly funding many projects with many of the main researchers like Linda Moulton Howe, Stanton Friedman, Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, Yvonne Smith, Dr. Roger Leir, and organizations like MUFON and CUFOS. Mr. Bigelow was responsible for creating and funding the popular radio show, Art Bells Dreamland because he wanted this country to get some quality education on paranormal topics. He was instrumental in developing and funding the Roper Organizations polling of 6,000 Americans for potential abduction encounters. He helped support the famous Abduction Studies Conference at M.I.T. in 1992. He made available hundreds of thousands of dollars to MUFON, CUFOS, and FUFOR for research projects. But he also desired to attract top quality analysis through different branches of science by the best minds from each field something UFO researchers had only dreamed of but rarely seen. This is when he created and funded NIDS the National Institute for Discovery Science at the end of 1995. Under top secrecy and the highest standards of confidentiality, Mr. Bigelow was able to attract some of the best academic and scientific minds in this country from the fields of astrophysics, medicine, psychiatry, psychology, parapsychology, biochemistry, and physics to quietly convene on a regular basis to seriously study the best data available in the areas of UFOs and abductions, ghosts, near-death encounters, psychic abilities, consciousness, and other paranormal occurrences. A number of famous people were involved, including Jacques Vallee, Ian Stevenson, and two of the Apollo astronauts who walked on the moon. They comprised what became known as the Science Advisory Board for NIDS. RESPONDING TO RUMORS To claim that I sold all of my abduction files sounds as if I loaded up a truck with these cases and shipped them off to Las Vegas for a lump sum of money. First of all, every one of my files, audiotapes, and videotapes on abductions is fully intact within the safety of my own home where they have always been. None of them have ever been logged as official MUFON cases. In fact, I have been going through many of them as I have begun to write a book on my research. I was contacted in 1995 by Robert Bigelow regarding a project to help educate his esteemed and newly-formed Science Advisory Board and enhance their awareness regarding the abduction phenomenon. He considered my personal research and data to be of the quality from which this team of scientists and professionals could learn and benefit. I was immediately concerned with confidentiality, but we agreed that assigning code numbers for each case and deleting identifying data (as in the Abduction Transcription Project) would protect individuals. This Science Board was not interested in anything but the kinds of information and experiences abductees are reporting not who they are or where they live. And I did not send everything that was desired sometimes only a page or two from a number of cases. Because this project would require many hours on my part, Mr. Bigelow agreed to reimburse me for my hours, costs, and other expenses. This essentially resulted in being like a part-time job for about seven months. He insisted on being generous because he knew how many hundreds of hours I had already worked with abductees at no charge in my free hours after my full-time day job. The irony is that at the end of this project in the spring of 1996 his Science Board was already busy with their own projects and reportedly never delved into any of the material that I had sent. Ever since I began collecting information from people back in 1988, I have made it clear that this is UFO research not therapy. I would meet in other locations after my regular hospital work hours and not charge any typical fees. The psychiatric units administrator told me that whatever I did in my free time was my own business. I would meet in borrowed offices, homes, hotels, friends houses, or wherever some privacy could be maintained. Because I paid my all of my own expenses and was volunteering so many of my hours, a number of people insisted on giving me something for my time and trouble. I allowed them to make research donations if they wanted to do so, which was rarely more than $20 total for three to four hours of work. I wanted to make it very clear from the start that this was not a professional service nor were they considered to be psychiatric patients. Although confidentiality was always provided, it was never protected in the strictest sense because unrelated assistants, UFO investigators, artists, friends, or even family members would commonly sit in on interviews and sessions, and there was never any absolute control over what they might say or do afterwards. These were NOT psychiatric patients, and this was NOT psychotherapy. There were never any official medical records kept in any medical office. There were no psychiatric evaluations, treatment plans, therapy goal lists, or progress notes developed. All files containing my research notes, audiotaped interviews, and alien drawings were always kept in a spare bedroom in my home where they all continue to be kept privately today. No case was ever logged or listed officially with MUFON either. Even my malpractice insurance carrier has declared that this research was not a professional activity but the furtherance of a hobby. I have always protected my abduction cases from public scrutiny. Before any media would ever be involved, I would always check with them or get permission to discuss their details. In fact, many of my abductees would call me first to make sure that a media representative would be okay or safe for them to talk with. This project for Mr. Bigelows Science Board offered the highest secrecy and utmost confidentiality from public scrutiny. The claim that I sold a list of names to Mr. Bigelow is not true. My ex-wife, Elizabeth, took a confidential list of names from my home computer at the time of our divorce and began circulating this list without anybody�s permission. It has even been posted briefly on a website on the Internet which is an absolutely horrible breach of privacy and potentially much more harmful. This list which did not include any addresses, states, phone numbers, or anything beyond a name was simply the necessary key to the secret, number-coded cases. Anytime you create codes you have to keep a key to those codes somewhere. And if the name Joe Williams appears on that list, does anybody know with any degree of certainty which Joe Williams in the entire United States to whom this would refer? The "one file" that was allegedly returned from NIDS to an abductee that supposedly had nothing blacked out ---- was none other than my ex-wife and the notes on my ex-wife's experiences. Not only did she give her consent 5 years ago and know fully what I was doing without any concern, but she is the only person who already has her ORIGINAL FILE and has had for the past 3 years! Therefore, she could make copies of anything and claim anything all on her own anyway!!! This is important additional information. The rumorists are not telling people that this file belonged to my ex-wife -- the initiator of ALL of this mess!!! Another recent Internet rumor claims that I neglected the rights of Australian researchers and abductees and was deceptive in the making of my research videotape, Encounters in Australia. When Glennys Mackay with MUFON in Australia invited me to speak at her conference in October of 1996, I let her know right away that I wanted to make a videotape of interviews with Australian abductees when I came to Brisbane. She indicated that there should not be any problem and that she would direct me to a small conference room in the hotel and even send some people to me. With each interview I invited each participant to read and sign a written consent form which indicated that the videotape footage would be used for research and educational purposes to enhance awareness of the abduction phenomenon. This videotape was never commercially produced, never assigned an ISBN number, never widely distributed, nor advertised in any regular fashion in any publication that I am aware of. I simply offer my home-produced research videos for sale to interested participants of UFO conferences at which I have been invited to speak. Although these rumors claim otherwise, many of you do not have to be told that I am well-trained in psychology and hypnosis. I have a B.A. degree in Psychology and a MSW in Social Work with 21 years of experience in the field of psychiatry helping thousands of clients with all kinds of emotional, mental, behavioral, and relationship problems. I was trained in clinical hypnosis at several special programs through the highly-respected Menninger Clinic in Topeka, Kansas, beginning 20 years ago. Claims of sexual affairs during sessions was initiated and perpetuated by my ex-wife only after our divorce. What is ironic about such claims is that I have had one or two helpful assistants present for 95% of all my sessions. The other irony is that the one abductee my ex-wife made claims about always had her husband present for every interview as well as the MSW professional who was assisting me. Also, helping my ex-wife (when we were married) casually explore any of her own UFO memories in the comfort of our home does not make her a patient or my behavior unethical. I will not state anything further about my ex-wife or her actions in respect for her rights and privacy, but such information would further explain many of the rumors, distortions, and claims. Coming from an established field of professional practice into the unestablished and rather chaotic field of UFO research has forced many of us to become pioneers who have had to create the pathways, carve out some rules, and attempt to make credible sense out of what we are doing. Mistakes are easy to make in this field because the guidelines are constantly being either created or revised. The goal has always been to comprehend what kind of intelligence is interacting with our planet so that we can help those people who are being affected to understand and cope effectively. We have always needed the expertise of scientists and other professionals who have traditionally been too leery or skeptical to participate toward those goals. Robert Bigelow and the National Institute for Discovery Science has finally been able to bridge that gap and open new doors for advanced research, scientific evaluation, and eventual understanding. As I have dedicated my life toward helping people, these have been the goals in UFO research which I have been trying to serve within my free time outside of my professional career. I sincerely apologize for the unnecessary confusion and negative publicity which has hurt many feelings. I am certainly not perfect. I am just trying to do a credible job in contributing to this challenging field. =====================> In passing and closing, there will be much more to follow in coming days from me. And I wish to make it CLEAR as a bell with ALL of you that while I believe Carpenter, I acknowledge that he may be guilty of doing a disservice to the abductees if indeed, there was any traceability to them on a personal level. And ONLY then. I also think that (in my opinion) there is at present no reason to report to the 140 abductees if the facts are as they have been presented to me. It is the contention of Mr. Velez that JC did wrong by not getting permission of those whose case histories were sold, and should notify them now. I do not agree with that, necessarily. Why? If the facts are as Carpenter represents them. I have no quarrel with John Velez, but I too, will sit this one out until the facts are made clear in this case. And if they are as presented, there will be at John Carpenter's disposal, all the help I can muster up to give him. No one should be harrassed, accused, have his or her good name dragged into the gutter by anyone. Especially by those who are self professed abductees. Words which I do not agree with but repeat here. Because, in my opinion, we abductees have more to lose at the hands of those who have done the same to us for decades, than JC does. We've been accused us of insanity, of seeking a moment of glory, of lying, etc. And now, one or more of our very own is doing exactly that to a researcher for reasons which have not as yet been proven. Dirty pool. Unfair. Premature at best. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 23:18:13 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:27:13 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign To: Members of the Executive Committee of the Mutual UFO Network, Inc.: Since a cloud of alleged impropriety now hangs over the Executive Committee for its having taken so long to act upon its months-long knowledge of the "Carpenter Affair", I hereby call upon all members of the Executive Committee to resign forthwith from their Committee positions, from their membership on the MUFON Board of Directors, and from their MUFON general membership -- all in the interest of helping restore the public's confidence in the purpose, operation, management, and integrity of this organization. Without your resignation, the mounting public criticism over possible malfeasance/misfeasance/nonfeasance on the part of certain MUFON officials cannot but further erode the public's confidence in our current and future status. In addition, you Executive Committee members owe all of us in the entire field of UFO research not only a full, written explanation as to who on the MUFON Board originally knew of the Carpenter affair (and when they knew it) but also a published apology for their having embargoed or otherwise downplayed that knowledge at the expense of the rest of the Board. If we have a lesson to be learned from this debacle, how about this one: enforced silence never can be the ally of truth! Larry W. Bryant MUFON Director of Governmental Affairs
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:18:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:28:24 -0400 Subject: UpDate: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light I've posted an evaluation of Mark Kelly's orthorectified "Mars Face" enhancement that Tom Van Flandern put on his web site. My evaluation is at URL: http://www.vgl.org/webfiles/mars/face/newface.htm The enhancement was intended to show what the Face would look like at the resolution of the MGS camera but at the lighting and viewing angles of the lower-resolution Viking images. The Viking images were acquired under more suitable conditions for viewing a face than the half-profile illuminated from beneath the "chin" that was actually imaged by the MGS. While I point out in my evaluation what I see as some flaws in the enhancement, I think the overall work is valid and the result is powerful: a representation of a humanoid face that is undeniable. Based on comparisons with the Viking images, I don't see any justifiable way to jiggle the lighting or proportions of the MGS Face image in a way that could arrive at a depiction that differs significantly from the Kelly enhancement. This is not the result of digital trickery. Kelly neither added features not in the original image nor removed features that were present. The match in lighting and positions of features with the Viking images is good. While some people will deny that this enhancement can be valid, I don't think that they will be able to say exactly _why_ it isn't valid. No doubt, it will be claimed that it is the result of wishful thinking. That was my first reaction to it as well, and that was exactly the reason why I decided to compare it to the Viking images. But I saw no specific discrepancies that I would attribute to wishful thinking. I don't expect anyone else will be able to find any, either. I think the Kelly enhancement may eventually have an explosive impact on public opinion. It may even motivate NASA to acquire additional images of the Face as they've promised to do, if only to refute Kelly.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 00:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:37:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mortellaro >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 17:37:15 -0400 (EDT) >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Mulvey >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 05:22:07 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:57:04 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Hi Jim, >><snip> >>>(and someone correct me if I am wrong - I just don't see it) >>>... all that demanding is useless and irrelevant. Because, in my >>>opinion, it is no longer necessary to inform those whose names >>>and records were sent to NIDS since there were no names sent.< > >>OK...you're wrong.<g> >>From my homework, by virtue of John Carpenter being an LCSW, the >>individuals on that list were protected Ethical >>Standards/Disciplinary Rules of the Missouri State Committee for >>Social Workers: >>"(2) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed >>clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant >>shall inform clients, at the onset of the professional >>relationship, of the limits of confidentiality. >Naturally the claim will be made by Jim and others that it >was not a _professional_ relationship, only a hobbiest type >relationship. By the same token some fool could make the >claim that they only had a hobby relationship with their >spouse because they didn't actually pay them to have sex. >>(3) A licensed clinical social worker, provisional licensed >>clinical social worker, temporary permit holder and registrant >>shall keep confidential his/her therapy relationships with >>clients including information obtained from this relationship >>with clients with the following exceptions: >Again, not professional, just hobbiest. >>(A) When the client gives written consent; >>(B) When the client constitutes a danger to him/herself or to >>others; >>(C) When the licensed clinical social worker, provisional >>licensed clinical social worker, temporary permit holder or >>registrant is under court order to disclose information; or >>(D) When required by law." >>[Source:4 CSR 263-3.100 Confidentiality PURPOSE: This rule is >>promulgated pursuant to section 337.630.2(15), RSMo and sets >>forth the ethical standards/disciplinary rules as they pertain >>to confidentiality.] >>Now Jim, If you can't see the ethical and moral factor of >>notifying clients when one's files are going to be transferred, >>then what about the right of the 120 clients to be able to >>choose for themselves if they want to file a legal complaint? >Obviously Jim's theory in life is that he believes everything JC >says... Nonsense! However I believe that you guys do _not_ believe everything he says. Now which of us is correct? You or me? >which is OK, as long as he admits it. Jim would >claim that JC is claiming a hobbiest type relationship which >would exempt him from the law. Jim would likely further claim >that since it was a hobby type relationship and the files were >redacted at least according to JC so everything is still allright. >Naturally we will ignore the fact that Jim (in his support of JC) >chooses to disbelieve Gary Hart in his 247 page documented >report has supposedly documented 6 or 7 abductee files >came back from NIDS with all personal information intact. Have you ever given consideration to the fact that Gary Hart does have a very large ax to grind? I have. My own investigation has uncovered the possibility that some among JC's detractors may have seriously reduced credibility in this matter. I do not refer to anyone specifically, merely in a "What If" scenario of course. Point. What glitters may be fool's gold. Hobby? Crappola. UFO and abduction research is not a hobby. But JC is not practicing as an LSW whilst performing UFO & Abduction research. If you must ask why, then something is wrong with your mental capabilities. And anyone thinking that in confiding in a UFO Abduction researcher is confiding to a licensed professional is a little off track, eh? >And we still haven't heard from Budd to tell us why JC >ended up with at least one and perhaps more of Budd's >files. Not to mention other abduction researchers. Ah but we have heard from Budd. Look his post up in the archives. Not only does he say that what he knows of JC indicates to him a confidence that he is telling the truth but that Budd tends to believe that he IS telling the truth. This among other things turned JV off. John V was apparently unable to continue with further comments about Budd's post because it brought up sensitive memories. And yet it is JV himself who claims that Budd did not respond. Tsk, tsk. And after responding to Budd's response. Oy veh. <snip> >>It must be this sickness that caused you to have posted your >>request to John Carpenter loaded with put-downs aimed at those >>of us who are trying to get these families notified. What's the >>purpose of that? >I was always under the impression that Jim was a defender to the >death of JC and the sale of the files, so his postings are no >huge surprise..to at least me. Then you are under the wrong impression. Your impressions of my impressions are impressionably incorrect. Not to mention incorrigible. However I am happy that you are not surprised. Sometime that (surprise) makes you wanna take mood altering drugs. Cheers, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 03:33:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:38:40 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Mulvey >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:38:05 -0500 >From: xxx xxxx <xxx.xxxx@xxx.xxx> >Subject: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hello, Errol, >Below is a post regarding the ongoing John Carpenter debate, >and the question of whether he sold unexpurgated files to >Bigelow. Would it be possible for you to run this anonymously, >deleting my header and identifying information? I'd like >the information to be posted, but do not want my name/address >attached. >Thanks very much _______________________ >To UFO Updates: >I am one of the abductees whose file was sold by John Carpenter >to Robert Bigelow approximately 4 years ago. I am also one of >the original litigants on the legal proceedings versus Carpenter >regarding his sale of the files. >There has been quite a bit of conjecture here on UFO UpDates >regarding whether or not Carpenter sold unexpurgated files to >Bigelow, or whether the files were sold with names, addresses, >and identifying information deleted. I would like to throw in >just a bit of information for everyone to ponder. >At the time of our then-pending lawsuit, our legal counsel >contacted Bigelow, requesting that he return all the files he >had purchased from Carpenter. Bigelow's response (via his >attorneys) was that he would return -only- the files of the >persons filing suit upon receiving a list of our names and a >form signed by each of us releasing him from any culpability in >the transaction. >If the identifying information and names were not intact on the >files Bigelow purchased, just how would he be able to send >_only_ ours back? >My file consisted of written documents, drawings, and oral tape >recordings. The information contained in the documentation >included names, addresses, and identifying information of not >just me, but my spouse, family members, friends, and co-workers. >Multiply that by 140 persons, each with files containing similar >information -- information that could be detrimental, at the >very least, to their livelihood. >I went to Carpenter for assistance because he carried the >initials of a medical professional. Because of his profession, >and because of his expressed confirmation to me, it was my >understanding that the information I divulged to him was >privileged, and fell under the protection of the >therapist/client relationship. Evidently, that relationship has >no guarantees or assurances. >Sincerely, >One of the 140 Hi 'One', In going through the archives the other night to respond to Colm Kelleher of NIDS, it occurred to me that had all the files been sanitized, Dr. Alexander would have emphasized that in his email to John Velez of July 13th. It was the golden opportunity to make NIDS smell like a rose in this stink. The lack of that assurance, with weeks of discussion behind us, left me feeling more than curious. Based on what you've told us we can either assume that Robert Bigelow is extremely telepathic or that Robert Bigelow bought 140 abductee files which were unsanitized. The latter is unfortunately the more probable reality. As of the writing of this post, I'm still waiting to hear from Colm Kelleher. He talked about the unprofessionalism in Ufology in his last message to this list. Given the resposting of NIDS ethical procedures on privacy, I'm hoping he elaborates on this 'unprofessionalism' in much greater detail in his response to me. Regarding John Carpenter, I did contact the State Committee of Social Workers at 573-751-0885 to confirm that he is indeed a LCSW. The gal I spoke with told me his license expires in September and when I asked about complaints, she told me no complaints have been filed against him. Since I know this issue has come up a few times, I thought I'd bring it up to you. Did I speak to the wrong person? If not, is there a reason why you and others haven't filed complaints? There will be people who won't think you have provided valid information because you chose to not post your identity. Some of those people still won't understand the severity of this issue, nor the urgency to push even harder for those other 120 families to learn the truth. I won't be one of them. Some of that is due to having done my homework. The rest comes from trusting the struggle for human decency and remembering the children Carpenter talked about in the 'Alien Zoo' article. I hope your post encourages more of the ~20 who know to come forward as well as others in the field who's silence is deafening. We can't let this ever happen again and all of us, who are able, need to help push for those other families to learn the truth. You're not alone. This tragedy in Ufology belongs to all of us. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:27:58 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:40:02 -0400 Subject: UpDate: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) When you spend $10G and don't have any more lawsuits to file, well, you have to get your money from somewhere. Gersten's latest scam: The Planetary Appeal Distribution Network. Go to: http://www.padn.org/ This whole idea the good old 'send me a dollar and send 10 more people on this list a dollar and get rich quick' scheme. "It doesn t matter what your beliefs or motivations are; you can benefit by assisting me in distributing, by email, the Planetary Appeal to our executive and congressional leaders and all media organizations. By participating in the PADN, you will be contributing to the free flow of information and our right to know the truth. And I will show you how to receive large sums of money for your help." That's right folks, for a mere $10.00, Gersten doesn't care what your motive is and he'll show you how to make big bucks without working because his" "six degrees of separation" principle guarantees that the PADN will reach everyone on the Internet." I have never seen anyone sell 'the truth' more than this guy...well, FOX is running a close second. I'm just waiting for the late night infommercial to pop up on tv...what's next, UFO chain letters? Psychic UFO Friends Network? I better not give this guy anymore ideas. And we wonder why ufology suffers a small credibility gap... Regards, Royce J. Myers III eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind" eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 UFO Hall o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog (UFO Dirtbag of the Month for August 2000 - beCAUS you demanded 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:48:59 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:43:31 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:01:10 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >Subject: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >To: updates@sympatico.ca, >Source: space.com http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/russian_ufo_report_000808.html >Links are preceded by an asterisk. >Stig >*** >Exclusive: Russian UFO Research Revealed >By Jim Oberg >Special to SPACE.com > >posted: 02:34 pm ET 08 August 2000 Here are some differing commments, thanks to the excellent book of Russian ufologist Boris Shurinov, which was published in French in 1995, but unfortunately no in English. The French title is "UFOs in Russia. The two faces of Russian Ufology". >In an special report obtained by SPACE.com, two of Russia's leading UFO >investigators have summarized the results of the Soviet Union's official >13-year study of UFO reports. >They maintain that the Western media claims of "secret KGB files" and >"captured aliens" are untrue. Boris Shurinov, in addition to that book, enquired on the origin of the "Secret KGB files" video He has brought proof that it was made by an American team, which pretended to make a SF movie, and hired actors in Moscow. The recovery sequence was shot in the vicinity of Moscow. The autopsy sequence was shot in the school of medecine with the "help" (well paid, presumably) of some people there. He said all that publicly at the 1999 San Marino conference. So, why are we talking again of this infamous hoax? BTW, who gave Karl Korff a bit of the UFO for "analysis"? Korff made a press conference, announcing that he would tell everything about the results of a scientific analysis. I would like to know, at the very least, who gave that preposterous debris to him. >"One can hardly imagine a greater absurdity," they write, although they >do admit that their own research program (1978-1990) was indeed >classified "SECRET" at the time and that there remained cases that could >not be explained. In other words, you see : there are no deep secrets in Russia! >The investigators, Dr. Yuliy Platov of the Academy of Sciences and >Colonel Boris Sokolov of the Ministry of Defense, wrote up their >conclusions for an issue of the official Reports of the Academy of >Sciences journal, published in Moscow. Dr. Platov forwarded an advance >copy of the report to SPACE.com. We can se at once who is talking : the Academy of Science and the Ministry of Defence, diligently forwarded to Jim Oberg. >"Many people are the eyewitnesses of strange things," the writers >report, "which cannot always be precisely identified with natural or >man-made effects. However, this amount is very insignificant, and from >this there does not follow even a 'hint' of the probable interference of >extraterrestrial forces into our lives." According to Boris Shurinov, Colonel Boris Sokolov was indeed in charge of collecting and analysing the big inquiry on ufos organised in the military forces during the 70's. Sokolov received many documents, at his "section of applied problems", a joint operation of the Ministry of defence and the Academy of Sciences. At that time, recalls Shurinov, who was the already an active private researcher, Sokolov would welcome information on ufos, would would not give any : it was all secret! So, it was a big surprise to independant ufologists like him when they learned that, in 1993, Sokolov had sold a bunch of these military files to American journalists Bryan Gresh and George Knapp, who were themselves very surprised by the deal! According to Shurinov, it was a "private" sale, to the profit of Sokolov. As everyone recalls, these files contained very interesting ufo cases. How is it that Sokolov talks now of "very insignificant" reports?? <snip> >Military secrets >Platov and Sokolov explain that from the start, the teams "assumed a >high probability of a military-technical origin of the observed strange >effects." >This was based in large part on the iron-clad identification of the >"Petrozavodsk UFO" with the launching of a spy satellite from a secret >nearby base. But this factor dictated that the study be kept secret >because most of the suspected causes were already military secrets. Boris Shurinov gives in his book a very different story of the Petrozavodsk case, in an 11 pages chapter. In short, the explanation by the launching of the satellite Cosmos 955 (which took place at about the same time) from the secret base of Plesetsk, does not stand because that base is at the North-East of Petrozavodsk. Satellites are launched either toward the East or the North , never toward the West!! Besides, it was a complex, multiple witness case, with perhaps several UFOs. The main one came from the North-East, remained still over Petrozavodsk during 10 to 12 minutes, and departed to the North. It looked like a solid object (a disk or a sphere) surrounded by luminous plasma. In 1984, Shurinov met with V. Migouline, a colleague of Platov, together with A. Listratov, at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow. Migouline told them that "the enigma of Petrozavodsk had found no explanation". The observation happened on 23 September 1977. James Oberg produced the satellite explanation as soon as October 1977. In January 1979, Migouline and Platov wrote in the popular weekly Nedelia (The Week) that there was no explanation, and Migouline repeated that in 1984! What an "iron clad" explanation! So, this is the version given by ufologist Shurinov. I would like to know if any mistake can be found 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 14 UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:03:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:45:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: John Carpenter Debate - One Of 140 - Velez Hi 1, Won, One, Juan? :) Thank you for post. That one message did more to 'make it real' than all of the correspondences I've written in the last 6 weeks! You said it all and you said it well. The lack of response from Carpenter in terms of informing the other 120 people is not looking promising. Posting to this list in an effort to appeal for public help in applying a little peer pressure to Mr. Carpenter to 'do the right thing' by these folks and notifying them has not been very successful. I see no reason to continue to repeat the same requests over and over just to respond to misinterpretations and 'static noise' that is introduced by people who have no other interest in this horrible business other than hearing the lilting sound of their own voices. It appears that the only way to prompt Mr. Carpenter to notify his clients is to file a formal complaint with the authorities in Missouri that issued his licenses. Let the State make the determination and assume responsibility for getting him to notify the others. He isn't going to do it on his own. Get together with the other abductees who are aware of the sale of files to join with you in filing formal complaints. Please keep us posted as to progress because we can't rely on Mr. Carpenter to do it. Again thank you for posting. If more people were aware of the hurt and damage internally to some of the families involved they never would have opened their mouths to try to 'minimize' the seriousness of this personal offense to so many witnesses/abuctees. Without knowing them (by knowing myself) I think I can say with confidence that many of them are going to feel as violated, disappointed and angry as you do when they hear the news. I have done all that I can on your behalf. If you wish me to, I too will file a complaint with the Missouri licensing board on your behalf recommending that they investigate this matter. My heart and my thoughts are with all of you. If you need anything from me in terms of help you have only to ask. If it is within my power to provide it I will. My best wishes and warmest regards, John Velez -- ______________________________________________ A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center - www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm jvif@spacelab.net "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Carpenter's LCSW License From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:53:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:01:26 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Carpenter's LCSW License To The 140: According to the Missouri State Committee of Social Workers (573-751-0885), Carpenter's license expires next month (September). If your files are among the 140 that Carpenter sold, _PLEASE_ call the office and file a complaint. Regards, Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Thought Provoking Thoughts From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:30:04 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:04:09 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Thought Provoking Thoughts Hello People, Being that I am a bit bed ridden with a viral flu at the moment I have quite a bit of time on my hands. Whilst I was reading some of my backlog of UpDates the one thought occurred to me. Whilst watching a film later on that day another thought occurred to me, OK no sarcastic remarks about two thought in one day puleese. Thought one, Memory is a funny thing. I was interviewing a person who had seen a strange light a few weeks back. This person had difficulty remembering exact details even though the sighting happened only two days before. As I drove the witness to where they saw this anomalous light the radio was playing and the DJ said something like, "and here is a blast from the past, a golden oldie, something from 1979" He then played a song which the witness sang along to - word for word. Now here we have a witness who could not remember details from 48 hours before singing a song that is over twenty years old. Thought two, JFK. The film that I was watching was Oliver Stone's 'JFK'. The thought that occurred to me was this. JFK was taken out because he wanted to take power away from the military. Was the military leaders in power in 1963 the same military leaders back in 1947? Who said there's no such thing as the "old boy network". Anyway back to one thought a week mode. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:55:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:06:17 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Hatch >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:22:28 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 14:46:44 -0400 >>From: Egio Hernan De La Vega Buonanno <egiohern@idirect.com> >>Subject: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - De La Vega Buonanno >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >>You know that I have never sent not even one comment to your >>List, but I enjoy a lot the diversity of points of view and >>opinions on the UFO subject and other extranormal phenomena and >>events that the readers kindly offer to a large attending >>multitude. In the last few years I have considered and analyzed >>messages whose authors really were able to show how deeply they >>had understood the complexity and also simplicity of these >>phenomena. I have also read other messages whose authors do not >>hesitate to submerge themselves into the most ridiculous >>stupidities, abandoning elementary scientific and logical >>procedures when analyzing those interesting phenomena. >>I am very surprised and also very sorry to hear from Jenny >>Randles that she believes the crop circle presence and inherent >>complexity can be explained away by miserable hoaxes, kind of a >>gigantic Doug and Dave unprofitable intensive-work enterprise, >>and the cooperation of normal atmospheric phenomena. To assert >>with a straight face such an illogical and unscientific >>statement, absolutely disregarding all available evidence, >>says a lot about the person and his/her " baggage of knowlege." >Hi, >Just to say that UFOIN will respond to the postings about our >crop circle memo such as the one above. >I simply here wanted to note that turning what was clearly >issued as a statement by the UFOIN team into my personal plea >(as alleged in the above posting) is misleading. If it were my >personal plea then I would have issued it onto this list as such >and I clearly did not. >The statement we posted indicated that it was issued by UFOIN (a >team of 20 experienced ufologists - half of whom are highly >published in the field and most of whom are well known to fellow >ufologists). The team includes several pioneer researchers in >the crop circle field. >That is an important difference from this memo being issued as >my personal plea. >Indeed, because it is NOT my plea for sanity, but UFOINs,I have >to collate responses from the rest of the team rather than >simply issue my personal reaction here. >But I will post responses - and they will be comments by the >team. So please bear with me - and do appreciate that my name is >there on the memo only because I posted it onto this list... >Although I should emphasise that I do, as it happens, personally >support the memo that we issued. Hello Jenny, Egio and others: I usually try to avoid controversies, especially those that go in circles or don't accomplish much. I have to agree with the UFOIN statement mostly. Doug and Dave (or whoever) could not have created all those intricate works of art, but an army of "wannabes" could. Then there are a few that might be caused naturally, the very simplest ones. I would add a couple of notes however. There is a very slight possibility of beam weapons being tested, possibly for purposes of psychological warfare. Here I have no first hand knowledge, not even second hand really. To speculate, something like a laser beam could carve intricate patterns in the crops as a sort of test. Thirdly, there are a few cases of "saucer nests", supposedly left behind by landed UFOs. Of all causes, only this last one seems UFO related. Other than that, I do not catalog Crop Circles at all. The same goes for Chupacabras and religious miracles BTW. They are outside the scope of anything I 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Colin Andrews - Research Flawed? From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:55:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:21:13 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Colin Andrews - Research Flawed? I don't post many comments on UpDates but in light of recent events I felt I should post what I know of the current situation regarding the so-called magnetic anomalies of which Colin Andrews speaks and a few other things. The "experts" who shout the loudest are the ones in published books, on TV and have high media profiles. The researchers who keep generally quiet, gather findings and then release them to other investigators are the ones who are usually doing some of the best work. They usually have full time jobs and support their activities from those jobs. The recent media circus which Colin Andrews has helped foster has done nothing but harm to the crop circle community. No other opinions from other seasoned researchers have been forthcoming which by its implication means that Colin has all the answers. From what I saw on TV he has a gadget on a pointy stick - HURRAH. A similar gadget used by another researcher at a known hoax formation gave significant readings indicating genuiness. His research is flawed. If we are to be truly scientific in our research we must have criteria from a "real event" and a hoax. Until we have those we will not know what we are looking for. As for 80% of crop circles are hoaxed, it is the same statement as 95% of UFOs are identifiable. It is touted out so that we look as reasonable as possible in front of the scientific community. Mark Haywood easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~mark.haywood/Cosmic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Keith From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:23:59 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri - Keith >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 20:15:12 -0500 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Ethics for LCSWs in Missouri >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Ann, >My primary effort is to tune and strengthen the JC case MUFON >received so that it can be taken to the MO board as a >complaint. Gary, I appreciate the efforts you have made. I don't agree that any "tuning" needs to be done. The people who know their files have been sold, should _immediately_ file an individual complaint with the state of Missouri -- as long as the feel they have been harmed by Carpenter's actions. >This may take two months. While individuals can complain >themselves, it will be most effective to have one complete case >using the largest, most accurate body of evidence to present to >the board. One focused effort. Wrong, IMO. Only one person need complain for the state to investigate. You don't need to provide the evidence, the state will gather it. It's great to have supporting documentation, but I do believe that the abductees who know their files have been sold, have all they need to file a complaint. They have Carpenter stating that he did, in fact, sell the files, and Bigelow claiming to have been the purchaser. These rules and regulations have statutes of limitation and the sooner someone files an official complaint, the sooner something will be done. >As usual, legal cases take time. This time is no exception. I >respect the need of those involved to get something done in a >timely manner so the work to accomplish this is in progress. No one should be preparing for a legal case, at this point. There is a simple complaint form that needs to be filled out and sent to the state of Missouri. There is no need for much else. Rebecca PS. I'm tacking this one because I keep reading about people claiming this thing was a hobby. Anyone who holds a license by a state (doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, social workers, etc.) always hold that license (unless revoked). A doctor can't ethically not render aid, just because he's not on call. A lawyer can't break the law and expect to keep his license, just because he wasn't acting as a lawyer at the time. A real estate agent can't buy property without disclosing the fact that they are a licensed agent. You are bound by the rules and regulations of your state's licensing board 24 hours a 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:34:35 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:25:57 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Odors from UFOs - Young >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 04:54:19 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >It's understandable why NIDs or any other organisation >interested in UFO reports are requesting new sightings, however, >it seems there are already vastly more than anyone is able to >investigate! Hi Jim, Colm, List: You are right about this, but unless a report has actually been competently investigated, everything being equal, a "fresh sighting" is probably far more useful than one that is many years old. Just the problem of ruling out aircraft, for example, in the case of a sighting which might be one, is impossible once radar tapes or other flight records are no longer available. If NIDS wants to establish their own "baseline" of random sighting reports, they may want to do all of the work themselves. >There may have been a time, although this is debatable, when 95% >of UFO reports were explainable, yet that tends to be based on a >relatively small sample, typically from 'Project Blue Book', or >such-like. It seems to me that there is a difference between "reports" and "investigated reports". The small samples you are speaking of, I think, are of investigated reports. >The entire perspective has evolved over subsequent years >and the means, plus the climate, for reporting observations >has significantly advanced. In my experience, which >encompasses analysing the large number of (additional) sightings >reported to the National UFO Reporting Center, the facts are >somewhat different. >95% of UFO reports are never explained. Are these raw NUFORC reports, Jim, or the "unkowns" which are left after you've analyzed the sightings? There's a big difference, and I'm confused. While I know that the personal biases of the investigators undoubtedly enter into the matter, I've been looking into reports since the 1960s and the figure of 95% of all reports being unknowable is, I think, way out of line. >If I'm mistaken, then given the number of reports we know are >made each year, can someone please let us know where 95% of them >are in fact documented as definitely/probably resolved. >This would save me a lot of research, and I'm sure others as well. One was the Center for UFO Studies study in the mid-late 80's done by Allan Hendry, reported in his book, The UFO Handbook (Doubleday/ Dolphin, Garden City NY, 1979). Clear skies (finally, it's been a miserable summer), Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Carpenter Speaks Out... - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:55:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:29:31 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Carpenter Speaks Out... - Hubbell >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 23:02:04 -0400 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Carpenter Speaks Out... >To: updates@sympatico.ca< Mr. Mortellaro, >Here are comments from John Carpenter himself as >received from a friend of his, relayed to me. This doesn't surprise me in the least. John Carpenter is a coward, choosing to respond through third parties about the charges leveled at him. I will address only one issue from his message. <snip> >Although these rumors claim otherwise, many of you do not have >to be told that I am well-trained in psychology and hypnosis. I >have a B.A. degree in Psychology and a MSW in Social Work with >21 years of experience in the field of psychiatry helping >thousands of clients with all kinds of emotional, mental, >behavioral, and relationship problems. I was trained in clinical >hypnosis at several special programs through the >highly-respected Menninger Clinic in Topeka, Kansas, beginning >20 years ago. Then you should have known better, Mr. Carpenter! Shame on you for your actions. Shame on you for your cowardice. Shame on you for not notifying the clients before you sold their files. You are a disgrace to the profession. Katherine Hubbell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Open Request To Researchers - Keith From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:33:54 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Request To Researchers - Keith >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 13:39:11 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Open Request to Researchers >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Robert Gates wrote in The MUFON-NIDS Coalition thread: >>If JC is fair game, shouldn't we also be asking Budd and >>other abduction researchers for a list of all files they either >>sold or gave away to other researchers for any researcher >>for any reason. As I recall JC admitted that he got a number >>of files from other researchers. As was suggested this may >>end up to be 60 of the 140. >Early on, there were emotional requests for statements from >other researchers but to date, we've only heard the one from >Budd via John Velez and Jenny's thoughtful comment about her >own philosophies and the UK Ethics Code. It's been six weeks. >Now is the time for statements be issued by other researchers. >Being afraid of getting into the web of emotion that's been >posted here isn't a valid enough reason to not make a statement, >given the level of responsibility here. Your continued silence is harmful. >Reseachers, in this extreme crisis, you do have a >responsibility to communicate with us, regardless of the passion you've read or the emotions that you may be feeling. I disagree -- just a little bit. Researchers who also hold licenses or who might belong to professional organizations (there are at least 2 hypnosis organizations) maybe hampered in offering their opinions on John Carpenter's problems. Professional ethics comes in to play. We might not like it, but just reading the code for Missouri Licensed Clinical Social Workers, one can find that other social workers or prohibited from commenting on another's problems -- at least until there is some resolution by the board. Doctors don't bad-mouth each other, typically. At least, not until they are called to testify. It's sometimes a cr@ppy world we live in, but if expect Carpenter to play by the rules (and I do), then I have to expect that other licensed professional to play by the rules as well. I do think that the dialog here on UpDates has been beneficial in gettting the word out. <snip> >Now is the time to come forward. We need to know how you conduct >your business with the abductee community and your system of >ethics in doing so. We need your voice. We need it now please. I don't think there is anything that prohibits a professional from letting folks know how their business is conducted. This could be a good thing. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:08:48 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:35:05 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:27:58 -0700 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >Subject: The, BS (CASU) >To: updates@sympatico.ca >When you spend $10G and don't have any more lawsuits to file, >well, you have to get your money from somewhere. Gressane's >latest scam: The Planetary Appeal Distribution Network. Go to: >http://www.padn.org/ >This whole idea the good old 'send me a dollar and send 10 more >people on this list a dollar and get rich quick' scheme. >"It doesn t matter what your beliefs or motivations are; you can >benefit by assisting me in distributing, by email, the Planetary >Appeal to our executive and congressional leaders and all media >organizations. By participating in the PADN, you will be >contributing to the free flow of information and our right to >know the truth. And I will show you how to receive large sums of >money for your help." Royce, Anyone who might be preparing to send their check: Isn't that illegal? I think it is in Pennsylvania. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:29:09 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:37:16 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Mortellaro >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:27:58 -0700 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >Subject: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >To: updates@sympatico.ca >When you spend $10G and don't have any more lawsuits to file, >well, you have to get your money from somewhere. Gersten's >latest scam: The Planetary Appeal Distribution Network. Go to: >http://www.padn.org/ >This whole idea the good old 'send me a dollar and send 10 more >people on this list a dollar and get rich quick' scheme. >"It doesn t matter what your beliefs or motivations are; you can >benefit by assisting me in distributing, by email, the Planetary >Appeal to our executive and congressional leaders and all media >organizations. By participating in the PADN, you will be >contributing to the free flow of information and our right to >know the truth. And I will show you how to receive large sums of >money for your help." >That's right folks, for a mere $10.00, Gersten doesn't care what >your motive is and he'll show you how to make big bucks without >working because his" "six degrees of separation" principle >guarantees that the PADN will reach everyone on the Internet." I >have never seen anyone sell 'the truth' more than this >guy...well, FOX is running a close second. I'm just waiting for >the late night infommercial to pop up on tv...what's next, UFO >chain letters? Psychic UFO Friends Network? I better not give >this guy anymore ideas. And we wonder why ufology suffers a >small credibility gap... Dear Royce, Listers and EBK, Just what are you objecting to anyway, Royce? Are you objecting to a legal method of raising money? Or are you objecting to the fact that it is MLM (multilevel marketing)? Or are you objecting to the fact that because it is CAUS, this is no way to make a buck? I am just not certain of the reason for your being somewhat negative over the project. Is it the plan itself which grates? Or is this something which you perceive no self respecting UFO organization should engage? Help me with this as I am not seeing your point. The plan is legal. No Federal or local laws are broken. It is a way for CAUS to raise cash for it's continued functioning. It is also a way for the CAUS member to make a few bucks. It seems to me that every time someone on this List gets his or her self in a hissey fit over someone else on this List, that someone launches a missile the size of a Scud on the hissey fittee. I don't get it. Or perhaps I do. "Don't make any enemies with me or I shall launch my scuds at you and make you and yours look like a damned fool." With respect, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact - Myers From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:31:11 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:41:22 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact - Myers >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 14:10:50 -0400 >From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com> >Subject: Gersten Cares Little For Historical Fact >To: UFO UpDates list <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello, Moderator of UFO UpDates... >Perhaps you will not consider this relevant (and feel free to >not post it to the list, or to excerpt is as you see fit), but >today I have had a little exchange with Peter Gersten (the 'UFO >Lawyer') that shows that he has little regard for truth or >actual historical fact, and is perfectly happy to spread >long-discredited tales as historical fact. <snip> Wendy and List: Gersten cares about himself and money, plain and simple. This guy is only a champion of his pocket book. As is evident by Wendy's e-mail from Gersten, you can't tell the guy anything without him e-mailing you back and being an ass about it. Well, unless it has to do with money. The guy is _obviously_ perfect... guess that's why he's broke and always begging for money. What am I saying? Silly me, it's all about the "message"...right? "What's real isn't important"...right? Wendy got about the average Gersten e-mail reply, anytime you disagree with him you're automatically in contempt of Gersten. Below are just a few gentle words via e-mail I received from good, kind-hearted, non-UFO Sunday, peace loving Gersten: (To clarify, I mistook his UFO list for UpDates and was just beginning to recieve UFO Updates, I had never subscribed to any list as active as UpDates prior to this and sent a message to Gersten asking not to be sent so many e-mails... silly me for making a mistake... The responses from Gersten provide quite an insight into Gersten...) 1) << Peter, <<Do you think it is possible that you send out an e-mail or two, not 21 to my box within a few hours. I apreciate the very up to date info, but it's bordering on ridiculous. Also, do you have a comment regarding Firmage's point of view of the Stephens issue, would like to hear it. Thanks.>> Royce, You doth jest with a fellow traveler...21? Most I have ever sent out was three. And yesterday was two. Today will be two. Is your delete button inoperable...or do you simply need to exaggerate totally out of context and break my balls. Cranky today? 2) << Please...do get some help. >> Royce, Is your shrink booked up or can I have his number? 3) << I sent you the message in error and would apologize otherwise if not for your rude response. Perhaps you need another vacation... >> LOL..I respond to a sarcastic and inaccurate e-mail that you mistakenly sent and I am rude and need a vacation...DUH! And what's this about another vacation. Everyday is a vacation for me. Now you will have 4 e-mails from me today...I think you like getting mail from me. And everything happens for a reason...even 'errors.' Peter 4) << Do you talk to everyone on your list like this? Just curious.>> No, actually only you. Wonder why? << At least you didn't open up with your rambling, new-age, pseudo-Shakespeare lingo again.>> No problem, consider yourself unsubscribed from CAUSupdates. I would not want to subject you to any further discomfort....or send out something that isn't appreciated. Peter 5) << Since I'm off your list, you have no further reason to contact me. >> Now why would I do such a punitive and spiteful thing as that? Peter
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Filer's Files #32 -- 2000 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:13:09 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:44:50 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Filer's Files #32 -- 2000 Filer's Files #32 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern August 14, 2000, Majorstar@aol.com, Sponsored by Electronic Arts Web Site at: http://www.filersfiles.com.-Chuck Warren Webmaster. TORRENTIAL RAINS, INCREASED UFO AND SUN ACTIVITY As I write this New Jersey is again being hit by torrential rains, flooding and poor weather. I have not seen this kind of weather since the Vietnam War. Many people are reporting strange weather that might be tied to contrails, disappearing aircraft and increased UFO reports. We had 14 inches or rain yesterday. Nothing similar to these rains are reported unless a hurricane comes through the area. When there are momentary breaks in the clouds at night, a Perseid meteor shower can be seen shining through the colorful Northern Lights. Auroras were spotted as far south as Los Angeles, California and New Jersey. On August 12, 2000, the Earth was hit by a shock wave from coronal mass ejection's from our sun as solar activity remained high. The colorful skies when visible through the clouds and smoke from Western fires has been spectacular. Perhaps the meteors, fireballs, and Northern Lights have encouraged people to report the flow of UFOs. If you can see the sky you might see some interesting sights. I don't get easily worried but I'm concerned about what connection might exist between the vast wildfires raging out of control in much of the Western United States and many reports of fireballs, meteor showers, coronal mass ejection's, and the strange weather ongoing in recent weeks. We have more reports of low level contrails forming, hinting at some type of weather manipulation or virus control operations. The news media warns of the spreading of the West Nile Virus in the Eastern US and heavy aerial spraying to reduce the mosquito population carrying the virus. Eighty-two fires are burning in the West. I'm uncomfortable with all these reports. Living not far from Princeton, I wondered what the father of modern physics, Albert Einstein would say about all this? He said, "Science without religion is lame," Einstein also wrote, "Religion with science is blind." I take this to mean we better start collecting scientific evidence and praying for a little sunshine and help. When viruses start exploding and changing with all these weather changes, we need help where ever we can get it. RUSSIA SUBMARINE HITS UNDERWATER USO ARCTIC CIRCLE NORTH OF EUROPEAN RUSSIA -- Itar-Tass news agency said, the nuclear-powered Russian submarine Kursk reported it had hit an unidentified object underwater on Sunday, August 13, 2000. Small rescue submarines were circling the Kursk for an initial inspection and found it damaged, but sitting straight on the seabed after a collision The stricken sub was built in 1994, and is classed as Oscar-2 by NATO. Officials said, the submarine was damaged, possibly in collision with a foreign submarine. Although not generally known to the public, high speed unidentified submerged objects (USOs) are frequently reported. UFOs are often seen entering and leaving the water. RIA news agency quoted the Northern Fleet press office as saying the crew was not in danger and that the question of abandoning the stricken vessel had not been raised. ''The Russian Northern Fleet command said, "They did not rule out that the foreign submarine was also damaged and was now not far from the Kursk.'' Russian and US submarines traditionally play war games in the area. In 1993, a Russian Delta-3 class nuclear-powered submarine collided with the USS Grayling in the Barents Sea, but both vessels were able to return to base. US Navy spokeswoman said, that a US Navy ship "Loyal," that gathers underwater acoustical data, was about 250 miles away from the Russian submarine when it went down. The ship was there by coincidence and had nothing to do with the Russian submarine or subsequent rescue efforts." Two US submarines were also in the general area but there is no indication they were involved. THIRD ANNIVERSARY OF SWISSAIR UFO NEAR MISS KENNEDY AIRPORT -- Two friends of mine Bob Durant and Don Berliner investigated one of the most significant cases concerning UFOs in recent years. At 5:07 PM on August 9, 1997, a Swissair Boeing 747 experienced a "near miss" with a cylindrical "glowing white" object traveling almost directly toward the cockpit at very high speed. The airliner was in level flight at 23,000 feet and cruising at 340 knots indicated speed in a cloudless sky. Six weeks after the event, the story was disseminated by the Associated Press new service. According to the AP account, the National Transportation Safety Board (NSTB) identified the object as a weather balloon, citing a report from another airline of a weather balloon in the same general area. The airplane was a Boeing 747, a wide-bodied along range airliner with Swiss national registration. The flight left Philadelphia International Airport at 4:50 PM and landed at Boston Logan Airport 57 minutes later. The cockpit crew consisted of Captain Phil Bobet, with 15,000 hours flying time, First Officer copilot G with 7,500 hours and Flight Engineer K. Captain Bobet was sitting in the left pilot's seat when sixteen minutes after takeoff they were over New York Kennedy Airport in clear weather. The two pilots almost simultaneously saw the UFO. The following dialogue is from the tape recording made by the FAA. This permits later investigation of communications where accidents or unusual events occur. Swissair Flight 127 (Probably Capt. Bobet speaking.) "ATC Swissair 127." ATC = Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, Danbury Sector 22: "Go ahead Swissair." Swissair: "Yes sir, I don't know what it was, but it just over flew just like a couple of hundred feet above us. I don't know if it was a rocket or whatever. But incredibly fast. Opposite direction." ATC: "In the opposite direction?" Swissair: "Yes sir, and the time was two-one-zero-seven (5:07 PM local time). It was too fast to be an airplane." ATC: "OK, thank you." To Houston 986, another airplane in the vicinity of Swissair 127: "Did you see anything like a missile in your area, perhaps off to your right?" H 986: "I'll take a good look, but if it's going that fast, I probably won't get a chance. We just saw Swissair go by a minute ago." Swissair 127: "We had no warning. It was way too fast!" The radio report was so provocative that the Boston Flight Standards office was notified while the airplane was still airborne and a FFA officer was sent to meet the crew. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), along with the FAA met the pilots. Normally this type of meeting is unheard of. The next day the Swissair crew was interviewed separately by four government agents. Bob Durant a commercial airline pilot later interviewed the Captain Bobet who said, he was clearly dismayed the balloon explanation. "He thought it preposterous!" Captain Bolet thought, "The path of the UFO was from opposite direction, slightly right. Estimated horizontal distance-between First Officer's seat and engine #3, vertical distance between 100 and 200 feet above the aircraft. "At the same time, I saw the First Officer plunging his head down towards his knees. The Flight Officer mentioned later that he thought he would get hit by the object. The UFO speed appeared to be very high. The object was white and balloons are dark. Balloons fly for about an hour and the last one had been launched ten hours earlier. Thanks to R. J. Durant and Don Berliner. A detailed report is available from the Fund for UFO Research. Editor's Note: Several terrible accidents have occurred in recent years that may be related to near collisions with UFOs. The crew of Egyptian Flight 990 apparently put their aircraft into a steep dive possibly as the result of a near miss. News accounts speculated that a pilot wanted to commit suicide and caused the death of those aboard. I feel it is more likely that Flight 990 took evasive action to avoid hitting an approaching Unidentified Flying Object similar to the one that almost hit Swissair 127. Allegedly, Egyptian pilot Gameel el-Batouty's said a prayer "Now I put my faith in God's hands" just prior to diving the aircraft. The plane dived for 40 seconds and seemed to pull up before failing to recover. Many of us might of stated something similar. PENNSYLVANIA LIGHTS BETHLEHEM -- Margaret Kichline writes, "I went outside about 4:00 AM on July 23, 2000, with my binoculars since it was pretty clear. Fifteen minutes later, I saw a bright yellowish-white object right below the moon that was the size and brightness of Polaris. It was moving very fast traveling toward Ursa Minor. I would say it took 20 seconds before it was out of my view. At 4:30 AM, another object identical to the first flew directly above the moon heading north toward Polaris. About 5:00 AM , I saw three similar fast moving flying objects, except they were not as bright, and were moving in same general area of the sky. There were no sounds, and no strobing lights. They were just steady glowing objects. Thanks to: Peggy K. vixalien@enter.net. FLORIDA RODS TAMPA -- Skywatch reports that a lady notified them that on August 7, 2000, "I have just seen the most remarkable site when I saw three rod-shaped craft in a huge triangular formation with the largest in the center." I do not believe they are stars because you can see stars beyond them. The stars are not nearly as bright and colorful. They are not rod-shaped and are not anywhere near as large as these appear to be. They appear to be over Tampa with the central and largest object facing north. There is a misty cloud cover to the west of them and there are what appear to be two of the other, smaller rod shaped vehicles just to the north of the large triangular formation. These two are also quite elongated and bright. They do not appear to be moving at all." I watched for a full five minutes. They still haven't moved and I have never seen any stars in the Florida sky that are elongated or truly rod-shaped as these are. They look like skinny, colorful vertical bars. There is no noise. The streetlight behind my house blinked off an on the whole time I was standing there, never fully lighting up or sustaining light. At first I saw what I thought was a shooting star, but it appeared as a very THICK band of white light shooting from north to south just east of the large triangular formation. It wasn't falling down -- it crossed north/south." Thanks to: DRxDON Skywatch International, INC. VIRGINIA CONTRAILS HAMPTON ROADS - Contrails are intense almost every day, but the real spooky thing is that, on any given plane, the contrails stop, start, stop, start, etc., leaving a pattern of disjointed trails what the heck is THAT? The contrails are particularly intense over Virginia Beach. It looks like tic-tac-toe almost every day. Thanks to Steven Wallace Steve xcongressx@yahoo.com. Editors Note: We are getting reports of contrails from all over the world. If anyone owns an expensive video cameral with 3ccd please take photos. If you own a plane get air samples. WISCONSIN: HOW AIRPLANES SUDDENLY DISAPPEAR MADISON -- Whitley Strieber writes he received this interesting E-mail from Mark. "Last summer, I was taking my noon walk next to Truax Field, when I saw an Orion sub hunter aircraft with the long MAD detector off the tail. I noticed because it was painted totally white, and had no markings. The Air National Guard was wheeling the craft into a hangar. About two weeks later, I was out in the sticks on the Wisconsin River when I heard the loud roar of a large plane. I looked up and there was nothing. I put on Polaroid sunglasses, and the plane was perfectly visible. I put the glasses on and off several times and the plane was only visible with polarized light. Nova had a show on camouflage, and it showed you could put lights on a military tank, and illuminate the tank, and it would disappear into the glare of the sky in the horizon. I think that there are aircraft that are illuminated with wing tip floods that make them disappear in the glare of the sky. I think the answer is technically very simple. A law enforcement friend informed me that the big Orion's are used to sniff methlabs in our war on drugs. Thanks to Mark S.sulla@gdinet.com and W Strieber, whitley@strieber.com NORTH DAKOTA FIREBALLS AND DISAPPEARING CRAFT Dave Fugere writes, "I have had Chemtrails sightings and taken pictures. Once you've had this strange stuff happen to you there is no way you can rest and blow it off without wanting to do a lot more observing. I videotaped rods on film six months before I even heard about them. I never thought I would ever be telling someone that I saw an airplane vanish in front of my eyes but it happened two weeks ago. Almost every night between 9 and 11:00 PM we have one or two planes that fly over my house with red and green lights. I was watching with my binoculars and I looked down for a for a second. When I looked back up and it was gone! You and others are now reporting things similar to what I saw. On August 7, 2000, I saw a white fireball in the northern sky falling at a certain trajectory and then it just seemed to drop at a steep angle. I fully expected it to hit not far away and was waiting for the explosion as it disappeared over my house. I was surprised to see it still burning very bright, but it didn't leave a trail like a shooting star does and was much slower. This is the third time this year I have seen one like this but this one was the brightest and biggest and burned the longest. Thanks to :DaveDFugere@goesp.com (Dave Fugere) TEXAS DAYLIGHT CYLINDER AUSTIN -- We had a daylight sighting of a large cylindrical object which lasted 30 seconds before the object disappeared on June 30, 2000, at 8:30 PM, which is still broad daylight. My husband and I spent a week on Lake Travis in a subdivision called Lakeway. There were jets and light planes flying to and from Austin's airport. My eye was drawn to a very bright white object which suddenly appeared flying rather quickly to the southeast at four to five thousand feet. The western sun reflected on the object and we were able to see the side of a large white cylindrical object with a very distinct round, flat rear end, also bright white. After about thirty seconds we saw the round rear of the craft enter the only cloud in the sky and we lost sight of it altogether. There was no noise made by the craft. The two areas in which my husband and I disagree are the angle in which the object flew, he says at a tilt and I say parallel to land, and what the front of the craft might have looked like. My husband believes the front was flat and I just couldn't tell because the object appeared suddenly and the front end was past our point of determination. My eighteen year old son has begun to look up since our sighting and on August 6, 2000, told me he saw what appeared to be a falling star. The *star's* trajectory lasted much longer than that of shooting stars he has seen in the past. It also flashed a blue light during it's trajectory which took up the entire sky he was able to see. Thanks to Craig and Carol Cowgill WASHINGTON LIGHTS GIG HARBOR -- Linda Lull writes I have been observing and following the chemtrail story for the past eighteen months. Lately, I noticed these light objects going in and out of sight. The most I can make out of them is a shinning light, then they total disappear from sight. I have been observing this activity for some time now. It does seem to be getting more frequent. Yesterday, I spotted the bright light twice in two different locations. I have noticed these light objects being visible than not visible around Chemtrails. I did not know what to make of it? I might add I'm a former Flight Attendant. Thanks to: Linda Lull, lindalull@hotmail.com. CALIFORNIA LIGHTS VICTORVILLE -- Mr. R. called the MUFON San Bernardino Hotline to report that on August 9, 2000, his wife looked out the window and noticed two very bright white lights swooping back and forth in the sky at 11:30 PM. She alerted him to the lights and he went outside his front door and was met by a blinding white light that illuminated his house and street. The light suddenly went out and he noticed both his outdoor mercury vapor lights and street lights were out. As he stood in the total darkness, he was again surrounded by the intensely bright light that lasted about a minute then once again blinked out of sudden darkness. About a minute and a half later he heard a rumbling sound like a sonic boom, that sounded like the noise that sometimes precedes an earthquake. The windows in his house rattled, but the ground never shook. Following the vibration, he looked towards the northeast sky and saw what appeared to be two faint white "falling stars" that were "falling" side by side and disappeared at the same moment. Mr. R. reported that there were no visual observations of normal aircraft or helicopters in the sky during the event and no sound was heard, with the exception of rumbling. Thanks to Cinde Costello LOOKIN4ET ENGLAND UFO SEEN NORTH LONDON - A high flying slow moving UFO was observed Friday afternoon on August 11, 2000, with a flashing light as it went into high cloud. Some observers thought the flashing light was actually light reflecting from sun. The shape discernible was egg shape on its side. It was not a plane, its possible the object was a weather balloon but both the shape and movements didn't seem right. Too low to be satellite. The object was visible for about 20 minutes until it didn't appear to emerge from cloud. Thanks to DAVE <David@qthlondon.freeserve.co.uk and gerry@farshore.force9.co.uk. AUSTRALIA CONTRAILS WITH UFOs BYRON BAY -- BBCIC News reports a professional photographer took two rolls of films August 3, 2000, of a very heavy Chemtrails activity over Byron Bay. When he developed the films he found many 'floating objects' between the Chemtrails. Shlomo, who was formerly with the Israeli Air Force and was teaching UFO's at UCLA, California inspected the slides and determined that the 'floating objects' are classical UFO's. As the Australian public is not very familiar with the subject of UFO's, Shlomo has decided not to discuss the UFO's locally in order not to confuse the Chemtrail issue at the moment. Shlomo is now negotiating to post these spectacular UFO-Chemtrail photos on the Jeff Rense website. Thanks to Debra Livingston http://tracers.8m.com and BBCIC Byron Bay Chemtrails Information Center www.mullum.com.au/bb/chemtrails . NEW WITNESS HANDLES ROSWELL WRECKAGE WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE -- June Crain called detective Sergeant James Clarkson in 1997, to share her firsthand account of working at Wright Patterson AFB from 1942 to 1952. June claims to have handled unusual metal parts of a flying saucer, taken dictation from Werner Von Braun, and been told of three UFO crashes. She claims to have held a Top Secret Q clearance and been asked to sign a "TOO HOT" memo as a result of a careless Master Sergeant announcing he had just flown in from New Mexico with alien bodies and wreckage. According to Dr. Bob and Ryan Woods, "Her story continues to validate the contents of the Majestic documents in both powerful overt and subtle ways. June was the only known surviving member of the parachute group of Wright Field. She passed away on August 23, 1998, yet she left plenty of evidence behind that is available at www.majesticdocuments.com/witnesses. Thanks to Dr. Bob and Ryan Woods CROP CIRCLES MAY BE CAUSED BY MAGNETIC FIELDS? Colin Andrews who has researched crop circles since the 80s claims the strange phenomena are caused by the Earth's magnetic field. Scientist Colin Andrews says 17 years of work has revealed that about 80% of the formations are man-made. But he believes that magnetism may account for the rest, which display a simplicity of form compared with elaborate, beautiful patterns of the "hoaxes." Dr. Andrews believes a mysterious shift in the magnetic field gives rise to a current that "electrocutes" the crops forcing them to lie flat on the ground. The known hoaxers, artists who spend hours trampling fields with footboards attached to a length of rope, say the public does not believe in scientific explanations. Explanations have ranged from freak weather conditions to alien visitors. But Dr. Andrews, funded by a grant from the Rockerfeller Institute in the US, believes he is closer to the truth. He has hired private detectives to track hoaxers and now says he can rule out 80% of the formations. He claims the less elaborate designs are the "natural" creations caused by a three-degree shift in magnetic field lines. Some claim the circles are UFO landing sites. Dr. Andrews, who plans to publish his findings later this year, says more work still needs to be done his theory. Most mainstream scientists believe the only explanation for crop circles lies in the footboards of hoaxers. Louise A. Lowry ShnSassy1@aol.com , http://www.worldofthestrange.com Editor's Note: The fields are often guarded and watched so it seems amazing these hoaxers never get caught, and can get away with destroying the farmers crops hundreds of times a year in numerous countries. WERNHER VON BRAUN'S 1948, FBI FILE Robert Collins writes, "On October 3, 1942, the space age began with the successful launch of the V-2 on its third attempt and the world would never be the same." Made as a weapon of war and not for science or adventure, the 46 foot alcohol and liquid oxygen V-2 had a velocity of 3500 mph and could carry a 1,650 pound warhead to a range of 200 to 250 miles. "It is the ancestor of practically every rocket flown in the world today and, in September of 1944, was launched against England toward London but came too late to affect the outcome of the war." Please see, http://home.earthlink.net/~rcollins637/reports/von_braun_fbi_fil e48.htm MARS FACE ANOMALY INVESTIGATIONS Lan Fleming writes I've posted an evaluation of Mark Kelly's orthorectified Mars Face enhancement. The enhancement was intended to show what the Face would look like at the resolution of the MGS camera but at the lighting and viewing angles of the lower-resolution Viking images. The Viking images were acquired under more suitable conditions for viewing a face than the MGS half-profile illuminated images taken from beneath the "chin." I think the new work is valid and the result is a powerful representation of a humanoid face. Based on comparisons with the Viking images, I don't see any justifiable way to jiggle the lighting or proportions of the MGS Face image in a way that could arrive at a depiction that differs significantly from the Kelly enhancement. This is not the result of Kelly digital trickery. since he neither added features not in the original image nor removed features that were present. The match in lighting and positions of features with the Viking images is good. I think the Kelly enhancement may eventually compel NASA to acquire a better image of the Face. We need NASA to take over head images of the Mars Face to avoid a major public relations crisis. See the Tom Van Flandern web site at http://www.vgl.org/webfiles/mars/face/newface.htm. Thanks to: Lan Fleming Editor's Note: These enhanced images make the face appear much more real. It struck me that the whole ancient area was a type of religious center similar to the Egyptian and Mexican pyramid complexes. The face by itself could be an accident, but the entire complex is much more convincing. I have visited the pyramids near Cairo and Teotituacan near Mexico City. Each has a central road or canal that may be similar to the Mars Cydonia pyramid complex. The road is on a \ 45 degree angle as I look at it. FRANCE AND WORLD WEATHER CHANGE? POITIERS -- A French researcher writes, "The weather phenomena that you refer too are certainly part of the climate changes that appear to be accelerating, as up till very recent months the major multinationals have fought them rather than looking for ways to alleviate the conditions that produce them. There is now little argument among the well informed about the FACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE - the argument is about what it will produce on the ground -- crocodiles in Pennsylvania and flooding of London, etc. One long ago proposed model has to do with increased cloud cover over land due to the water vapor being blown off an increasingly hot ocean. I have been observing that factor for my last ten years in Europe. The climate wherein, I live has totally changed in the eight years that I have been here -- there is no summer as it has been conventionally known here for centuries of recently recorded history AND for the last two years no Winter to speak of -- not one daytime frost last winter AND it can be warm enough in any month for us to eat out on our back terrace -- something we did last Christmas and the preceding years New Year's Day. My last guest reported great shock throughout northern Italy as she has just returned from a villa outside of Milano and for a month, no summer as the people normally know it. Our locals are increasingly disturbed. Two other facts which you can check out with scientific friends on the NASA side -- Sun spot activity is the highest on record and indicates a cycle that requires new thinking -- this certainly is influencing the climate. There have also been a rash of comets crashing into the Sun. And the real kicker -- historical climatic research indicates a 7 degree change in earth climate can occur within a decade. The normally slow system once it enters a chaotic phase can shift enormously in a very short time. Our disregard of ecological boundaries is a playing with dynamite. I would guess that strange diseases is part of the general upset, BUT would appreciate any data on those that cross your screen as I have tracked things of that sort for over 3 and a half decades. Thanks to: Ira User886114 I hope everyone has a nice summer! BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT All real estate agents are not the same? Some real estate agents or sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced. Others are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities. When you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest investments! Remember, the majority of people do not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems. Picking the right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find out, " What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs. To get a free copy of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com. We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and US. PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO shots available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham Bethune.. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055 MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention I recommended you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2000 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the files on their Web Sites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item appeared. Send your letters to Majorstar@aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: CPR-Canada News: New Crop Circles in Ontario From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:02:22 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:08:44 -0400 Subject: UpDate: CPR-Canada News: New Crop Circles in Ontario CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 14, 2000 _____________________________ NEW CROP CIRCLES IN ONTARIO Preliminary Report - August 14, 2000 A set of three crop circles has been reported in Ontario, at Oro-Medonte Township, near Orillia. A copy of an article from The Calgary Sun follows. Reported by June Mewhort. Further details, ground report, images to follow. This is the third (reported) formation so far for 2000. Saturday, August 12, 2000 Crop circles puzzle farmer By CP ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP, Ont. -- A central Ontario farmer refuses to believe aliens or Star Wars weapons are responsible for three, neatly-formed circles that have appeared in his grain field. "I try to live in the real world," Garnet Horne, 59, said yesterday. At first, the family suspected the three circles -- 23, 15 and 12 metres in diameter -- were a prank. "I figured some jackass tramped it down to get our goat," Horne's older brother, Donald, said. But there was no pathway leading to or from the three circles. "We got right down and looked for footprints," said Garnet. "Not a heel mark, nothing. It isn't human. It's got me beat." Inside each circle, the barley and oats have been flattened to the ground in a symmetrical, counter-clockwise swirl. Around the circular edges the flattened grain meets a perfectly upright wall of unharmed oats and barley. "It's not aliens and it's not somebody tramping it down, said Garnet. "I can't explain it." Garnet first spotted the circles while driving by the field at dusk Thursday. "It scared the wits out of me," he said. This is not the first time crop circles have appeared west of Orillia, Ont., near Bass Lake. In 1992 and 1993, circular patterns appeared about 3 km north of the Horne farm in a corn field. Copyright � 2000, Canoe Limited Partnership. All rights reserved. _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UpDate: Re: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:11:25 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:11:28 -0400 Subject: UpDate: Re: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 23:18:13 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Request That The MUFON Executive Committee Resign >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Larry W. Bryant >MUFON Director of Governmental Affairs writes the following: >To: Members of the Executive Committee of the Mutual UFO >Network, Inc.: >Since a cloud of alleged impropriety now hangs over the >Executive Committee for its having taken so long to act upon its >months-long knowledge of the "Carpenter Affair", I hereby call >upon all members of the Executive Committee to resign forthwith >from their Committee positions, from their membership on the >MUFON Board of Directors, and from their MUFON general >membership -- all in the interest of helping restore the >public's confidence in the purpose, operation, management, and >integrity of this organization. They will likely not resign. Why, you may ask? Simple, apparently data and file sharing have been going on in the UFO community for quite awhile. Likewise many folks have been receipants of grants/cash and or otherwise from person A to researcher or organization b. So John Carpenter has apparently done nothing more or nothing less then many people in the UFO field. >Without your resignation, the mounting public criticism over >possible malfeasance/misfeasance/nonfeasance on the part of >certain MUFON officials cannot but further erode the public's >confidence in our current and future status. I suspect they will try to ignore it to death as has supposedly been done since this first surfaced in 1996. >In addition, you Executive Committee members owe all of us in >the entire field of UFO research not only a full, written >explanation as to who on the MUFON Board originally knew of the >Carpenter affair (and when they knew it) but also a published >apology for their having embargoed or otherwise downplayed that >knowledge at the expense of the rest of the Board. MUFON won't apologize because (the story will go) they were JC's personal files and not related to MUFON, so not MUFON's fault. It's been suggested, or pointed out to me that all the supposed notables and quotables in the UFO field have been deathly silent.. now for 6 weeks. Meanwhile back into our time capsule to Roswell in 1947 where we can still hear... it was a weather balloon... weather balloon, then a stone wall of silence... :) Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:13:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:28:05 -0400 Subject: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? The Amazon listings are kinda light on the reviews, but they look interesting. ..... Summoned : Encounters With Alien Intelligence by Dana Redfield http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571741267/ref=sim_books/104-3493645- 5794339 Reaching for Reality : Seven Incredible True Stories of Alien Abduction by Constance Clear http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966705319/104-3493645-5794339
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.14.00 From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:30:13 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:34:05 -0400 Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.14.00 TMP NEWS The E-News Service of The Millennium Project http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews http://persweb.direct.ca/psa August 14, 2000 _____________________________ WEEKLY BRIEFING A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports 8.14.00 As more and more planets are discovered outside our solar system, NASA announces plans for an ambitious two-pronged landing mission on Mars in 2003, pledging that it has learned from its past mistakes with recent Mars missions. We can only hope! Plus stories on Europan tides, self-destructing comets and previous evidence for water on Mars, long before NASA's big recent announcement. Also an excellent report contributed by Brenda Livingston of Living-Tracer Enterprises on the newest twist to the chemtrail saga: "disappearing aircraft". Reports of this as well as of the small "spheres" and other odd objects being seen close to or in some chemtrails seem to be increasing, as also reported on by George Filer in the latest Filer's Files from last week and on Whitley Strieber's Dreamland with Greg Avery, William Thomas and George Filer. This also fits in with some of our own observations here as unusual as it all seems... Links to these reports and more below... Paul Anderson _____________________________ Quantum Leaps in Planet Search http://www.msnbc.com/news/441793.asp?cp1=1 NASA Plans to Send Twin Rovers to Mars in 2003 http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0008/10marsrovers/ NASA Says it Has Learned from Past Mistakes for New Mars Mission http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/11/mars.mistakes.reut/index.html Is Mars Water Old News? http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/marswaterold.html Scientists Discover Tidal Squeezing on Europa http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/europa_squeeze_000810.html Hubble Images Reveal Details of Comet's Breakup http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/10/hubble.linear/index.html Stealth Tech: An Explanation For Disappearing Aircraft and Persistent Contrails? http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/stealth.html Project Voyager and The Planetary Society Form Strategic Alliance http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/voyageralliance.html UFO Hunters Search NSA Documents on Web http://www.foxnews.com/science/080800/ufos.sml P3N Special Report: Virginia Governor Submits CAUS Federal Lawsuit to Virginia Court http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/virginiacourt.html ____________________________ TMP News is the e-news service of The Millennium Project, a future studies research organization, providing a Weekly Briefing of the latest news and reports relating to the most phenomenal, enigmatic and controversial issues of our time in science and technology, as well as periodic information and updates on TMP-related news and events. TMP News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by TMP, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the TMP News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews See the TMP web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa _____________________________ � The Millennium Project, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:52:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:35:23 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 15, 2000 _____________________________ GIANT "FOREST HEART" IN NEW CALEDONIA Well, now, something a little different... I just came across a photo in the latest (July/August) issue of Share International magazine (which I do keep tabs on, although I am still uncertain regarding my opinions on Benjamin Creme and "Maitreya"). The aerial photo shows a very large area of forest in New Caledonia (off the coast of Australia) which is much lighter in colour than the surrounding forest, and in a distinct, and quite symmetrical "heart shape" with well-defined edges. It doesn't appear to be just clearcutting, as you can still see the trees growing in the heart region (albeit they look very small!) as well as outside of it. The central part of the heart is very light, almost white. Offhand I don't know what the explanation (if normal) would be, except perhaps controlled burning or something?. It had been reported on, apparently, according to the caption with the photo, in the Abend-Zemung newspaper (Munich). I am trying to locate a copy of that article somewhere online if possible. If anyone has any leads on this, please let me know; I think this is worth at least following up on. I believe this was found recently, but I don't have an exact date yet. The SI web site doesn't have the photo on it yet (http://www.shareintl.org). Share International is carried on many newstands for those who would like to see the print copy. This reminded me of the "giant forest rings of Canada" I reported on last year: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/forestreport.html except with this the shape is much different, and the trees in the affected region don't appear to be "missing" (ie. a general lack of vegetation), at least not in the entire area, but are prominently "discoloured". Just another mystery to add to a never-ending list... Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:42:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:32:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter - Hart >>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 00:59:58 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Open Letter To John Carpenter >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Have you ever given consideration to the fact that Gary Hart >>does have a very large ax to grind? I have. Ok, Mr. Mortellaro-what is my big ax to grind? A direct answer is called for here. I don't have anything to grind except my wanting to stand up for friends whose rights were violated. As long as you make a statement such as the above, let us hear what you think it is. >>Hobby? Crappola. UFO and abduction research is not a hobby. But >>JC is not practicing as an LSW whilst performing UFO & Abduction >>research. If you must ask why, then something is wrong with your >>mental capabilities. And anyone thinking that in confiding in a >>UFO Abduction researcher is confiding to a licensed professional >>is a little off track, eh? Then why is Carpenter's MUFON business card imprinted MSW/ACSW and his regular business card, which he used with abductees imprinted MSW/LCSW? You think the abductee's who believed he was acting as an LCSW all have something wrong with their mental capabilities? He never told them he wasn't acting as one nor did he tell them that there was going to be no confidentiality for any hypnosis or medical records he kept as case material. Was this just an oversight or an unfortunate mistake? In Carpenter's response post, Carpenter said he didn't charge for his sessions but sometimes accepted donations of $20 or so. For the record, I have multiple witnesses that say he charged $65 from 4-94 on. >>I was always under the impression that Jim was a defender to the >>death of JC and the sale of the files, so his postings are no >>huge surprise..to at least me. >>Then you are under the wrong impression. Your impressions of my >>impressions are impressionably incorrect. Not to mention >>incorrigible. However I am happy that you are not surprised. >>Sometime that (surprise) makes you wanna take mood altering >>drugs. I'm personally disappointed in your response to the clear need for increased abductee rights. They must be allowed a say as to where their mental health material goes. You think hypnosis is child's play? One source I've talked to says you_can_tell someone to harm themselves under hypnosis. You_can_bypass the instinct for self- preservation. Hypnosis is a tool for, in effect, scanning someone's mind. The need for total disclosure of all aspects of research done this way to the one it is done to, is not a negotiable issue with me. It must be done this way or not done at all. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 04:29:41 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:36:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Koch >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 22:07:07 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Joachim, >You need to soak your head in a bucket of beer. >Alternatively, if that's what you're already doing, you need to >stop and sober up. >Crop circles are a dead end. >This way leads to madness. >Etc. >Dennis >PS: And yes, I've been there, done that. Dear Dennis, I feel a bit sorry for you because it seems that you are one of the few who have no other arguments than the nonsense you've written above. There is a Phenomenon going on there in England, believe it or not. It is a vey complex one with many aspects and apparitions. And this is what I tried to explain and what you don't want to accept. It reminds us of our abilities and qualities as human beings to respond to the frequencies of this planet and to the cosmos at all. This phenomenon has nothing to do with greys and maybe this is why you are not interested in. Again, sorry for you. Best wishes Joachim
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:43:32 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:38:33 -0400 Subject: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? Hi All, This is aimed more at UK researchers, has anyone heard of any UFO reports that were broadcast on a Radio station in Luton' sometime last week? I was told that UFOs had been seen around the town and that they were subsequently reported on local radio? Any info on this would be welcome: contact me at the above. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 14:02:58 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:41:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:46 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Jenny, you post as if you are addressing a junior class. >Of all the bragging put out lately concerning how many cases you >claim to have solved, this one has to beat them all! >Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >lighthouse, is silly. >Your claim of having solved the famous 1956 Lakenheath case (for >which you still have not offered the proof requested by many) is >equally silly. Hi Georgina, A question to Jenny or UFOIN. If you say the Crop Circle phenomena is solved, what answer has your team of experts with 20yrs in the field ( no pun intended) gave to the remarkable actions of the white ball shaped objects' made famous by the likes of Steve Alexander and many more? And what about those people who equally have had 20 years in the field of crop circle research, but come up with a totally different view point as you and your team, is this to be disregarded by UFOIN? Also does anyone know if the lecture given by Jenny Randles, I read about in a library at Ripley (Yorkshire) last month was videotaped? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 14:08:27 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:43:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Hale >Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 22:07:07 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Crop circles are a dead end. >This way leads to madness. Hi Dennis, Hey so you got that right, the nodes are dead at the end! And you forgot to put the link in for madness! http://www.madness.com Roy.. Keep Smiling.... "Our opinion is just 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 15 Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:24:06 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:45:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Young >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:30:04 +0100 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Thought Provoking Thoughts >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Thought one, Memory is a funny thing. >I was interviewing a person who had seen a strange light a few >weeks back. This person had difficulty remembering exact details >even though the sighting happened only two days before. As I >drove the witness to where they saw this anomalous light the >radio was playing and the DJ said something like, "and here is a >blast from the past, a golden oldie, something from 1979" He >then played a song which the witness sang along to - word for >word. Now here we have a witness who could not remember details >from 48 hours before singing a song that is over twenty years old. Dear Sean: That's the difference, I guess, between a fleeting event seen once and an old song that the person probably heard, and sang along to, hundreds, maybe even thousands of times. >Thought two, JFK. >The film that I was watching was Oliver Stone's 'JFK'. The >thought that occurred to me was this. JFK was taken out because >he wanted to take power away from the military. Was the military >leaders in power in 1963 the same military leaders back in 1947? >Who said there's no such thing as the "old boy network". What worries me is that for many people, particularly younger people who were not around in 1963, or for anyone for whom the details of that distant event have faded, Oliver Stone's movie has now become their "memory" of 1963. Hey, get some rest and some good food. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:05:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:04:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 04:54:19 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >It's understandable why NIDs or any other organisation >interested in UFO reports are requesting new sightings, however, >it seems there are already vastly more than anyone is able to >investigate! >There may have been a time, although this is debatable, when 95% >of UFO reports were explainable, yet that tends to be based on a >relatively small sample, typically from 'Project Blue Book', or >such-like. The entire perspective has evolved over subsequent >years and the means, plus the climate, for reporting >observations has significantly advanced. In my experience, which >encompasses analysing the large number of (additional) sightings >reported to the National UFO Reporting Center, the facts are >somewhat different. >95% of UFO reports are never explained. >If I'm mistaken, then given the number of reports we know are >made each year, can someone please let us know where 95% of them >are in fact documented as definitely/probably resolved.> >This would save me a lot of research, and I'm sure others as >well. Certainly would be nice to be able to confidently ignore "all UFO sighting reports except" a few, say 5%. Back in the good old days when the number was "finite" it was possible for a person or a small grup of people to review and come to some conclusion about the bulk of reports. The prime example is the Battelle Memorial Institute study in conjunction with (and funded by) Project Blue Book. This study involved all 4000 (about) sightings collected by the U.S. Air Force between June 1947 and the end of December, 1952. Over a year's time (about) the analysts were able to review all of these reports and come to some conclusions about which were known and which were unknown, with some level o certainty attached. AFter the initial examination they eliminated about 800 reports leaving them with about 3200 which were more carefully studied and entered into their computer data bank. This collection of sightings was large fraction (I don't know exactly what %) of the known sightings and therefore careful analyses of them was, "statistically speaking" a good representation of the total number of reports. (And, incidently they arrived at about 20% unknown with a few percent being what I call "hard core" unknowns that just couldn't be explained without resort to assuming witnesses were crazy and instruments were also crazy.... and then repaired themselves immediately after a sighting). Nowadays one would have to study a hundred thousand sightings to provide a comparable statistically valid analysis. Who has time to do that? So, when Jim says 95% of reports are never explained, he is probably correct (one could argue about the exact percentage) simply because 95% of the sightings are never thoroughly investigated. For those of you who have never carried out an investigation, let me say that an investigation of one incident that might last a few minutes can take days, week, months, even years. The Kenneth Arnold case is still debated after 53 years.... and hours of discussion just within the last several years. I spent several years on the New Zealand Sightings. Many years on the Trent photos. Months on the Japan Airlines sghting of Nov. 1986. Months on Gemini 11. Several months on Phoenix lights (see brumac.8k.com). With this anount of effort being put into individual sightings one just hasn't the time to analyze carefully a zillion other sightings. Bottom line: the continual flow of reports suggests that _something_ is going on, but what fraction is due to True UFOs (TRUFOs - initially unidentified object sightings which, _after_ careful investigation remain unidentified) can be only a guess, and any guess would probably be wrong. Ummmm, .... my guess is 5-10%.... And I'm wrong!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Hemo Predator (Chupacabras) From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:10:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:06:30 -0400 Subject: Hemo Predator (Chupacabras) Hi! We've opened a new web page that represents the first step to a serious study of what is known as the "Chupacabras" - an unfortunate misnomer. It is an orderly collection of data, photographs, sketches and interviews with witnesses, some obtained first hand. Learn about the detailed investigation of the events in Miami (1995-1996) and Chile (2000), where hundreds of domestic animals were attacked by unidentified blood predators and its relation with the UFO phenomenon. We hope this material, presented here in one place for the first time, will be a useful reference to other investigators. http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/index.html Very truly yours, Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo Miami UFO Center (Espaol) http://ufomiami.nodos.com Miami UFO Reporter http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/index.html Depredador de Sangre http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html Hemo Depredator http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/index.html Patagrande -Bigfoot- (Espaol) http://patagrande.homestead.com/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:54:04 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bourdais >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:46 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:19:07 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>It is our opinion that the crop circle phenomenon has been >>extremely well studied, its nature has been largely defined >>through scientific methods and the latest revival of it is >>nonsensical, inappropriate and completely unneccesary - >>especially given its baseless association with alien imagery. >>We simply wanted you to have the benefit of our collective >>experience to see why we do not believe that crop circles have >>anything to do with aliens and why, in our opinion, this is now >>a solved mystery. >Jenny, you post as if you are addressing a junior class. >Of all the bragging put out lately concerning how many cases you >claim to have solved, this one has to beat them all! >Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >lighthouse, is silly. >Your claim of having solved the famous 1956 Lakenheath case (for >which you still have not offered the proof requested by many) is >equally silly. >Colin Andrews and many other fine researchers have not just >written books about the circles - they have spent considerable >time and effort investigating the phenomena. What exactly is >your proof that that this is now a mystery that is solved? >Please don't tell me you are going to put it up on your web site >because I am still waiting in anticipation for the material you >were supposed to be posting up almost a year ago concerning your >Lakenheath proof. Quite right. The "Junior auditors" of Cometa, as Perry Petrakis called them, or the "Cometa boys", as Jenny Randles called them, are still waiting for the proof! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Carpenter-Gate From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:50:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:15:42 -0400 Subject: Carpenter-Gate I have been trying to follow the "John Carpenter/MUFON/NIDS/ Bigelow/abductee files" thread, and I have to say that the word "confusing" is an understatement, I think. I wasn't going to get into it for the simple reason that there is already enough confusion floating around this list and other places on the Internet about this, and I don't know that my commenting is going to help or hinder anything in the long run. But I feel compelled to say a couple of things, and since I make it my practice to comment when something calls to me for a comment, here goes: My two cents, for what it's worth...... Being a registered nurse by profession with 18 years of experience under my belt in that line of work, I fully understand the legal, moral, professional, and ethical standards regarding confidentiality of patient records. Having been involved in 'UFO Stuff' for the last 5 years or so, I also fully understand how quickly the so-called 'UFO Community' can turn on one of its own. I've been there, done that, bought the t-shirt in the past. And I can tell you from personal experience, my friends, it ain't a pretty sight, and it ain't helping the overall reputation of anyone dealing with 'UFO stuff' in the eyes of the general public. The reality of life in the medical profession... and I consider LCSW to be part of that profession... is that reputation is everything. All it takes is one disgruntled patient to ruin years of hard work. Whether that patient is right or wrong, whether that complaint is justified or not, whether there is ever a "formal" complaint to whatever governing board is applicable or not, the damage is done by word of mouth around town.... or around the internet, as the case may be. I had a friend in Denver... an RN with years of experience and an impeccable reputation among her co-workers... who spent damn near a year defending herself to the State Board of Nursing for something she didn't do. All because a former employer got pissed when she quit and took another job. A bogus complaint was filed with the State Board of Nursing, and it took the better part of a year to get the matter resolved. It didn't matter that the case was dropped by the State Board because investigation proved it out to be a baseless complaint, the tarnish to my friend's professional reputation was done by then. A few years ago, a couple of people who run on the Internet in UFO circles decided that I was less than truthful about some things I spoke of via IRC and email lists. They bashed me at every turn, doing their best to paint me out to be the biggest pathological liar that ever hit this earth. In the past month or so, it has come to light that I wasn't telling lies, that I wasn't playing stupid Internet games, and that I was, in fact, relating the truth. Have any of these people come forward and said "Oops, sorry Bobbie, we made a mistake and raked you over the coals unjustly"? No, they haven't. And it wouldn't matter if they did... the damage was done. The point of all of this being that I don't think it is fair to hang Carpenter out to dry on this e-mail list. The facts, as presented here, have been confusing and conflicting. And it seems to me that it is not the place of anyone to complain about the man unless that person is one of the abductees whose file was sold. _They_ are the ones who need to decide if formal action against Carpenter should be taken by the Licensing Board in his state. And they don't need pressure from the UFO community to do that if they don't want to. I agree they need to be made aware of the sale of their information. I personally would be pissed as hell if my doctor sold my medical files to someone... redacted or not. My medical doctor doing that would be considered unethical, at the least, by our fellow medical professionals. It wouldn't matter to me if my doctor blacked out my name and identifying info in the files or not... I would still feel betrayed and be mad as hell. I think that is theway these abductees should feel, but it is not _my_ place to tell them how to feel or what action they should take. I have to wonder, since I see people demanding that Carpenter inform these 140 abductees, exactly what proof of that notification would be acceptable. No one seems to be taking Carpenter's word for anything these days. Why would these same detractors believe him if he said that he did indeed notify everyone? I agree that the files should not have been sold... redacted or not... without the knowledge of those involved. I agree that the abductees should be told. I don't agree that this mail list is the place where Carpenter should have been drawn and quartered. These posts have ended up on other lists, and people read the archives of this list. Since so many "name personalities" run on this list, it is perceived as a somewhat "authorative" voice on the internet. And unfortunately it doesn't matter any more whether Mr. Carpenter is investigated by the Licensing Board in his state and found guilty or not of any wrong-doing... his name is "mud" in the "internet buzz" now and that can't be undone. As a LCSW, it is his state governing board that should determine the legality/ethical standards violations, if any, that are applicable to his actions. I, for one, am not qualified to make that judgement as I'm not a LCSW... and I don't think anyone else who isn't a LCSW is qualified to judge, either. I don't go around telling computer engineers, for example, how to practice their profession. I don't think any non-nursing professional has the qualifications to tell me how to practice my profession. And if I were smart, I would have probably done like these researchers who have been bashed for not speaking up and kept my mouth shut... This has turned into a feeding frenzy, and it isn't a pretty sight. And we wonder why the general public thinks the UFO field is full of lunatic-fringe nutcases...... Sigh, Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:29:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:19:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Deardorff >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:55:56 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: Jenny Randles' Plea For Sanity - Hatch >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello Jenny, Egio and others: >I usually try to avoid controversies, especially those that go >in circles or don't accomplish much. >I have to agree with the UFOIN statement mostly. >Doug and Dave (or whoever) could not have created all those >intricate works of art, but an army of "wannabes" could. Then >there are a few that might be caused naturally, the very >simplest ones. Hello Larry and Crop-Circle Pundits, I need to point out, once again, that neither the intricate crop-circle formations that formed overnight nor many of the "simple" ones could have been made by wannabes or by some natural weather event. No hoaxing team has dared claim credit for making the complicated ones, which included precise geometric arrangment of a lot of small angular shapes, not just circles. Otherwise, they would have done so and then would have been prepared to show the news media precisely how they could make another one just like it, which they would proceed to do. As for the "simple" ones, consider the one of 1 Aug. 1986 at the Upper Farm, Headbourne, Worthy. It was a circle 57 ft in diameter (photo shown on p. 36 of Delgado & Andrews' 'Circular Evidence'). However, it had two layers, the upper, most visible layer was swirled counter-clockwise inwards, and the lower layer counter-clockwise outward, such that they overlay each other at about right angles. How is nature, or hoaxers either going to accomplish this? If a whirlwind or vortex of some sort is postulated, it would have to first swirl every other crop stem one way, while leaving the other thousands of stems in between still standing; then it would need to swirl these others at right angles to the first. The two- layer structure of this CC was documented by both Meaden and Andrews, in _The Crop Circle Enigma_, p. 22. I'm sorry, but nature doesn't operate in any such way! Especially, nature doesn't just start generating lots of crop circles in a particular section of one country after some particular year (1978) but not before. It seems about a year ago that a few of us on this List discusssed this case, and no one could come up with any conceivable means of hoaxing it. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:30:19 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:21:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:13:09 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? >To: 'UFO UpDates' <updates@sympatico.ca> >The Amazon listings are kinda light on the reviews, but they >look interesting. >..... >Summoned : Encounters With Alien Intelligence >by Dana Redfield >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571741267/ref=sim_books/104-3493645-57 94339 >Reaching for Reality : Seven Incredible True Stories of Alien Abduction >by Constance Clear >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966705319/104-3493645-5794339 I can answer on the second one: Reaching for Reality. I have not finished reading it but I can say already that it's a very good one, which deserves serious reading. Constance Clear is a professional therapist, and she and presents her abduction cases in the most serious way. She gives close accounts of the hypnosis sessions, and it makes a very believable case for the reality of abductions. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 19:02:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:22:56 -0400 Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New Regarding: >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:52:53 -0700 >From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> >Subject: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New Caledonia >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Paul wrote: >The aerial photo shows a very large area of forest in New >Caledonia (off the coast of Australia) which is much lighter in >colour than the surrounding forest, and in a distinct, and quite >symmetrical "heart shape" with well-defined edges. Paul, Sounds like this is a mangrove forest which features on the cover of 'Earth from Above' - see: http://abramsbooks.com/fall99/Earth%20from%20Above.htm As the cover shows, it is of course only a heart-shaped feature if we 'turn it around' to 'match'! I suppose that's one advantage with crop circles. ;) Although I haven't seen this book, apparently the photographs are spectacular. As very much an aside, it would be interesting to consider how these images might be interpreted if they were an ET civilisation's first 'close up' photos from a distant planet. I wonder if Mount Rushmore would spark a debate about the 'faces on...'. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 19:20:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:23:40 -0400 Subject: Re: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light - Easton For an alternative interpretation (and definitely a Fortean similarity!), I would recommend: http://hometown.aol.com/codeufo/gematria.html James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:25:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response Hi, UFOIN would like to thank the many people who responded to our 'plea for sanity' regarding crop circles. The various comments (up to and including 13 August) have been discussed by those in the team who have been most closely associated with crop circle research. This reply is a summary of their views. It is therefore a collective UFOIN response and NOT a Jenny Randles message. With regards to the claims of Levengood and Talbot concerning possible cell changes to crops - their data is interesting, but we do not consider it persuasive. There are concerns regarding the methodology of all crop circle sampling research. In any study you need to be careful - for example - as to whether you accept single or double-blind samples in any study. In other words, if samples are labelled to have come from inside a circle they may be found to have abnormalities, but those labelled as being control samples may be deemed "normal." This aspect of any research needs careful consideration. The problem with crop circle samples is that there is little, if any, independent confirmation of the results. Further, no real attempt is evident to study "ordinary" wheat throughout the stages of its growth for comparison with "real" crop circle abnormalities. It would be interesting to compare "real" circle samples with those from lodging, animal disturbance, sclerotinia, rust, etc. Furthermore, samples from crop circle sites which are suspicious (or indeed sometimes likely) hoaxes seem to be analyzed as if the sites were "genuine" so that there appears to be no distinction between the quality of the sites nor the samples involved. This is a serious problem with all such research. If results believed to be anomalous are found from circles that appear to be hoaxed this means either the hoax interpretation is flawed or the results may not be as anomalous as they seem. This remains an unresolved dilemma with this kind of research when you are dealing with crop circles that by their established nature involve a high percentage of fakes. For this reason we applaud the efforts made and respect the integrity of the researchers involved but are very wary of reading too much into this work. Paul Fuller of UFOIN has published much cogent assessment of this kind of research in his magazine 'The Crop Watcher' over the years. This stems from his professional grounding in statistical analysis. So he is well qualified to comment. Here are some key points illustrated in that assessment: - this work only sampled complex formations rather than take a representative sample - Andrew Hewitt's 1991 dissertation found that 70 % of circles appearing in Britain were singles yet Levengood and his team didn't take any samples from single circles, they just concentrated on the more complex or fantastic patterns (the ones that offer the most evidence for being hoaxes, in fact) - their response to specific claims of hoaxing for the circles sampled was simply that they didn't believe mere claims - but given the number of researchers who were caught promoting provably man-made formations this was a weak response - we need to see specific evidence to deny any consistent claim that any individual circle was hoaxed, because such a claim is intrinsically viable and so has first to be refuted. - the statistical methods were in his view flawed and frankly Paul could not make sense of what they were attempting to say or do much of the time, A lot of the problems with such work stem from the fact that Levengood was apparently unaware of all the pro-hoax evidence that members of the UFOIN team had been gathering since Ian Mrzyglod and Marty Moffat started this in the early l980s. As such he was painted into a corner by not appreciating how extensive this data already was (and today - we believe - it is overwhelming). We do not blame Dr Levengood for this. It was simply an unfortunate consequence. The problem of an "intense aerial microwave source" generating circles was raised by the replies. This was first discussed early in cerealogy, and it was dismissed by many commentators. An actual experiment to create and demonstrate such microwave-induced effects in the field has yet to be conceived. We would argue that theorising is fine, but you need to back this up by doing actual experimentation to show that the theory is more than idle speculation. People in the UFOIN team have based their conclusions on almost 20 years of continual research and experiment. These include: - lab experiments to test that electrical vortices can create circles - data searches of science journals looking for pre UFO age crop circle events - systematic study of aerial reconnaissance photos looking for remote undiscovered circles in the age before the phenomenon was recognised - collating a data base of eye witness testimony from those who have seen circles under formation and seeking patterns within that evidence - looking for (and finding) mythological evidence that circles have long had an effect on cultural life and are not just a recent phenomenon. This work has shaped the research and theories that we adopt - causing the mutation or abandonment of some previously suggested mechanisms (such as Meaden's overly complex plasma vortex). This is, in our view, is how science should tackle the circles. Not by guesswork but by theory and research to support or deny that theory. The conclusions offered by UFOIN follow such a trail of evidence, regardless of some of the dismissive commentary offered about our 'unscientific' findings. As for the often-stated EM 'interference' reported by some circle experts, this has to be compared with the many instances where video cameras, cell phones, etc. have NOT failed to work inside circles. By far the overwhelming majority. One of the strengths of the scientific method is that if such effects are to be accepted as real then they should happen to all (or most) of the researchers involved, not just to isolated groups, and thus we would all have been faced with the same evidence and the same requirement to explain. This is how any 'paranormal' phenomenon (contentious or not) is recognised as being a genuine subject for research and resolution - for example the near death experience. Science disputes how to explain it but not that it exists. Alleged odd effects within circles do not match that level of reproducibility and as such cannot be taken as a proven reality. In one Canadian case, an investigator prone to migraines from environmental effects stood within a "real" circle without any ill effects and even called one of the UFOIN team via cell phone long distance without any EM effects. This is by no means an unusual piece of negative evidence. The "investigator effect" has also been noted by several researchers, and likely plays a part - whereby expectation can cause otherwise explicable distortions to take on stranger meanings. With regards to offered comments about our work being illogical and beyond the realms of the scientific, we might simply state the following. Half a dozen members of our team have been there throughout the entire crop circle debate (from l980 onward). This is longer than any recognised crop circle grouping or researcher - including 'giants' such as Colin Andrews and Pat Delgado or bodies like the CCCS. We produced the first publications and staged the first ever conference. Our capacity to pass informed comment is, we believe, demonstrable. Between us we have investigated hundreds of circles, engaged in a large amount of genuine research, always sought to apply logic and science to our findings and followed where the evidence trail has led and are now passing on to you the results of what we have learned. We do not consider that to be inappropriate behaviour. Our work has been extensively published and so is readily available to check. We might respectfully ask of those who attack our statement to what extent and duration they have conducted field and experimental research that refutes our conclusions? One of the main arguments raised in the replies was that the crop circles cannot be hoaxes because they are too widespread and complex and so would require armies of skilled tricksters. Sadly these suggestions do not match the facts. Firstly, there are many self confessed hoaxing teams regularly faking circles. It has been easily possible to demonstrate that these are more than sufficient to explain the majority and the range of patterns that appear. Secondly, many demonstrations (some filmed) have shown conclusively that even complex circles can be quickly created without detection and produce results that 'fool' experts. Thirdly, the idea that the patterns are mathematically precise is often an illusion. A few cases are impressive and skillfully created. These are the ones widely promoted. Many are much more crude and contain errors or kinks in their patterns that give away the haste of creation. These, of course, get less emphasis. The fact is that most people are unaware that circles began centuries ago and in modern times still often appeared in relatively simple terms. The media nearly always promoted the rarer and more spectacular designs to 'show off' the phenomenon because these were the most visually newsworthy. This can lead to false expectations. If you base your opinions on what you think is going on rather than what is really going on, then you tend not to gain a full insight into the evidence. As for circles involving a 'message' - yes, indeed they do. That is why we believe so many are the result of human hoaxers and only a small residual caused by natural forces. The message, its logic, its playing to the crowds and its entire new age ethos is clearly designed to suit the very audience who respond to it. Indeed it is clearly human in all respects. And human being love to tease other humans, or respond by creating hoaxes that they know will egg on the people whom they consider to be practising 'false science'. To many engaged in hoaxing (we have learned) that equates to those seeking alien perspectives behind these circles. Indeed several circles hoaxers have told us that they see this as a battle of wills against the 'other side' and deliberately strive to create ever more extraordinary patterns. Ask yourself this. Why would an alien intelligence spend hundreds of years writing pictures in fields - specifically locating most in one part of the world of late - and create a seemingly all too human pattern of marks, game playing, even punning? Would there not be good cause by now to create the marks (as one assumes that they could do via their advanced technology) in locations such as the grounds of Buckingham Palace or the White House lawn? Where the whole world would then have to pay attention. After all the failure of such marks to appear surely has nothing to do with the presence of security cameras at these places or the danger of being caught since aliens using some advanced science surely are not bothered by that little matter. Only human hoaxers would find such things a restriction. Of course, we know that humans are capable of producing all of the things seen within the circle evidence. Complex formations. Messages like 'We are not alone' and - yes - even 'star maps'. What is needed to take seriously any contention that aliens create circles is the evidence for some clearly structured intelligently created pattern that was done in such a way that humans could not possibly have created it without detection. Or indeed one that left new science (eg the formula for an anti-gravity drive or a cure for cancer might be a good place to start). Are we really saying that the best a civilisation from another star system can do is spend years doodling in a few crop fields with images of whales, geometric shapes and pretty patterns? Where do these wise aliens come from - the planet moron? Best wishes, UFOIN
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:41:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:33:32 -0400 Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:07:45 +0100 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> >Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done - Goldstein >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:15:27 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:41:15 +0100 >>>From: clearlight@t-online.de (Josh Goldstein) >>>Subject: Re: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 04:12:12 -0400 >>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>>Subject: John Carpenter - Apathy And The Damage Done >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>Hello All, >>>>Trash this posting now if you're not up for a 'long one!' You've >>>>been properly warned. :) >>>>Well it's been over a month and not one of the major abduction >>>>researchers has stepped forward to comment or to express their >>>>views on the matter of client/witness/abductee rights. The >>>>apathy and silence on this issue is profound. Not just on the >>>>part of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and the others but on the part of >>>>the UFO "community" in general. >>><snip> >>Josh writes: >>>Hello John, >>>I can't answer for major abductee researchers but I can answer >>>for my own humble non abductee self. I said nothing because it >>>seemed to be an invitation to get swallowed in the maelstrom. <snip> Hi Josh, hi All, Josh wrote: >Hello John, >I should have been more specific with my points. When I stated >"a whirlind turning into a maelstrom" what I meant was that >after you wisely posted your initial alarm regarding these >files, a whirlwind developed over the seriousness of this issue >and other listmembers' concerns. It was turned into a maelstrom >by several other people attacking Carpenter to the point I >thought that they went over the line. When I referred to a >tirade I was referring to the above situation, not to you. We know each other a long time on this list Josh, I never took your note to mean "me" personally. And I agree with you 100% that at times others stepped over the line with the personally directed parts of the assault on Carpenter. I assiduously avoided becoming embroiled in that part of the discussion. I think that kind of personalized approach ended up hurting those of us who were only trying to get some consideration and respect for the witnesses/abductees involved. You saw yourself what a battle it's been for me and a few others to keep the focus on witness/abductee rights issues. >I assumed that when Carpenter would notify the abductees that he >sold the files he would let them know that they were redacted. Those are the only two things I have been pressing for all along. ie; that he 'notify' the clients involved and that he provides them with a written and signed assurance that their files were properly sanitized. >To me he seemed forthright in his response posted on this list. >Perhaps you should contact him directly and request that he does >the above and provide a written statement. Been doing that for 7 weeks amigo. Now that some of the abductees whose files were sold know to contact the Missouri State Board in charge of issuing Mr. Carpenter's licenses there is no longer a need for my involvement. It's all up to them now. I will of course remain available to them to lend any further assistance or support that they may require. Let others defend Carpenter and his inconsiderate treatment of these abductees. I'm on the side of the witnesses. I have been all along. For me, the abductees involved are the _only_ thing that this whole debate has been all about. >By the way, as a Jew in Berlin I feel very comfortable. The >German people have done a tremendous job of trying to atone for >the evils of Nazism. Jews are the most honored people here these >days. It must be a gratifying thing for you to be able to say Josh. I know that it is a gratifying thing for me to hear. :) If your family was originally from Berlin it must have been a wonderful day for them when they were able to go home to live without the fear of repression and death hanging over their heads. I have learned from the lessons they all paid so dearly for. I am not a Jew, but I too am one who will never forget. >There is also great German - American friendship. The >neo-nazi skinheads are a very tiny group of people in what used >to be East Germany. The German government is seriously dealing >with that. Yeah, we have Neo-Nazi's here too! "Illinois Nazi's" are a kind of joke over here. And they are just a "fringe group" here too. The German government should do what we do over here,...ignore them! >If you check the amount of anti-semitic attacks on >synagogues in the United States it would worry you. Not just that Josh, it's the hate crimes directed at people of color, against Gay people, the violence in general that really worries me. It creates an atmosphere of 'chaos' where nobody ever feels completely safe. What a world we have created for ourselves eh? Warm regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: olin Andrews - Research Flawed? - Poulet From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:30:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:31:14 -0400 Subject: Re: olin Andrews - Research Flawed? - Poulet >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:55:10 +0100 >From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Colin Andrews - Research Flawed? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I don't post many comments on UpDates but in light of recent <snip> >will not know what we are looking for. As for 80% of crop >circles are hoaxed, it is the same statement as 95% of UFOs are >identifiable. It is touted out so that we look as reasonable as >possible in front of the scientific community. Hi Mark, and All I don't agree with you on this. To say that "80% of crop circles are hoaxed" is _not_ the same as saying that "95% of UFOs are identifiable". The "3%" of non-identified UFOs is a figure that comes from Blue Book, if I remember corectly. And it has been tested constantly ever since. The more rigorous investigators get around 5% of unexplained while the others may find as many as 15%. The 20% of unexplained crop circles is not based on the same criteria as the 5% of unexplained UFOs. In ufology, we're talking about evidences like witnesses, photographs, videos, radar echos and ground traces. I'm not saying that there is nothing "strange" in crop circles. I'm just saying that it has not yet been determined if there is something strange. Bye, Jacques Poulet http://www.chucara.com/ English Chucara http://members.xoom.com/jpoulet/english/ Fortean Files CDROM http://members.tripod.com/jpoulet/ CHUCARAPhone: (514) 913-0274 Box 61 La Prairie, Qc Canada J5R 3Y1
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:04:33 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:38:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts - Mortellaro >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:24:06 -0400 (EDT) >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Thought Provoking Thoughts >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:30:04 +0100 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Thought Provoking Thoughts >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>Thought one, Memory is a funny thing. >>I was interviewing a person who had seen a strange light a few >>weeks back. This person had difficulty remembering exact details >>even though the sighting happened only two days before. As I >>drove the witness to where they saw this anomalous light the >>radio was playing and the DJ said something like, "and here is a >>blast from the past, a golden oldie, something from 1979" He >>then played a song which the witness sang along to - word for >>word. Now here we have a witness who could not remember details >>from 48 hours before singing a song that is over twenty years old. >Dear Sean: >That's the difference, I guess, between a fleeting event seen >once and an old song that the person probably heard, and sang >along to, hundreds, maybe even thousands of times. >>Thought two, JFK. >>The film that I was watching was Oliver Stone's 'JFK'. The >>thought that occurred to me was this. JFK was taken out because >>he wanted to take power away from the military. Was the military >>leaders in power in 1963 the same military leaders back in 1947? >>Who said there's no such thing as the "old boy network". >What worries me is that for many people, particularly younger >people who were not around in 1963, or for anyone for whom the >details of that distant event have faded, Oliver Stone's movie >has now become their "memory" of 1963. >Hey, get some rest and some good food. >Clear skies, >Bob Young Gentle Men, Other Kinds and EBK, I thought a lot about the above. And this is what I up with came. Think about this a long, long while. Try to think about it without food or water and especially, without any rest. If you follow my suggestions, then in a few short days, you too, will up with come, the following unbelievable connection. The connection between the assassination of JFK, the assassination of AL (Abe Lincoln) and the UFO conundrum. Ready? OK... o JFK rhymes with EBK. o JFK contains three letters o EBK contains three letters Wait! I ain't done yet. o UFO has three letters two - too. o But Conundrum has _no_ initials. Well, I am certain that you understand. I was not able to go without sleep, food and mood alterning drugs for more than a few hours. I suppose then, that I do not have the answers to the above interesting relationship. A lot like some of you, attempting to make something where there may very well be only a fabric in your mind. The fabric is torn. And it doesn't yet (and _may_ never) fit the worn, torn and stupid cloth you have placed for all of us to see. It is all within you. CAUS, Carpenter, Gersten et al. Those of you who attempt to understand, I applaud. Those of you who are pig-headed, paranoid, throwing vicious, snotty hissey fits on anyone who you do not like or trust, to you I have a suggestion and it is this. Uh... I am sorry. I just cannot think of a suggestion. Just keep on truckin' folks. In time, the world will see you for what you are. Soon I hope. Identity Witheld. I shall use the name of one of the voices in my head instead. Barfalot Q. Carbunkle, Esq.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 as Neanderthal the Nephilim? From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 18:07:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:46:01 -0400 Subject: as Neanderthal the Nephilim? List members and our most esteemed moderator (and those who only read the archives), David Jacobs' book "The Threat: The Secret Alien Agenda" implies that the alien hybridization program has a goal of re-populating the Earth with a kinder, gentler form of humanity. Has this happened before? The following URL locates a paper which discusses the possibility that Neanderthal man was identically the Nephilim or a hybridization thereof. As you might recall, the Nephilim are the "sons of God" who mated with the "daughters of man" in the book of Genesis. Anyway, it's a well-earned diversion from the NIDS/Carpenter controversy. Check it out: http://www.ftech.net/~bric/rp.no38.html Regards, Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 18:45:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:48:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Stacy >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 04:29:41 -0400 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 22:07:07 -0500 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Joachim, >>You need to soak your head in a bucket of beer. >>Alternatively, if that's what you're already doing, you need to >>stop and sober up. >>Crop circles are a dead end. >>This way leads to madness. >>Etc. >>Dennis >>PS: And yes, I've been there, done that. >Dear Dennis, >I feel a bit sorry for you because it seems that you are one of >the few who have no other arguments than the nonsense you've >written above. Joachim, Please don't feel sorry for me. At the same time, please accept my apology for slamming you and your beliefs personally. I simply didn't want to get involved in a lengthy discussion about a "phenomenon" that no longer has any objective meaning -- or should I say any hope of an objective resolution that will satisfy all the involved parties. When I say I've been there and done that, I mean it. I'm presently moving or I would give you specifics. But you can see my articles about same in the MUFON UFO Journal, along with the lengthy essay I contributed to Jerome Clark's Encyclopedia of the Unexplained. For the record, I was one of the participants in Project Argus. If you don't know about it, you should. (They announced certain findings which they at least had the integrity to later retract.) Fortuitously, I also got to see Steven Greer and his group at "work" -- if one wants to call it that. You might also want to consult an article by Montague Keen which I published in The Anomalist 4. You do know who Keen is, right? He was the scientific adviser to the original Centre for Crop Circle Studies before he, too, so to speak, saw the light. You can order a copy at: http://www.anomalist.com >There is a Phenomenon going on there in England, believe it or >not. It is a vey complex one with many aspects and apparitions. >And this is what I tried to explain and what you don't want to >accept. It reminds us of our abilities and qualities as human >beings to respond to the frequencies of this planet and to the >cosmos at all. There most certainly is a Phenomenon going on in England. I was willing to accept it as something extremely mysterious, too, until the evidence disconvinced me. You're welcome to your planetary and cosmic frequencies. Be my guest. Use them to explain anything you think they will explain. I certainly don't want to tread on your toes >This phenomenon has nothing to do with greys and maybe this is >why you are not interested in. Again, sorry for you. >Best wishes >Joachim I agree wholeheartedly that the phenomenon has nothing to do with greys. Whatever gave you the idea that I thought it might? My current disinterest in crop circles has nothing to do with the notion of greys, or any other type of aliens whatsoever. It has to do with the lack of evidence that anything weird is actually going on -- your attempts at communication most definitely included. So don't feel sorry for me. Save that for those closer to home. They'll need the solace more than I will. And since I've forgot -- just what is it the circles are telling us? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:24:04 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:49:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton Regarding: >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:46 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Georgina wrote: >Jenny, you post as if you are addressing a junior class. >Of all the bragging put out lately concerning how many cases you >claim to have solved, this one has to beat them all! I'm sure we all appreciate, with apparently your exception, that Jenny is never one to boast, even though she has been responsible for helping to solve many UFO cases. It's not everyone who can make that claim, as I'm sure you realise. >Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >lighthouse, is silly. Perhaps comprehensive debunking of that Rendlesham mythology is the real source of your ire. Are there no facts you can provide to back up your remarks? >I am still waiting in anticipation for the material you were >supposed to be posting up almost a year ago concerning your >Lakenheath proof. Whatever happened to the new Rendlesham case material you have been lauding for well over a year. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:33:58 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:55:21 -0400 Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:29:09 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:27:58 -0700 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >>Subject: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>When you spend $10G and don't have any more lawsuits to file, >>well, you have to get your money from somewhere. Gersten's >>latest scam: The Planetary Appeal Distribution Network. Go to: >>http://www.padn.org/ >>This whole idea the good old 'send me a dollar and send 10 more >>people on this list a dollar and get rich quick' scheme. >>"It doesn t matter what your beliefs or motivations are; you can >>benefit by assisting me in distributing, by email, the Planetary >>Appeal to our executive and congressional leaders and all media >>organizations. By participating in the PADN, you will be >>contributing to the free flow of information and our right to >>know the truth. And I will show you how to receive large sums of >>money for your help." >>That's right folks, for a mere $10.00, Gersten doesn't care what >>your motive is and he'll show you how to make big bucks without >>working because his" "six degrees of separation" principle >>guarantees that the PADN will reach everyone on the Internet." I >>have never seen anyone sell 'the truth' more than this >>guy...well, FOX is running a close second. I'm just waiting for >>the late night infommercial to pop up on tv...what's next, ufo >>chain letters? Psychic ufo Friends Network? I better not give >>this guy anymore ideas. And we wonder why ufology suffers a >>small credibility gap... >Dear Royce, Listers and EBK, >Just what are you objecting to anyway, Royce? Are you objecting >to a legal method of raising money? Or are you objecting to the >fact that it is MLM (multilevel marketing)? Or are you objecting >to the fact that because it is CAUS, this is no way to make a >buck? I am just not certain of the reason for your being >somewhat negative over the project. Is it the plan itself which >grates? Or is this something which you perceive no self >respecting ufo organization should engage? Help me with this as >I am not seeing your point. Jim, All of the above. Gersten is making ufology look silly and it is obvious that his motives are not in the best interest of ufology. Gersten took CAUS and compeltely destroyed its credibility in a short amount of time. Barry Greenwood had to leave the organization he worked so hard to make credible for 13 years because Gersten suddenly just popped up out of no where and decided to run CAUS into the ground. It's one thing to generate finances for an organization, its another to do so at the expense of the goal or the credibility of the subject matter for which the organization is dedicated to. Take a look at many of the strange and apocolyptic messages Gersten has generated. Take a look at some of the e-mails he chooses to send to people. Gersten puts up this facade, says one thing and then does another. I certainly don't want someone like him representing ufology and then having people not familiar with the subject somehow connect all of ufology to Gersten and his organization - no thank you. The guy runs out of money and then begs for more or uses some scam to keep the cash coming in. Just exactly how much CAUS money has Gersten put into ufology and how much has gone into his pocket? Gersten knows his lawsuits are going nowhere, yet he continues to waste time and resources. I think a guy representing a non-profit agency shouldn't be able to turn around and suddenly say, 'I'm not representing the organization for free and it'll now cost you $10,000.' If his position isn't paying off, and he wants to pursue ufology, he needs to do what everyone else does - get a job. The guy does have a license to practice law doesn't he? Even part-time, a decent lawyer can make some good coin. While people have a right to _earn_ a living, I don't believe that people should be charging $10G to file a lawsuit that costs about $105.00 to file, especially when you're representing a non-profit organization that can file for free and you have someone 'donate' the filing fee. Aside from other expenses (copying, office supplies, et al), you can't tell me Gersten needs $10G for the appeal. If CAUS isn't paying Gersten's bills, then he needs to get off of his ass and get a job. How many other ufologists have gainful employment in which they use to finance their investigations/research? Many do. I myself have put up thousands of dollars of my own money, time and resources into UFOs since 1994 without any kind of return, that's because I'm not expecting to profit off of ufos. What about EBK? He puts many hours of his own time into running UpDates and doesn't charge a dime for it. There are many more people who have contributed 100 times what I have to the field in terms of money and time. ufology is not a vehicle to fame and fortune, as opposed to what some might think. (Just like all the statements I've made here, this is just my opinion.) >The plan is legal. No Federal or local laws are broken. It is a >way for CAUS to raise cash for it's continued functioning. It is >also a way for the CAUS member to make a few bucks. Oh, I'm sure Gersten made sure it was perfectly legal. "It doesn't matter what your beliefs or motivations are... I will show you how to receive large sums of money for your help." This ufo chain letter deal, which that's all it is, is the most ridiculous and discrediting thing (next to the appeal fund-raiser) Gersten has scammed up to date. And yes, Jim, no self respecting organization should engage in something as low as chain letters. Gersten would have gained more credibility having a CAUS bake sale with ufo shaped cookies. If a couple of federal lawsuits aren't going to do it, then why should anyone think a bunch of e-mail chain letters and contacting everyone in government will? The grass roots UFO movement died a long time ago. And if there is some sinister secret U.S. governemtn agency running above the law controlling all ufo info, then any lawsuit trying to pry info out of the governmnet is a joke. The only way anyone is going to get the bottom of ufos is to get out into the field and find the smoking gun, whether it be ET, military or otherwise. A lawyer would know that any case is built on strong _evidence_, not conjecture, new age dogma and the rest of the garbage that goes along with a lot of so-called ufologists. >It seems to me that every time someone on this List gets his or >her self in a hissey fit over someone else on this List, that >someone launches a missile the size of a Scud on the hissey >fittee. I don't get it. Or perhaps I do. "Don't make any enemies >with me or I shall launch my scuds at you and make you and yours >look like a damned fool." I'm not having a "hissey fit", Jim. And Gersten doesn't need any help looking like a fool, he does just fine on his own. I for one am just tired of the morons out there continually destroying the credibility of legitimate ufology. I'm tired of parasites trying to suck a living off the money of others all in the name of truth and ufos. Haven't you? Regards, Royce J. Myers III eXpos: The Watchdog of ufology - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind" eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 ufo Hall o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog (ufo Dirtbag of the Month for August 2000 - beCAUS you demanded 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:13:54 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:59:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Randles >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 03:13:46 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Jenny, you post as if you are addressing a junior class. Hi, And you - Georgina - with the greatest respect - appear at times to have difficulty with the English language. With apologies to all on this list who did understand me when I said this yesterday, I repeat - the posting on crop circles was from UFOIN. I copied it onto this list, hence my name appeared on it that way, but it reflects the views of several UFOIN team members long associated with this subject (and some of them longer associated than myself). I did make that absolutely clear yesterday and it was stated in the 'plea for sanity' message in the first place . So why make this a personal thing? On the same token - since you post them - are we from now on to ascribe all 'Nick Pope' messages that you put onto this list as being your own ? I guess you'll say that everyone knows you simply forward his messages onto this list because Nick chooses not to be on e mail... But then, the basis of the UFOIN message was equally clear as being a commentary from the team POSTED by me - so you cannot have it both ways. UFOIN has a growing team of excellent, experienced and often well known members who do not all agree with me by any stretch of the imagination and there are some variations in opinions on crop circles. But we share a broad con census . That's what counts. That's what the message sought to bring forward, based on a great deal of research - summarised in our collective response on this subject to this list today. >Of all the bragging put out lately concerning how many cases you >claim to have solved, this one has to beat them all! Excuse me, but I respectfully ask - what bragging? Yes, I resolve about 95% of the cases that I investigate. So, I expect, do all serious Ufologists (give or take a few percentage points). If a case is resolved I am happy to say so, and learn the lessons that such IFOs often teach. Its part of any Ufologists job. I think it is important to express this evidence when possible and its something I have done for a very long time. There are solved cases discussed in my earliest books 20 years ago. Its a part of UFO research to which I think we pay too little attention - because it strengthens our work to learn from the past and makes more valuable the cases that cannot be explained (of which there are certainly some). Nor is this a policy unique to me, of course. Most of the truly good UFO books spend some time resolving cases and debating how they lead us into more contentious areas (and that includes the Condon Report and Allan Hendry's superb 'UFO Handbook' as just two - very different examples). I don't think that I have been solving any more cases than usual of late and hardly bragging about them when I do. Indeed - aside from internal debates within UFOIN - recent solved cases that I have personally worked upon have not been made public; although they include one that was an aircraft diverted out of the way of a firework, another that was a stellar mirage and a few others that have been instructive in their own way. Two of my own personal cases to date this year remain unresolved. So with respect Georgina, your comments do not seem to have much relation to the facts. If - of course - by this 'bragging' you mean the recent Cheshire video statement. Once again, as you know, this was a UFOIN report and that posting itself makes no claim to have solved this case. It simply sets out factual data Ufologists needed to see (but never did get to see) in order to better evaluate the claims made about the video. I don't think UFOIN has any reason to apologise for taking that line which many Ufologists appreciated our adopting BTW. If you regard the asking of searching questions as a form of bragging, then you do have a different interpretation of common usage words than I. I would only ever make claims about solving cases in regards to reports that I have personally investigated - and even then only offer my ideas and views, never conclusive resolutions, unless there are exceptional circumstances, since nobody can ever be certain that they know all the answers in this phenomenon . >Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >lighthouse, is silly. Well, it would be silly if I made such a bald claim, but I don't. Perhaps your desire to champion the case has something to do with your own forthcoming book about it . By the way, the promo for your book suggests it is the first to tell the full story as previous ones (I assume from the context you mean mine) were written by a Ufologist with an axe to grind and who had little access to witnesses. Were you talking about me here? The only axe to grind I may have had is trying to resolve this case (for almost 20 years now) . And I have had plenty of access to those involved (civilian witnesses, military personnel, MoD personnel, MPs, the local police, forestry commission, scientists, etc). In the early days, yes, the direct military witnesses were understandably reluctant to come forward, and so I had limited access for a year or two, but that was 17 years ago and things have changed a lot as time has gone by. That is why my views on the case have developed rather than stood still. They have evolved with the evolving witness testimony and the extent to which I have been able to explore the case. You are welcome to dispute my findings, but not to allege they do not have a proper basis in the witness testimony and evidence. I might expect a journalist to try to get 'one up' on others by doing down the work of those who came before. But are we not all part of a UFO community - working together to find the truth and each adding our own piece of the jigsaw? I will let those who want to read 'The UFOs that Never Were' choose how to interpret what I write on this case. But its a gross oversimplification to say that I claim this case is explained as just a lighthouse. This does not account for the radar tracking or the close encounter features to the case described by Burroughs and Penniston to mention just two of the residual anomalies. What I do say - and justify saying - in the book is that gradually various parts of this case have eroded and the role that the lighthouse played in the case has become increasingly apparent when weighed against the sum of the evidence. I certainly do not think this was an alien contact (a possibility I did for a time seriously entertain) but I have formed my conclusions by way of a slow awareness of the evidence as it has accumulated across 20 years. And I am always willing to change my mind if evidence to the contrary comes to light. But what I set out in 'The UFOs that Never Were' is an honest appraisal of the sum total of the evidence as I currently see it. You are very welcome to disagree with me, of course. But calling honest opinions backed by evidence - 'silly' - is not a promising start to any attempt to do things better. >Your claim of having solved the famous 1956 Lakenheath case (for >which you still have not offered the proof requested by many) is >equally silly. Again, you seem somewhat confused. I have not 'solved' the Lakenheath case. I have uncovered aspects to it that call into question key claims made in the past, eg that there was a visual contact by the RAF crew sent on an intercept that night. But that's very different from saying that I know what caused this case to happen. Work continues. As for not publishing evidence. Firstly, I don't generally respond to bullying tactics. Secondly, there are very cogent reasons why UFOIN has yet to publish its full findings on this case - connected with data that has emerged so far. When the time is right we will do what we said we would do - publish freely for all to see. But the timing of that occurrence unfortunately has to be directed by ongoing events. There is nothing sinister to read into that comment BTW. Its just a question of investigation techniques. Many others, I am sure, will be happy to be patient and assess for themselves what we produce when we produce it. Our investigation has taken interesting turns that do not favour premature revelations. UFOIN considers establishing proper conclusions by gathering all the available evidence to be more important than being goaded into commentary before that time simply to fuel an internet debate. But we will fulfil our promises and when we do you will all appreciate why we genuinely did have to take our time. >Colin Andrews and many other fine researchers have not just >written books about the circles - they have spent considerable >time and effort investigating the phenomena. With the greatest of respect again - Georgina - so have many people in UFOIN despite this further rebuke on hard working people. I don't pretend to have spent much time chasing circles lately, and my reasons for not doing so are genuine. Basically so many circles are hoaxes that a huge amount of time is wasted looking for the few interesting cases. Any real circles will still be there long after the media and the tricksters have given up. Right now they complicate the phenomenon too much to make meaningful field research worthwhile in my opinion. However, for several years I was very deeply involved in research and some of the UFOIN team have been far more deeply associated with real research than I ever have been. To suggest otherwise merely reveals your ignorance, I am afraid. But I do agree that Colin Andrews has certainly been trying. Nevertheless, not to appreciate what the people in the UFOIN team have contributed demonstrates only your lack of understanding as regards to who indeed has done what, when and why over 20 long years. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - From: Dwight Connelly <bookdc@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 02:03:34 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:19:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? - >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:13:09 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Any Comments On These 2 Abduction Books? >To: 'UFO UpDates' <updates@sympatico.ca> >The Amazon listings are kinda light on the reviews, but they >look interesting. >..... >Summoned : Encounters With Alien Intelligence >by Dana Redfield >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571741267/ref=sim_books/104-3493645- >5794339 >Reaching for Reality : Seven Incredible True Stories of Alien Abduction >by Constance Clear >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966705319/104-3493645-5794339 Ron, I reviewed these for the MUFON UFO Journal, and thought both were well done. Dwight Connelly
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 'Expert' From: UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:43:13 +0300 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:24:01 -0400 Subject: 'Expert' Here is how I, for example, conceive a person called expert, both in Crop Circles, or in UFO-research: 1) Expert is a person, who can take several hypothesis into consideration, and won't attack either scientific or parapsychological ones. 2) Expert has or is willing to accept scientifically proved hypothesis about how the phenomenon appears. Expert doesn't then have to be a scientist. For example; in UFO-research, scientifically proofed hypothesis is, that majority of the experiences are naturally explained. Expert also knows several hypothesis about those natural explanations. 3) Expert is able to receive critics, and change his/her mind, if the proof shows any reason for it. What do you think folks? Am I on the right tracks about "Experts"? Minna L from Finland UFO-Finland www.ufofinland.net ufofinland@saunalahti.fi
The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:58:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:31:11 -0400 Subject: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso Col. Corso & Voice Stress Analysis by William Michael Kemp I was hired by Ed Gehrman to perform voice stress analysis on an interview by Art Bell. I've done voice stress analysis for Ed in the past as part of his investigation into the bombing which injured Judi Bari, an Earth First activist. The subjects of the Bell interview were Dr. John Alexander http://www.webcom.com/kelleher/bios/alexander.html and Col. Philip Corso http://www.ufomind.com/people/c/corso/ Copies of these tapes, show #970723, conducted on the night of July 23-24, 1997, are available from the Premiere Radio Network. I find both Col. Corso's and Dr. Alexander's statements, per Voice Stress Analysis, to be credible. Their stress levels are consistent, and are in the absolutely "normal" range. This strongly indicates that no deception is present in either subject. Below you'll find a discussion on the technique of voice stress analysis, and my report on the Corso-Alexander interview. --- Ascertaining the truth of public statements Over the years, folks have appeared in the public eye, making claims, often fantastic or incredible claims about UFO, paranormal occurrences, abduction, etc. Many of these claims are from rational and respectable members of the public. But we also know that our world is chock full of lies and liars. It has always been so. Truth, while powerful, is fragile and susceptible to breakage by forceful interests who deny truth for their own benefit. Lies, sadly, seem to be much more enduring and difficult to destroy than truth. Wouldn't it be nice to have some means to discern truth from lies and fiction? Polygraphs (classic "lie detectors") are expensive to own, difficult to operate, and difficult to interpret. The subjects must specifically agree, must enter into a stressful circumstance to be tested, and are dependent on questions formulated and administered by an inquisitor. So we come to our present circumstance. Are we simply to remain at the mercy of those who speak in public, and believe those who shout the loudest or have the loudest megaphone? A Solution-- Voice Stress Analysis With this in mind, I offer a solution. The technique of "voice stress analysis," or "psychological stress analysis," goes back thirty years. It is founded on the premise that lying produces stress (from fear of discovery if not for moral reasons) and this stress is manifested in the voice. Properly applied and interpreted, this analysis, while not foolproof, has a fine track record. It is in regular use by various and sundry government entities around the nation, from the local cop-shop on up. I suggest that you visit the web site http://Diogenesgroup.com to see this illustrated. This company makes a commercial product based on a 166 megahertz Pentium laptop to do real-time analysis. Of course, this product is only available to law enforcement and other government entities, or those holding a government license. Even in relatively sparsely-populated Alabama, the method is in common usage. The local newspaper, The Gadsden Times (which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The New York Times) has run feature articles discussing the use of voice stress analysis by various law enforcement agencies, with much crowing by those agencies attesting to its effectiveness. http://www.garybaker.com/garyhtml/vsa.htm A former CIA intelligence officer, George O'Toole, conducted an extensive investigation into the assassination of President John Kennedy using voice stress analysis (which he refers to as "psychological stress analysis"). He concluded that the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, did not commit and was not involved in the killings, other than being a "patsy." The House Select Committee on Assassinations Chief Counsel, Richard Sprague, in 1976, stated his intent to use voice stress analysis on all testimony. Voice stress analysis-- equipment Voice Stress Analysis has been subject to criticism, largely because of poor equipment, improper application, and poor analysis of the results. As with the classic polygraph, the knowledge, skill, and understanding-- both of the method, and of human nature-- of the operator is critical. The day of poor equipment is behind us. High quality tape recorders are everywhere, from hideout miniature recorders with remote microphones to be clipped to a collar to desk-top boom boxes. A video camera, switched on but with the lens cap in place makes a fine audio tape recorder. Almost everyone has equipment perfectly capable of performing the necessary evaluations. A moderately fast computer, such as those equipped with a Pentium processor and a 16 bit sound card, are excellent tools. Software/freeware is readily available (http://winsite.com/info/pc/win95/misc/vsawin1a.zip/) and will perform analysis in near real time. Thus, the first hurdle is past. We have the tools. With polygraphy, the subject is critically aware that for a stated period of time, his physical responses to questions will be intensely scrutinized. With voice stress analysis, any spoken words, from formal questioning to casual conversation with someone concealing a small tape recorder to broadcast public statements can be captured on tape and analyzed. When investigating Lee Harvey Oswald, Mr. O'Toole, mentioned above, concluded, from analysis of media tape recordings of the few statements of Oswald, and of other witnesses, that Oswald was telling the truth. He committed no act of violence. Unwilling to simply accept this, I did web searches until I found the relevant comments of Oswald in wave files on the net. I downloaded them, analyzed them with freeware software, and reached the same conclusions; Oswald was not Kennedy's killer, and had committed no act of violence. Voice Stress Analysis-- its proper application We can't expect to analyze a bull session with a bunch of guys drinking beer and swapping tall tales and find "truth". Further, we can't properly analyze a "casual" lie. By this I mean that it is not always possible to make up lies just to test the analysis. I cannot tell the tape recorder that my name is General Douglas MacArthur and I live in New Guinea and expect proper results. The lie must be relevant and must have a "down side" for the liar. The heart of the physical response is the "fight or flight" reaction of a liar who fears capture and exposure. I have performed experiments on friends who volunteered to "beat the machine." They told lies concerning the color of their socks and underwear and showed no signs of stress (lying) whatsoever. There is no consequence to these lies, no hazard if the lie is discovered, no feeling of moral compunction to create stress. Meaningless lies generated strictly for the purpose of testing are therefore not a proper application. Using voice stress analysis in such situations will likely produce no valid results whatsoever and is likely the source of much of the criticism of the method. However, in other circumstances, voice stress analysis is extremely effective. One is the candid recording, recorded by one party to a conversation. The second party to the conversation does not know that the recording is being made, and thus exhibits no "stage fright" or other external and artificial manifestations of stress. Voice Stress Analysis-- difficulty of interpretation The inherent weakness of voice stress analysis is that emotional topics can also create vocal stress. Subjects to which the speaker is sensitive (an unfaithful spouse, an embarrassing situation, guilt over past actions) often generate stress in the voice. This is a normal human reaction and does not necessarily indicate deception. Such things can greatly confuse the issue and must be taken into account when performing voice stress analysis. In a rambling and unstructured monologue, the speaker's mind is racing to select words and topics, and every time the mind touches a "hot button" there will be a blip of stress in the voice. Every moment of indecision will show a stress bump. Therefore, this is a situation to be avoided for serious analysis. Experience with the technique allows the operator to sort out occasional stress over sensitive topics, emotional issues, and such. The final analysis takes these matters into account and looks for the clear pattern, the stress on several words in a row on the same topic, rising in stair step, which indicates deception. I have many hours of experience in analyzing stress in voices. I have analyzed friends, politicians, candid recordings, and staged interviews. From this experience comes my confidence in the method, and my ability to properly use it. I must state again that proper interpretation of the results is the most important ingredient. One must not assume that an indicated absence of stress is indicative of the truth, for some people's natural level of stress is quite low, and the escalation upon telling a lie can escape detection. Likewise, one must not assume that an indicated presence of stress indicates a lie. Variations in the level of stress is the critical criterion. Voice Stress Analysis-- can proper training defeat it? It is entirely likely that intensive training can enable a person to lie without stress in the voice. However, I seriously doubt that this degree of sophistication can be successfully acquired by the average individual. And even in a trained individual, I seriously doubt that such training can extend to every word spoken in all situations. In short, even the trained agent will be vulnerable to the hideout tape recorder making a candid recording. Much of the disinformation is not disseminated by the actual source of the disinfo, but rather by "spokespersons", people who have no stake and no knowledge of what is being put forward. The news broadcaster is another which cannot be analyzed for the truth of the news being reported. When one finds the principal of a statement actually making the statement, the analysis can go forward. Clinton saying "I did not have sex with that woman". Janet Reno talking about the tanks at Waco as "like a good rent-a-car". I've analyzed these particular statements. Both show high level stress, and both statements can be judged as lies. Real world application Having said all the above, we come to my analysis of the Art Bell interview. I was hired by Ed Gehrman to analyze the statements of Philip Corso and John Alexander, as interviewed on Art Bell's radio show. My association with Ed Gehrman extends back two years. Ed was investigating the case of Judi Bari, an Earth First activist in California who was badly injured when a partially defective bomb exploded in her car. She was subsequently accused of knowingly transporting the explosive device-- a charge which she denied. There had been many interviews with principal and secondary players in this event, and Ed hired me to conduct voice stress analysis on the various voices encountered in this investigation. Ed had investigated, personally and with the aid of experts in various fields, the circumstances. I knew nothing of his conclusions, nor really of the case in question, nor the players. The results of my analysis closely coincided with the results he obtained via his other investigations; my analyses also cast a shadow upon at least one other player whose role in the affair, at this time, remains questionable. There is little physical evidence linking this one gentleman to the events, but his clearly stressed (and therefore, presumably deceptive) statements indicate that he is in possession of guilty knowledge relevant to the Bari case. Various statements by both Corso and Alexander can be reasonably construed as "true". These typically concern "off hand" comments, made by both gentlemen, which can be more or less verified as being publicly accepted as factual, and thus true; also, there are statements very likely to be "true", such as Dr. Alexander at one point stating that Col. Corso had been on the go the day of the interview for "17 hours" (in a late-night interview). These statements of "known truthfulness", when examined for stress levels, show "normal" stress... and this pattern of stress is repeated throughout the interview by both men, thus providing a *control* or *calibration*. The interview displays a remarkable uniformity of response. The stress levels of both men average, throughout the interview and regardless of the instant subject, very close to 9.5 hertz. On a scale of 8 hz to 12 hz, this 9.5 level is considered dead normal, unstressed, and truthful. For a statement to be considered suspect, stress above 10.5 hertz is almost necessary, unless the "normal" stress level is abnormally low, such as 8.5 hertz. This low level is almost never encountered. The "normal" stress level is almost always in the mid 9 hz range. Further, stress in the voice is "mobile". In the course of conversation, it is not only normal, but is actually expected that the stress level will rise and fall with certain words and subjects. The mind runs ahead formulating sentences, and this "bounces" the stress level. Also, certain subjects to which the speaker is sensitive often elicit an elevated stress level. Colonel Corso, for instance, exhibits spikes of stress when speaking the words "CIA" and "Capitol Hill". Other subjects, of intense interest or concern, elicit spikes of stress in the Colonel, but rarely above 10.5 hz. He exhibits no continuing or grossly high stress in the discussion wherein the words "CIA" and "Capitol Hill" appear. In fact, it is possible to find instances in alternate portions of his interview which cover the same subject where in other sections the trigger words appear with a moment of elevated stress. Therefore, it is possible to conclude with high confidence that there are "trigger words", rather than lies, responsible for the stress spikes. If the average stress displayed were 10.5 hertz, and the spikes were well into the mid to upper 11 hz range, it would be very likely that deception was in progress. This is illustrated in the testimony before congress by Janet Reno, talking about the incident at Waco. She speaks of appropriate planning and judgment, she speaks of the measured and appropriate governmental actions, she speaks of the tanks being much like "good rent-a-cars". She displays a very high level of "average" stress: an ongoing level at approximately 11 hz, and spikes to nearly 12 hz. This is an almost absolute guarantee of deception. Neither Corso nor Alexander display these signs of the stress of deception. While both demonstrate spikes, on subjects (apparently) sensitive to them personally, there is no general elevation of stress, no spikes produced when discussing a relevant topic, and no recurring spikes on the key topics. I must, therefore, conclude that Corso and Alexander are telling the plain truth. Alexander's role in the interview is as a reference to verify that Corso's claims of service record, assignments, and organizational affiliations are true. He speaks confidently, and displays no indication that he is lying or that he didn't do the research and verification which he claims to have done. Corso speaks of various subjects revolving around his service record, and displays no inordinate stress. He speaks of his assignment to an organization called "Foreign Technology Development", which was dedicated to what could be called "military-industrial espionage and exploitation"-- stealing militarily-relevant technology from foreign sources. Included in this, per Corso's claims, are technology and artifacts, inanimate as well as biological, which came from the purported crash at Roswell, N.M., in 1947, of an extraterrestrial craft(s). He speaks of the nature of the technology and artifacts, and also that "other crashes" in "other countries" have occurred. In short; Corso gives every indication of truthfulness in his claims that he was a principal player in exploiting technology which came from wreckage resulting from a crash of an extraterrestrial craft; likewise, he gives every indication of truthfulness when discussing the actuality of biological remains recovered at the site. Note: a link to an expanded version of this article, delving more deeply into the methodology of voice stress analysis, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Odors from UFOs - Pressley From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:32:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:47:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Pressley >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:05:46 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 04:54:19 +0100 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Easton >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I spent >several years on the New Zealand Sightings. Many years on the >Trent photos. Months on the Japan Airlines sghting of Nov. 1986. >Months on Gemini 11. Several months on Phoenix lights (see >brumac.8k.com). With this anount of effort being put into >individual sightings one just hasn't the time to analyze >carefully a zillion other sightings. Is your research on the Japan Airlines sighting available on the web? At the time of the sighting, I was in Alaska and employed by the U S Air Force. I remember the sighting very well. Loy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Antonio Rullan's Levelland Paper at The Temporal From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@TEMPORALDOORWAY.COM> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 07:46:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:52:49 -0400 Subject: Antonio Rullan's Levelland Paper at The Temporal Antonio Rullan's recently completed paper on the Levelland sightings of 1957 has been published at The Temporal Doorway. It can be found at: http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/guestpapers/levelland/index.htm This paper is the most comprehensive analysis ever performed of the important Levelland vehicle interference case, and is almost 80 pages in its paper edition. The web edition includes all of the content of the paper edition including maps, figures, diagrams, photos of the witnesses, and climatological data for the time period in question. An extensive examination of the ball lightning hypothesis is undertaken and an evaluation of that hypothesis in light of the evidence is made. I am privileged to host this paper. Antonio Rullan can be reached at TonyRullan@aol.com with any of your comments or questions. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:07:49 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:41:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:58:32 -0400 >From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> >Subject: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Col. Corso & Voice Stress Analysis >by >William Michael Kemp <snip> This is extremely interesting - as far as it goes. What concerns me is the phenomenon of humans sometimes thoroughly convincing themselves that certain events actually occurred, or that they actually witnessed phenomena or participated in events or experiences that are, in fact, partially or wholly imaginary, or at least severly distorted to the point of unrecognizability. I have had personal experience with persons who can tell stories, in all sincerity, about things that supposedly happened in the past. And according to both my own memories of the events/times in question, as well as the memories of others and actual evidence to the contrary, the stories told are either totally imagined, badly distorted, enhanced, changed, embroidered, or otherwise altered out of all resemblance to reality. Yes the person has completely and honestly convinced him or herself that the facts are as he or she remembers. Many of these misremembered or invented "histories" are about rather trivial matters; many others involve extremely emotion-fraught and life-changing topics and events. The predeliction for internal alterations of history seems to operate independently of the perceived (by self or others) gravity or novelty of the events. I have noticed that certain persons are much more prone to self-delusion of this kind. They are not "lying," in so far as they truly believe they saw or experienced what they are relating. Obviously, neither lie detection nor stress analysis is very useful in such cases. I have no idea why certain people are motivated or moved to recast or invent history in this way. They seem to lack a sense of the difference between reality and fantasy. (And I want to stress that the people of this temperament I have encountered are highly intelligent, fully functional and fully convinced of their own probity and integrity.) They readily change chronologies, alter facts, make up experiences and stories -- and virtually instantly and effortlessly assign these fantasies to the "reality" category. This is one reason why I'm always suspicious of the "Well, he sounds so sincere," argument in reports of unusual phenomena. We humans are awfully good at sincerely fooling ourselves! Purrrrrs... Wendy Christensen
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 16 Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:43:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:43:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:48:59 -0400 (EDT) >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Boris Shurinov, in addition to that book, enquired on the origin >of the "Secret KGB files" video He has brought proof that it was >made by an American team, which pretended to make a SF movie, >and hired actors in Moscow. Is this the video hosted by Roger Moore? After reading this post, I went home and checked and, sure enough, I had the video but hadn't watched it yet. Needless to say, but, hooboy... The "autopsy" looked worse than our Roswell one, and the "crashed saucer"!? Um, don't think so... unless those ETs also sometimes rivet corrugated steel plates to their hardware. (that's not my only objection to the recovery scene.) I don't propose to know what an ET craft would look like exactly, or how an actual crashed UFO recovery or alien autopsy would look, but my intuition kept telling me that there simply was something very *not* real-looking about the whole thing. BTW, Mr. Friedman was in the video. Any comments? I would have thought that he'd be likely to point out how utterly _terrestrial_ that alleged crashed ET object really looked...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Rhodes From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:11:22 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:05:16 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Rhodes >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:43:32 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >This is aimed more at UK researchers, has anyone heard of any >UFO reports that were broadcast on a Radio station in Luton' >sometime last week? >I was told that UFOs had been seen around the town and that they >were subsequently reported on local radio? >Any info on this would be welcome: contact me at the above. I have a contact at Luton do you have a date for the sighting or are you looking for historial sightings, if they exist? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: 'Expert' - Bauer From: Dave Bauer <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:11:49 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:07:30 -0400 Subject: Re: 'Expert' - Bauer >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:43:13 +0300 >From: UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> >Subject: 'Expert' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Here is how I, for example, conceive a person called expert, both >in Crop Circles, or in UFO-research: >1) Expert is a person, who can take several hypothesis into >consideration, and won't attack either scientific or >parapsychological ones. >2) Expert has or is willing to accept scientifically proved >hypothesis about how the phenomenon appears. >Expert doesn't then have to be a scientist. For example; in >UFO-research, scientifically proofed hypothesis is, that majority >of the experiences are naturally explained. Expert also knows >several hypothesis about those natural explanations. >3) Expert is able to receive critics, and change his/her mind, >if the proof shows any reason for it. >What do you think folks? Am I on the right tracks about >"Experts"? Hi Minna, Well, you are right about experts but you're looking in the wrong place. There's no such thing as an expert in the unknown, just people who publish their opinions in books. Stop me if I'm wrong, but it sounds more like you're talking about open-minded. If that is the case then here is how I, for example perceive open-minded: Having the ability to be receptive to new idea's and except the factual information no matter what side of the fence it happens to fall on. All the best, Dave.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Koch From: Joachim Koch <achimkoch@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2000 23:15 CET Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:09:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Koch >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >To: Updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >The various comments (up to and including 13 August) have been >discussed by those in the team who have been most closely >associated with crop circle research. >This reply is a summary of their views. It is therefore a >collective UFOIN response and NOT a Jenny Randles message. <snip> Dear Jenny, You shouldn't associate your honest name any longer with UFOIN's staements regarding crop circles. When I wrote that the first UFOIN statement was, to me, a bulletin from Flatland, this new piece here is written from defiant people who have a negative approach and who seemingly wish to maintain that. Too much has happened out in the fields. To pin down this phenomenon by soil or whatever samples is not the way to understand what the phenomenon is all about. These projects you propose were already conducted by serious scientists in the past and all these produced no convincing result. And for me, UFOIN is not the group which could outshine the scientists I have met in the fields in my time of being out in Wiltshire since 1991. This phenomenon is something new. So you from UFOIN need a new approach, too. Do you think you can efford this? This phenomenon is not ment to be tested by our (or UFOIN's) laboratories and by all that common equipment of ordinary science. This time we ourselves are the target of an approach of an unknown feeling object, something that wants to make us aware of ourselves. No samples, no laboratory, no human arrogance --- simply us as a part of this Universe. This is what this phenomenon means to us. Stop counting the grains of sand -- look up and see the sparkling diamonds above you. Look and think. If you want... Best wishes Joachim Koch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 03:41:33 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:21:10 -0400 Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Goldstein >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:33:58 -0700 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >All of the above. Gersten is making ufology look silly and it is >obvious that his motives are not in the best interest of >ufology. Gersten took CAUS and compeltely destroyed its >credibility in a short amount of time. Barry Greenwood had to >leave the organization he worked so hard to make credible for 13 >years because Gersten suddenly just popped up out of no where >and decided to run CAUS into the ground. >It's one thing to generate finances for an organization, its >another to do so at the expense of the goal or the credibility >of the subject matter for which the organization is dedicated >to. Take a look at many of the strange and apocolyptic messages >Gersten has generated. Take a look at some of the e-mails he >chooses to send to people. Gersten puts up this facade, says one >thing and then does another. I certainly don't want someone like >him representing ufology and then having people not familiar >with the subject somehow connect all of ufology to Gersten and >his organization - no thank you. <snip> >Regards, >Royce J. Myers III >eXpos: The Watchdog of ufology - "Don't Trip On Your Open >Mind" eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 ufo Hall >o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog (ufo Dirtbag >of the Month for August 2000 - beCAUS you demanded it!) Royce, Well done. Your "dirtbag" description on your site is splendid. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:25:23 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness (Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: Science writer Ian Ridpath recently paid a return visit to the location of what was once considered to be the UK's strangest 'UFO' encounter. Now demonstrably proven to have been a story which featured the profound misidentification of nearby Orford Ness lighthouse, as Ian originally suggested, Ian has kindly forwarded a photograph he took on 11 October, 1998 "from the edge of the forest near where Col. Halt apparently saw his flashing UFO". Ian writes, "The field in the foreground is the one they crossed while trying to approach the UFO" "The farmhouse is evidently the one which Col. Halt thought was on fire". "If Col. Halt had been too far from the spot I was standing, the lighthouse would not have been directly visible. I confirmed this when I returned at night - the sweep of the beam was visible above the trees on the horizon, but the direct flash could seen only at or near the spot from which the photo was taken". This categorically confirms the point I highlighted in detail within 'Resolving Rendlesham': "Halt was asked about the assertion he had been deceived by the Orford Ness lighthouse and replied: 'First, the lighthouse was visible the whole time. It was readily apparent, and it was 30 to 40 degrees off to our right. If you were standing in the forest where we stood, at the supposed landing site or whatever you want to call it, you could see the farmer's house directly in front of us. The lighthouse was 30 to 35 degrees off to the right, and the object was close to the farmer's house and moving from there to the left, through the trees'. Here, as never before, Halt provides specific details of the perspective he believed to be accurate. When he states, 'If you were standing in the forest where we stood, at the supposed landing site or whatever you want to call it, you could see the farmer's house directly in front of us', that's correct and the Orford Ness lighthouse is in a direct line of sight, east, towards the coast. However, when he claims, 'The lighthouse was 30 to 35 degrees off to the right' that seems to be consequentially incorrect; the _Shipwash lightship_ was 'off to the right', the lighthouse was straight ahead, where Halt observed the 'unidentified light' to be. His comment that 'the object was close to the farmer's house', again places the light source in the line of sight to Orford Ness lighthouse, whereas he believed the lighthouse to be much further south". [End] Ian's photograph, showing the lighthouse's exact siting in relation to the farmhouse, plus a magnification, can be respectively seen at: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ridpath1.jpg http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ridpath2.jpg On 13 May, 1997, in an interview with Salley Rayl, Halt further confirmed: RAYL: Now, I know it's hard to tell because it was dark that night, but any idea what size the initial red object was? Any idea? HALT: Nah. I would just have to guess. My guess would be probably two to three feet, maybe a little less. RAYL: Two to three feet HALT: From the distance, in diameter. RAYL: In diameter. So, it's a very small object. HALT: It was a very small object, but it was very bright. [End] Consider also how the sighting was documented in Halt's microcassette recording: HALT: You just saw a light? Where? [Unclear] Slow down. Where? VOICE: Right on this position here. Straight ahead, in between the trees - there it is again. Watch - straight ahead, off my flashlight there, sir. There it is. HALT: I see it, too. What is it? VOICE: We don't know, sir. VOICE: Can I just have a... HALT: It's a strange, small red light, looks to be maybe a quarter to a half mile, maybe further out. I'm gonna switch off. HALT: The light is gone now. It was approximately 120 degrees from the site... VOICE: It's back again. HALT: Is it back again? VOICE: Yes, sir. HALT: Well douse flashlights then. Let's go back to the edge of the clearing so we can get a better look at it. See if you can get the Starscope on it. [...] HALT: There is no doubt about it - there is some type of strange flashing red light ahead. VOICE: There! It's yellow. HALT: I saw a yellow tinge in it, too. Weird! It appears to be maybe moving a little bit this way? It's brighter than it has been. It's coming this way. It is definitely coming this way. Pieces of it are shooting off. There is no doubt about it. This is weird! [...] HALT: OK, we're looking at the thing, we're probably about two to three hundred yards away. It looks like an eye winking at you. Still moving from side to side. And when you put the Starscope on it, it sorta has a hollow center, a dark center, it's like a pupil of an eye looking at you, winking. And it flashes so bright to the Starscope that it almost burns your eye. [...] HALT: We've passed the farmer's house and are crossing the next field and now we have multiple sightings of up to five lights with a similar shape and all but they seem to be steady now rather than a pulsating or glow with a red flash. HALT: 2:44. We're at the far side of the second farmer's field and made sighting again about 110 degrees. This looks like it's clear off to the coast. It's right on the horizon. Moves about a bit and flashes from time to time. Still steady or red in color. [End] As we can see, the intermittently flashing, tiny red/yellow light was 'clear off to the coast' and this observation took place after Halt notes a sighting of "up to five lights with a similar shape and all but they seem to be steady now rather than a pulsating or glow with a red flash". There were several sources of standard, non-flashing lights on the coast and surrounding area. However, a mainstay of Halt's account in later recollections is how the red light 'exploded' into "five white objects and disappeared". Evidently, that simply never happened and Halt is subsequently confusing separate occurrences. It was later confirmed by Ian and Jenny Randles, via visits to the site, that Orford Ness lighthouse was visible as a small, pulsating light through the trees, deceptively appeared to be at eye level and could seem to move as an observer walked through the dense forest. The evidence that Halt was merely observing this same local landmark, which had already fooled three members of the security police during the inaugural 'UFO' sighting - a fact which wasn't yet known to Halt - is thoroughly comprehensive. In fact, this seems to be proven, as Ian's photograph shows. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Murgia From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:38:10 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:41:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Murgia >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >To: Updates@sympatico.ca >The problem with crop circle samples is that there is little, if >any, independent confirmation of the results. Further, no real >attempt is evident to study "ordinary" wheat throughout the >stages of its growth for comparison with "real" crop circle >abnormalities. It would be interesting to compare "real" circle >samples with those from lodging, animal disturbance, >sclerotinia, rust, etc. Why would it be interesting? You guys have already made up your minds it seems. Why don't YOU do the testing and _you_ find the scientists willing to look at it? >Our work has been extensively published and so is readily >available to check. Could you tell us what peer reviewed journals your work has been published in? I would like to read it. >Ask yourself this. Why would an alien intelligence spend >hundreds of years writing pictures in fields - specifically >locating most in one part of the world of late - and create a >seemingly all too human pattern of marks, game playing, even >punning? If you guys are going to start trying to think like an ET then I have lost a lot of respect for your work. Why would an alien intelligence do anything? I have no idea. I can't think like them. Can you? Anything on your part to try to think like them is total speculation and unscientific. >Would there not be good cause by now to create the marks (as >one assumes that they could do via their advanced technology) >in locations such as the grounds of Buckingham Palace or the >White House lawn? Where the whole world would then have to pay >attention. Gee, why don't they just land on the white house lawn? Do we still have to listen to this argument? Give me a break. You keep assuming that you can think like "them". You can't. Stop trying. It makes you look so amature. >What is needed to take seriously any contention that aliens >create circles is the evidence for some clearly structured >intelligently created pattern that was done in such a way that >humans could not possibly have created it without detection. Or >indeed one that left new science (eg the formula for an >anti-gravity drive or a cure for cancer might be a good place to >start). Who is saying aliens created them? Most of the people that have posted on this list have just stated their opinion that many of the circles remain unexplained. I don't recall seeing the word alien too often. It seems like that's your choice of words. >Are we really saying that the best a civilisation from another >star system can do is spend years doodling in a few crop fields >with images of whales, geometric shapes and pretty patterns? Do you know what they are thinking? If you do, please tell us. This is such bad scientific thinking. Actually, the word science doesn't even belong in that sentence. Speculation, guess work, trying to read ETs mind, etc.. Bascially, a joke and an insult to our intelligence. I do feel like we are being treated like kids now. Uninformed, stupid, un-scientific, unable to think like ET, kids. >Where do these wise aliens come from - the planet moron? I will refrain from responding to that one because it's just so juvenile. I rarely post to this List but this post has so many ridiculous aspects. You do make some good points but the bad points just totally destroy your credibility. You have still not explained or attempted to explain the balls of light that have been seen in the fields. Why not? Joe in Tampa
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 CPR-Canada News: 'Radial' Crop Circle - From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:14:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:37:13 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: 'Radial' Crop Circle - CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 16, 2000 _____________________________ 'Radial' Crop Circle - Grenfell, Saskatchewan Preliminary Report - August 16, 2000 Report received this afternoon of a new circle just found at Grenfell, Saskatchewan, east of Regina, by local reporter Jamie Gibson. Formation is a small single circle, only about 10 feet in diametre, in mature wheat. What is interesting about this circle however, is the lay, which is radial, with the wheat stalks flattened out from the centre to the outside edges. A similar pattern was seen in the large seven-circle Edmonton, Alberta #2 formation in barley from last year. No tracks were reported found in or around the circle, and the centre region is darkened or "singed" appearing. Further details, images when available. This is the fourth report now for 2000 in Canada. On a related note, there is a report from Ron Russell, Midwest Research, of new formations in North Dakota, USA, close to the Canadian border (details pending), as well as the recent "scalloped circles" formation in Oregon, courtesy Carol Pedersen, CCCS-Oregon. Must be that time of year again...! Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 01:04:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:35:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs - Maccabee >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:32:15 -0500 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com> >Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>> >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:05:46 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: Odors from UFOs >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>I spent >>several years on the New Zealand Sightings. Many years on the >>Trent photos. Months on the Japan Airlines sghting of Nov. 1986. >>Months on Gemini 11. Several months on Phoenix lights (see >>brumac.8k.com). With this anount of effort being put into >>individual sightings one just hasn't the time to analyze >>carefully a zillion other sightings. >Is your research on the Japan Airlines sighting available on the >web? At the time of the sighting, I was in Alaska and employed >by the U S Air Force. I remember the sighting very well. Thanks for your request for info on the Japan Airlines sighting. A shortened version of the analysis of that sighting is contained within my MUFON Sympisium paper, "Prosaic Explanations, the Failure of UFO Skepticism." This paper in its complete form is at my web site. Click on "papers" on the "front page" of the site and you will see a list with Prosaic Explanations at the bottom of the list. The JAL sighting is discussed on page 5 of that paper. If you want more detailed information you can contact me directly. Incidently, I am working on my Gemini 11 Astronaut sighting papers of 20 years ago to post on my web site since there are repeated references to astronauts..... did they really see anything unidentified or not? The Gemini 11 astronauts saw and object and photographed it. It has never been identified.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 03:20:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:40:40 -0400 Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Velez >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":; >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Goldstein >Date: Thu, Aug 17, 2000, 12:21 AM >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 03:41:33 +0100 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> >Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:33:58 -0700 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >>Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>All of the above. Gersten is making ufology look silly and it is >>obvious that his motives are not in the best interest of >>ufology. Gersten took CAUS and compeltely destroyed its >>credibility in a short amount of time. Barry Greenwood had to >>leave the organization he worked so hard to make credible for 13 >>years because Gersten suddenly just popped up out of no where >>and decided to run CAUS into the ground. Six years ago when I first started learning about the different UFO groups and organizations that existed, one of the very few that I was impressed with was CAUS. (Under the leadership of Barry Greenwood.) Because of Barry, CAUS had a reputation for being a serious and credible grass roots organization. And then came Gersten. All of a sudden my CAUS Newsletters went from being serious, thoughtful and informative, into a compendium of the worst possible/popular New Age tripe. After I received the second one, (I thought that first might have been an 'aberration') I requested to be removed from the CAUS mailing list. It took three such requests before it was actually removed. >>It's one thing to generate finances for an organization, its >>another to do so at the expense of the goal or the credibility >>of the subject matter for which the organization is dedicated >>to. That 'may be' the point of it all! If Gersten had had help, he could not have done a quicker and more effective job of first castrating and then destroying what once was a good and valuable organization. That's why I say that the gubbamint doesn't need to spend time, money, or personel trying to subvert UFO groups. If they wait long enough, somebody like Gersten will show up and do it for them. ;) >>Take a look at many of the strange and apocolyptic messages >>Gersten has generated. Take a look at some of the e-mails he >>chooses to send to people. Gersten puts up this facade, says one >>thing and then does another. I certainly don't want someone like >>him representing ufology and then having people not familiar >>with the subject somehow connect all of ufology to Gersten and >>his organization - no thank you. I agree 100%. I went at it with him publicly a few times over what he did to CAUS and to Barry Greenwood. But then, you are responding to the 'docca' who of late has taken to defending the offenders, and identifying as "evil" or "paranoid" anyone who attempts to bring a wrong-doing to light. He reacts as if Gersten was wrongly reproached for his "chain letter" fund raiser. The 'docca' obviously has no clue about what CAUS was like _before_ Gersten came along and trashed it as a _potentially powerful_ grass roots organization. I didn't agree with everything that came from Barry but he ran a 'clean game' and he brought credibility to the table. Gersten 'uses' CAUS in the same way that some New York Gypsies use store fronts. Thanks to him, there _is no more_ grass roots organization. According to the 'docca's response to you, Gersten is only running a perfectly legal and legitimate Multi-Level Marketing group! <LOL> Remember when CAUS _used to be_ a "grass roots" UFO group! Josh wrote: >Royce, >Well done. Your "dirtbag" description on your site is splendid. >Thanks, >Josh Goldstein If it has anything to do with the way Gersten ousted Barry Greenwood and the way he butchered and destroyed CAUS; what (at one time) was one of the best and most promising of all the UFO groups, then allow me to add my "splendid" to Josh's and I'll raise you a 'well said' for your post. :) Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 06:02:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:43:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:50:01 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Carpenter-Gate >To: updates@sympatico.ca Hi Bobbie, <snip> >I agree they need to be made aware of the sale of their >information. I personally would be pissed as hell if my doctor >sold my medical files to someone... redacted or not. My medical >doctor doing that would be considered unethical, at the least, >by our fellow medical professionals. It wouldn't matter >to me if my doctor blacked out my name and identifying info in >the files or not... I would still feel betrayed and be mad as hell. I >think that is the way these abductees should feel, but it is not >_my_ place to tell them how to feel or what action they should >take. I don't recall anybody telling the abductees how to feel. I do recall questions about complaints being filed with agency that oversees regulations governing the professional conduct of licensed social workers in the state of Missouri. I don't recall that portion of the discussion being anything but legitimate questions and comments. >And unfortunately it doesn't matter any more whether Mr. >Carpenter is investigated by the Licensing Board in his state >and found guilty or not of any wrong-doing... his name is "mud" >in the "internet buzz" now and that can't be undone. And who's fault is that? I agree that this discussion has been heated and confusing, but to imply that anybody but Carpenter himself is responsible for the upset and bad publicity suggests to me that you don't really understand the impact the sale of these files without permission from the individuals has had on the abductee community. >I don't think any non-nursing professional has the qualifications >to tell me how to practice my profession. If you, as a nurse, acted unethically towards 140 people in a given group, I'm pretty certain you would find folks from that group, in your face feeling very 'qualified' to comment on your behavior. As for this situation, I don't have to be an LCSW to empathize with the violation that those 20 people feel who already know their files were sold without their express permission. Nor do I have to be an LCSW to know the right thing to do now is to notify the rest of those 120 families. Having a modem and the ability to type makes me qualified. >And if I were smart, I would have probably done like these >researchers who have been bashed for not speaking up and >kept my mouth shut... I recall no bashing of researchers. I'm also not so certain that it's smart at this time for researchers to withold from posting their administrative procedures regarding abductee files. >This has turned into a feeding frenzy, and it isn't a pretty >sight. So what's the alternative? Silence? I read the heated discussion on Crop Circles tonight with great amusement, as I saw all kinds of passion unfolding. Parts showed some real teeth. Regardless of who believes what, and how etiquette may have degenerated, it was obvious to me that every one of those people care. The same goes for those of us who have posted these past weeks regarding 'Carpenter-gate.' The way your post read you would think we were all a pack of animals. Only some of us are<g>, and even from that group, most of us care about these abductees. This discussion had to happen and if one long message could get sent out loud and clear amidst the teeth and passion, let it be that this should never have happened in the first place, and it should _never_ happen again. My compassion is split between those abductees who already know and are dealing with the complications and those 120 who don't know. Personally, I have no compassion left over for John Carpenter and his internet popularity problems. >And we wonder why the general public thinks the UFO field is >full of lunatic-fringe nutcases..... Not me. I haven't wondered about that since the evening I shined my very bright flashlight into the sky, from my fizzling hot tub, to see alien ships beaming back a friendly hello as they followed Hale Bopp. Admittedly, exhaustion could have prompted this unusual vision, since my last several car payments had gone into a UFO money marketing scheme resulting in a 25 mile round trip walk from the Greyhound station, where I dropped my power hungry, telekenetic hybrids off for their weekend journey at 'Star Child' camp. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:27:31 -0300 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:45:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:43:59 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study - Cecchini >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:48:59 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Report On 13-Year Russian Government UFO Study >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Boris Shurinov, in addition to that book, enquired on the origin >>of the "Secret KGB files" video He has brought proof that it was >>made by an American team, which pretended to make a SF movie, >>and hired actors in Moscow. >Is this the video hosted by Roger Moore? >After reading this post, I went home and checked and, sure >enough, I had the video but hadn't watched it yet. >Needless to say, but, hooboy... >The "autopsy" looked worse than our Roswell one, and the >"crashed saucer"!? Um, don't think so... unless those ETs also >sometimes rivet corrugated steel plates to their hardware. >(that's not my only objection to the recovery scene.) >I don't propose to know what an ET craft would look like >exactly, or how an actual crashed UFO recovery or alien autopsy >would look, but my intuition kept telling me that there simply >was something very *not* real-looking about the whole thing. >BTW, Mr. Friedman was in the video. Any comments? >I would have thought that he'd be likely to point out how >utterly _terrestrial_ that alleged crashed ET object really >looked... The first time I saw the whole movie was when it played on TV.I was certainly not in a position to investigate. One email poster claimed he knew who faked it. I was in no position to evaluate much of anything nor to go to the Soviet Union to check on the people. I think I was very neutral. Is it possible? Sure..But it is in my gray basket. There were a bunch of interviews done and a lot of editing. It was a very brief trip on my part. I will stand behind almost everything in "UFOs Are Real", and in "Flying Saucers ARE Real" because I was very heavily involved. This was just a quick interview. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:43:33 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:47:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Bowden >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:38:10 -0400 (EDT) >From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >>The problem with crop circle samples is that there is little, if >>any, independent confirmation of the results. Further, no real >>attempt is evident to study "ordinary" wheat throughout the >>stages of its growth for comparison with "real" crop circle >>abnormalities. It would be interesting to compare "real" circle >>samples with those from lodging, animal disturbance, >>sclerotinia, rust, etc. >Why would it be interesting? You guys have already made up your >minds it seems. Why don't YOU do the testing and _you_ find the >scientists willing to look at it? >>Our work has been extensively published and so is readily >>available to check. >Could you tell us what peer reviewed journals your work has been >published in? I would like to read it. >>Ask yourself this. Why would an alien intelligence spend >>hundreds of years writing pictures in fields - specifically >>locating most in one part of the world of late - and create a >>seemingly all too human pattern of marks, game playing, even >>punning? >If you guys are going to start trying to think like an ET then I >have lost a lot of respect for your work. Why would an alien >intelligence do anything? I have no idea. I can't think like >them. Can you? Anything on your part to try to think like them >is total speculation and unscientific. >>Would there not be good cause by now to create the marks (as >>one assumes that they could do via their advanced technology) >>in locations such as the grounds of Buckingham Palace or the >>White House lawn? Where the whole world would then have to pay >>attention. >Gee, why don't they just land on the white house lawn? Do we >still have to listen to this argument? Give me a break. You keep >assuming that you can think like "them". You can't. Stop trying. >It makes you look so amature. >>What is needed to take seriously any contention that aliens >>create circles is the evidence for some clearly structured >>intelligently created pattern that was done in such a way that >>humans could not possibly have created it without detection. Or >>indeed one that left new science (eg the formula for an >>anti-gravity drive or a cure for cancer might be a good place to >>start). >Who is saying aliens created them? Most of the people that have >posted on this list have just stated their opinion that many of >the circles remain unexplained. I don't recall seeing the word >alien too often. It seems like that's your choice of words. >>Are we really saying that the best a civilisation from another >>star system can do is spend years doodling in a few crop fields >>with images of whales, geometric shapes and pretty patterns? >Do you know what they are thinking? If you do, please tell us. >This is such bad scientific thinking. Actually, the word science >doesn't even belong in that sentence. Speculation, guess work, >trying to read ETs mind, etc.. Bascially, a joke and an insult >to our intelligence. >I do feel like we are being treated like kids now. Uninformed, >stupid, un-scientific, unable to think like ET, kids. >>Where do these wise aliens come from - the planet moron? >I will refrain from responding to that one because it's just so >juvenile. I rarely post to this List but this post has so many >ridiculous aspects. You do make some good points but the bad >points just totally destroy your credibility. >You have still not explained or attempted to explain the balls >of light that have been seen in the fields. Why not? Hi Joe, With regard to the balls of light I thought I might just point out something you seem to have missed. While it is true the balls of light have been seen and video taped in the circles they have also been seen and taped in area's where there are no circles. Just recently I have been studying some daytime footage taken only last month showing balls of light performing very intricate movements near a crop circle formation in Wiltshire. There is also footage of the same taken in the skies over London, could be the best ever caught on film ;-) Are there crop circles in London? I think I would have heard about that one. If someone is filming a mysterious object (crop circle) and happens to capture another mysterious object (ball of light) it is human nature to connect the two, they are both mysterious after all. Then again what do I know, I don't think like an alien :-) All the best, Dave Bowden.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 33 From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:18:27 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:49:11 -0400 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 33 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan@aol.com> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 5, Number 33 August 17, 2000 Editor: Joseph Trainor PREHISTORIC STAR MAPS FOUND IN FRANCE AND SPAIN A German scientist has found star maps within the cave paintings of France and Spain. The paintings were done by prehistoric Cro-Magnon man about 16,500 years ago. The maps discovered at Lascaux in central France, "which are though to date back 16,500 years, show three bright stars known today as the Summer Triangle." "A map of the Pleiades star cluster has also been found among the Lascaux frescoes." ""And another cluster of stars, drawn 14,000 years ago, has been identified in a cave in Spain." "According to German researcher Dr. Michael Rappenglueck of the University of Munich, the maps show that our ancestors were more sophisticated than many believe." "The Lascaux caves, with their spectacular drawings of bulls, horses and antelopes, were painted 16,500 years ago." "Discovered in 1940, the walls show the artistic talents of our distant ancestors. But the drawings may also demonstrate their scientific knowledge as well." "The star map has been found in a region of the Lascaux caves known as the Shaft of the Dead man." "Painted onto the wall of the shaft is a bull, a strange bird-man and a bird on a stick." (Editor's Comment: Bird-man, eh? Interesting. The Incas believed that a "bird-man" gave Manco Capac and his sister-wife, Coya Mama Ocllo Huallpa, a golden staff and instructed them to leave their home in Bolivia and found the city that became Cuzco.) "According to Dr. Rappenglueck, these images form a map of the sky with the eyes of the bull, the bird-man and the bird representing the three present stars Vega, Deneb and Altair. Together these stars are popularly known as the Summer Triangle and are among the brightest stars that can be picked out overhead during the middle months of the northern (hemisphere) summer." "Around 17,000 years ago this region of the sky would never have been below the horizon and would have been expecially prominent at the start of spring." "'It is a map of the prehistoric cosmos,' Dr. Rappenglueck told BBC News Online. 'It was their sky, full of animals and spirit guides.'" "Neareer to the entrance to the Lascaux caves is a magnificent painting of a bull. Hanging over the shoulder is what appears to be a map of the Pleiades, the cluster of stars sometimes known as the Seven Sisters." "Inside the bull painting there are also indications of spots that may be representations of other stars found in that region of the sky." "Today this region forms part of the constellation of Taurus the bull, showing that identification of this part of the sky stretches back thousands of years." (Editor's Comment: This is really mind-blowing. It means that Cro-Magnon man was aware of the Zodiac 17,000 years ago.) "Dr. Rappenglueck has also identified a star map painted on the walls of a cave in Spain 14,000 years ago. The Cueva del Castillo cave, in the mountains of Pico del Castillo, contains a region known as the Frieze of Hands." "At the end of this remarkable section can be found a curved pattern of dots." "'Nobody paid much attention to it,' Dr. Rappenglueck said, 'But it is obviously a drawing of the constellation we know as the Northern Crown (Corona Borealist--J.T.) It is truly remarkable.'" (See BBC Online News for August 9, 2000. Many thanks to Louise Lowry for forwarding the article.) (Editor's Comment: I am very much intrigued by this Cro-Magnon fascination with the Pleiades. This star cluster figures prominently in the folklore of many of the indigenous peoples here in the Americas.) CHUPACABRA STRIKES AGAIN IN NORTHERN CHILE The mysterious predator known as the Chupacabra struck again in northern Chile last week, killing six chickens by draining their bodies of blood. The attack took place in a backyard chicken coop on the Calle Galvarino (street) in the barrio Norte (section) of Conche, a small town 130 kilometers (78 miles) northeast of Calama and 90 kilometers (54 miles) west of the border with Bolivia. According to the chickens' owner, Sra. Ana Reyes, "at approximately 9 a.m. yesterday (Tuesday, August 8, 2000--J.T.) she went out as she does every morning to feed her chickens and to check to see if any eggs had been laid." "'When I got there, I found six of them dead, missing feathers, and with two puncture marks on their spines, aside from being very dry with no blood whatsoever,' she said." According to the newspaper Cronica, the chickens were "as dry as if all their blood had been drained." "Upon inspecting the henhouse's perimeter, located behind the woman's house and facing another dwelling occupied by her daughter, she discovered that a rather large animal, to judge by its footprints, had opened a hole on one side of the structure in order to get inside and slay the chickens." "'The strangest part is that neither my daughter nor I heard anything during the night, nor did the dogs bark very much, except for the morning when we were all awake,' Sra. Reyes said." "In spite of all this, she doesn't believe that it could have been a dog because the hens were bloodless and did not appear to have been bitten or to have any flesh missing." "'Had dogs been the culprits, aside from killing them, they would have eaten some of them, and that's not the case here,' she added." (See the Chilean newspaper Cronica for August 9, 2000. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico y tambien Gloria Coluchi para eso articulo de diario.) UFO SIGHTED TWICE NEAR VAIL, COLORADO A local man sighted a UFO on two occasions last weekend just east of the ski resort town of Vail, Colorado (population 4,000). On Sunday, August 6, 2000, at 9:35 p.m., Robert Fiske "stepped outside into the parking lot of my condo building in the East Vail area to walk my dog before heading for work. I took a look up into the sky and almost directly overhead I saw what I first thought was a light aircraft flying low over Vail. I was immediately struck by the strange arrangement of lights on the object, and the fact that I should have been able to hear engine noise from it as it seemed to be no more than 500 to 1,000 feet above the valley floor." "The four white lights I could see on the underside of the craft were symmetrically arranged at equal locations from each other--one forward, one in the rear, one each on the outside. If the craft was circular, it would have lights at each 90 degrees (position)." "I watched it as it continued eastward at a relatively slow rate of speed. I could hear vehicles on (Interstate Highway) I-70 that runs near my condo building, as well as a jet engine from an airliner which I saw flying west at a much higher altitude, but I could not hear any engine noise from the object. I had it in sight for about two minutes until it faded in the east." Two days later, Bob had another sighting. This one took place on Tuesday, August 8, 2000, at 8:35 a.m. He was driving home on I-70, having just completed his work shift at a lodge in Vail. He "was driving home from work on I-70 between Exits 176 and 183 going eastbound. My eye caught the sun glinting off an object to the east. As I watched it approach, the sunlight stopped reflecting off it and I could see a dull gray elongated shape which I took for the fuselage of an aircraft. I tried to make out wings or a tail section to make sure it was an aircraft but could not. I pulled quickly over to the side of the interstate and grabbed for my camera, which I've been carrying with me most of the time now, to try to get a picture. I kept glancing at the object as I fumbled with the camera. As I went to take a picture, the object, which had still been approaching from the east, suddenly faded from view before I could snap it I took one anyway of the area where I had last seen it." Unfortunately, nothing showed up in the snapshot's image. Vail is on Interstate Highway I-70 about 60 miles (100 kilometers) west of Denver. (Email Form Report) HOVERING UFO SEEN BY A CAMPER IN SASKATCHEWAN On Sunday, July 30, 2000, at 10:07 p.m., D.N. was lying on his sleeping bag at a campground near Humboldt, Saskatchewan, Canada when he spotted a UFO. "I was lying in my tent, looking at a bright star overhead--Vega," D.N. reported, "At 10:07 p.m., I noticed that it appeared that a star near the constellation Hercules suddenly began glowing brighter. Within about three seconds, it had become very bright, as bright as an aircraft landing light and many times brighter than any other star visible overhgead, with a bluish quality (aura--J.T.) to it (like the strobe lights on a communications tower--D.N.) Then it simply winked out." "I watched the area for several seconds to see if the light might have been an aircraft passing overhead, although the light was much broighter than any aircraft strobe light I've seen at night, then made a note of the time. I watched the sky for another forty minutes, then retired for the evening." Humboldt is on Provincial Highway 5 located about 100 kilometers (60 miles) east of Saskatook. (Email Form Report) CONCORDE CRASH: THE MYSTERY DEEPENS "A fuel leak that led to the fiery crash of an Air France Concorde jet was probably caused by a strip of metal on the runway where the supersonic jet took off, investigators said Thursday," August 10, 2000. "The 16-inch piece of metal, which was not part of the doomed jet, probably punctured one of the jet's tires, according to" France's Ministry of Transportation. "The damaged tire sent heavy chunks of rubber flying forcefully into the jet fuel tanks." "The tire chunks--some weighing 9 pounds or more-- damaged one or several fuel reservoirs on the jet's left wing," feeding the Number 1 and Number 2 engines. The fire was in the Number 2 engine. (For more details, see UFO Roundup, volume 5, number 31 for August 3, 2000, "Concored Crash: The UFO Connection," page 1.) The damage caused "'a very important fuel leak and fire,'" according to the ministry's Accident and Inquiry Office. "The office's statement, which said the supersonic jet was traveling at 196 miles per hour (212 kilometers per hour) when the tire burst, shed more light on why the Concorde crashed outside Paris" in Gonesse on July 25, 2000. "The jet smashed into a hotel, killing all 109 people aboard and four people on the ground." "The exact chain of events that brought the aircraft down remains to be determined, the report siad. Experts still must confirm the theory that the stray piece of metal was responsible for the crash. The report also did not say where the metal might have come from." Meanwhile, a new wrinkle has emerged in the Munchengladbach angle of the Concorde crash. Last week news sources in Europe revealed that the "homemade bomb" which exploded at the commuter rail station in Dusseldorf "injured 10 recent immigrants, six of them Jewish." (Editor's Note: The original news report made absolutely no mention of this.) (See USA Today for August 11, 2000, "Jet probe: Puncture was cause" and "Germany tries to quash rise in hate crimes," page 11A.) (Editor's Comment: Great! Now we have an anomalous piece of metal mixed in with the Concorde crash debris. And no explanation as to how it got there. If this keeps up, we're going to have to start a new newsletter--Aviation Conspiracy Digest. And here comes another item for our proposed new e-zine.) NO AGREEMENT ON CAUSE OF EGYPTAIR 990 CRASH "The National Transportation Safety Board released the details of its investigation into the crash of Egyptair Flight 990 Friday," August 11, 2000, "but drew no conclusion about the cause, a move that allows the political dispute between the United States and Egypt to continue." James Hall, chairman of the USA's National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released the "1,665 pages of data, including interviews with witnesses, mechanical reports and transcripts from tape recorders in the cockpit." Flight 990 crashed off the Massachusetts coast on October 31, 1999 following a sudden plunge caused by a failure of the plane's elevators. (For more details, see UFO Roundup, volume 4, number 31 for November 25, 1999, "Mysterious engine failure doomed Egyptair Flight 990," page 1.) "The new information reignited passions that have simmered since U.S. news organizations reported that U.S. officials believed the crash was an act of suicide by the co-pilot, Gameel el-Batouty." "Egyptian officials and members of el-Batouty's family strongly deny that he could have intentionally brought down the plane, saying that he was a happy family man and that the accusation is part of an attempt to cover up the real cause." In November 1999, a German airline pilot claimed that he had seen Flight 990 dive to avoid a small missile rocketing up from the eastern tip of Long island.. "Egyptair officials insisted Friday that the evidence released points to a mechanical failure in the plane's elevators, two small flaps at the rear of the plane which direct the nose of the aircraft and are normally level with each other. During the last few moments of the flight, the two flaps were uneven. Egyptian officials believe this suggests mechanical failure." On the other hand, "U.S. investigators have said they suspect the malfunction was caused by one pilot trying to pull the plane up while another was trying to push it further down." All 217 people aboard the Boeing 767 were killed when it crashed in the Atlantic Ocean. "In an unusual move, the NTSB included testimony from FBI reports that detail allegations that the co-pilot, Gameel el-Batouty, exposed himself and repeatedly propositioned female staffers at a hotel in New York. He even voiced fear that he was 'in trouble' over the allegations, one unidentified witness told investigators." "They are attacking the dignity of an honored man, who has been honored by the Egyptian government.' said Walid el-Batouty, the co-pilot's nephew. 'And so this hurts the feelings of all the Egyptian people.'" "'They did not release anything today, 'said Walid el-Batouty, 'All that was issued today has already been leaked by the NTSB, and those leaks only caused damage to my uncle and my family. His wife is not doing well at all. She is very much upset today by the report. That is (character) assassination.'" The main point of contention between the sides is the two-minute conversation between el-Batouty and the pilot, Captain mahmoud el-Habashy. "The tape was not released and the (NTSB) translation was disputed by the Arabic-speaking members of the investigative team." (See the Minneapolis, Minn. Star-Tribune for August 12, 2000, "Egyptair crash report leaves cause undetermined," page A8, and USA Today for August 14, 2000, "NTSB sees no mechanical flaw on 990," page 3A.) (Editor's Comment: And the tape is still classified. So welcome to the biggest coverup since the crash of TWA Flight 800. Forgotten is the German pilot's testimony and the early reports of multiple radar images trakced by Logan Airport in Boston, Mass. All we have is the NTSB version of the cockpit conversation. Did Captain el-Habashy and co-pilot el-Batouty mention a UFO on the tape? With the actual tape locked away, your guess is as good as mine.) MYSTERIOUS ENGINE FAILURE DOWNS A PLANE IN OREGON On Thursday, August 10, 2000, pilot Howard Hamer took off from Chilloquin, Oregon in his single-engine home-built Lancer 236. While he was airborne, the Lancer's engine suddenly and musteriously lost all power. Hamer "decided to attempt an emergency landing on U.S. Highway 97" just north of Klamath Falls, Oregon (population 18,000). Hamer lined up the plane with the highway, the Lancer's nose heading north, and began his gliding descent. Meanwhile, an empty logging flatbed truck driven by Filiberto Corona Ambriz of Arbuckle, California, was also heading north on Highway 97. "Without realizing it," Corona "pulled under Hamer's plane...The plane's propellor snagged on the sleeper of the truck, and the tail crashed down onto the empty flatbed trailer." Neither Hamer, a resident of Nevada City, California, nor Corona were injured. (See the Minneapolis, Minn. Star-Tribune for August 12, 2000, Cleared for landing--on a truck bed," page A6.) (Editor's Noe: Klamath Falls, Ore. is the most notorious UFO hotspot in Oregon.) A NEW SAINT NICK "Ending a decades-long debate, the Russian Orthodox Church decided Monday," August 14, 2000, "to canonize Russia's last czae, Nicholas II." The church maintains that the last Romanov emperor "died as a martyr to faith when he was executed 82 years ago." "The Archbishops Council, the church's highest body, also canonized his wife Alexandra, and the couple's four" teenaged "daughters and one son. All were killed by a Bolshevik firing squad." "Although Nicholas was reviled by many, he and his family deserved sainthood for their 'meekness during imprisonment and acceptance of their martyrs' death,' according to a church statement. "The vote was unanimous, the Interfax news agency reported." "Nicholas abdicated as czar on March 15, 1917, as revolutionary fervor swept Russia." The family was arrested by the Cheka on the orders of Communist dictator Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, a.k.a.a. Lenin "and in April 1918 they were sent to the Ural Mountains city of Yekaterinburg." "On July 17 a firing squad led by Yakov Sverdlov, a Zionist Bolshevik, "lined them up in the basement of a palace there and killed them." (Editor's Comment: Yet there are stories that two Romanovs, the czarevich Alexei and his sister, Anastasia, were rescued by a traitor in Sverdlov's execution squad and smuggled out of Russia by the White Brotherhood of Orenburg.) "'In the last Russian Orthodox monarch and his family, we see people who sincerely tried to carry out the commandments of the Gospels in their lives,' the council's statement said." "Nicholas II was the fourth Russian czar to be canonized; the previous three ruled in the Middle Ages. Many (Russian) believers already considered the last czar holy and have said they were cured of medical ailments after praying to him." "Miracles have been reported on the anniversary of his abdication and at the site of his death." (See USA Today for August 15, 2000, "Last czar canonized by Russian church," page 14A.) (Editor's Comment: Wouldn't it be something if Alexei is still alive and hiding out in Villa Margarita, Butch and Sundance's old hideout in Bolivia? He'd be 93 today--same age as Fatima seer Sister Lucia Abobora de Jesus dos Santos. Probably drinking yerba mate and playing shuffleboard with Etta Place. Well, there are worse fates. It's a long way home from the Crab Nebula. Just ask Judge Crater.) from the UFO Files... 1874: UNFORGETTABLE CHARLES FORT Yesterday was the one-hundred-and-twenty- sixth anniversary of the birth of this remarkable man, who could truly be called "the Father of Ufology." Charles Hoy Fort was born in Albany, New York on August 16, 1874, the son of Charles nelson Fort, a wholesale grocer, and Agnes Hoy. Both the Fort and the Hoy families were patroons, descendants of the Nederlander families who had settled along the upper Hudson River in the Seventeenth Century. (Editor's Note: The original Ganegahaga or Mohawk name for the river was Cohotatea.) As a child, Fort "was intrigued by science and earnestly collected birds' eggs, insects and rocks." When his Grandpa Hoy, who owned an Albany market, asked him what he intended to be when he grew up, Fort replied, "A naturalist." He got into more than his share of mischief, though, and was usually at odds with his stern Victorian father, a breach that worsened after the elder Fort allowed Charles's younger brother Clarence to be committed to a mental asylum. (Editor's Comment: Let me guess, Clarence claimed he had been in contact with aliens from space. It would be interesting to read that particular casefile.) In 1891, at age 17, Fort "became a reporter for the Albany, N.Y. Democrat and soon began to sell feature articles to the Brooklyn World" in New York City. Grandpa Hoy died in 1891, leaving him a small inheritance. And, in 1892, Fort quit high school, took a train to New York City and became a staff reporter at the World. About the same time, Fort first became interested in UFOs. He avidly followed the strange case of Morris A. Veeder in Lyons, New York. For several months, a strange light hovered over Lyons during the winter months--a luminous orb seen nowhere else in upstate New York. He later wrote about the case in one of his books. In 1893, Fort embarked on a trip around the world "in order, as he later wrote, 'to accumulate a knowledge and an experience of life that would fit me to become a writer.' " He traveled extensively through Canada, the UK and South Africa." (Editor's Note: It appears that Fort was in South Africa during the Capetown "golden globes" UFO case of 1895. Maybe one of our South African readers can provide some more information.) Returning to New York City in early 1896, Fort "married Anna Filing, a childhood friend from Albany. The couple had no children." As the Twentieth Century dawned, Fort eked out a shoestring existence as a writer, submitting humorous articles to Tom Watson's Magazine, the Popoular Magazine and Smith's Magazine, which was edited by novelist Theodore Dreiser, with whom he eventually became close friends. Following a UFO flap on the USA's West Coast in 1904, Fort "devoted much of his time to the pursuit that was to become the focus of his life: the collection of data he considered inexplicable by conventional science." Fort's was a world "hovering between the two poles of Order and Chaos. He could produce proof that there had been rains of frogs, rains of blood, that people had been mysteriously swished off the planet and that strange people from other planets had visited here in hordes." Still Fort continued his literary career. He wrote ten comic novels but only one of them, The Outcast Manufacturers, was ever published. It appeared in 1906. The other nine are now lost. "Around 1912 he write a book called X, which suggested that the Earth was controlled by Martians; and in 1916 followed it with another, titled Y, describing the influence on our civilization of a race living at the South Pole." (Editor's Comment: Shades of H.P. Lovecraft and his "Kadath of the Cold Waste!") Dreiser was very much impressed with both books and sought in vain for publishers for them. But there were no takers. Depressed, Fort destroyed 40,000 notes he had compiled on strange phenomena. In 1919, he tried again with a new work, The Book of the Damned. Again most publishers rejected it, but Dreiser arm-twisted his own publisher, Boni 7 Liveright, into putting Fort's book in print. Fort stunned the world with his parade of "the damned," evidence of phenomena that scientists often wilfully and deliberately ignored. He presented hundreds of cases of UFOs, strange sky falls, unusual buried prehistoric artifacts, strange disappearances and bizarre happenings, all of it served up with a uniquely American down-home humor. Fort told how in 1890 people in Loudonville, Ohio had seen a city floating in the daytime sky. Some declared the apparition to be "the New Jerusalem." Others thought it looked like the city of Sandusky. Fort wrote, "Now it may be that Heaven is exactly like Sandusky. And those of us who have no desire to go to Sandusky should ponder that point." But not everybody enjoyed Fort's writing. H.L. Mencken, the Sage of Baltimore, wrote to Dreiser, "Is it that Fort seriously maintains that there is an Ultra- Saragossa Sea somewhere in the air, and that all of the meteors, frogs, and other things has dropped out of it? He seems to be enormously ignorant of elementary science, particularly biology." H.G. Wells, the dean of science fiction authors, was even more harsh, writing, "Fort is one of the most damnable bores who ever cut scraps from out-of-the-way newspapers and thought they were facts. And he writes like a drunkard." But Dreiser stuck by his big, shaggy-haired friend, writing, "You--the most fascinating literary figure since (Edgar Allan) Poe. You--who for all I know may be the progenitor of an entirely new world-viewpoint." Fort, he told Mencken, "is a great thinker and a man of deep and cynical humor...To me he is simply stupendous and someday I believe he will get full credit" for his work. In 1921, Fort took his wife Anna to London. He did full-time research at the British Museum and spent evenings writing a book entitled New Lands. In it Fort took swipes at astronomers, whome he wrote, "are led by a pillar of rubbish by day and a cloud of bosh by night." But he also pointed out strange phenomena in outer space seen by the astronomers of Earth and hinted at the existence of what modern science fiction writers call "generation ships"--humungous UFOs that pass through our solar system the same way modern cruise lingers pass by the Stone Age islands off Borneo or New Guinea. The Forts returned to New York City in 1929 and, two years later, in 1931, Fort published his third and most famous book, Lo! Dreiser and another noovelist, Tiffany Thayer, organized a Fortean Society and invited Fort to join. But Fort, described as "a shy, bearlike man with a brown walrus moustache and thick glasses," refused to attend the inaugural dinner. He thought science had already become a cult with its dogma and materialist world-view and resolute defenders. He saw the Fortean Society evolving the same way. Eventually the two systems would be at each other's throat, like the rival papacies at Rome and Avignon in the Middle Ages. By 1931, Fort was being hailed in the American newspapers as "that arch-foe of science" and had become, along with Jennifer Lopez, the most famous resident of New York City's Bronx borough. He planned a new book, and he broadened the scope of strange phenomena to be studied--Bigfoot, the Yeti, lake monsters, precognition, ESP and psychokinesis. He even coined a new word--teleportation--which was immediately picked up by science fiction writers all over the planet. In February 1932, Fort began to take notice of the cancer that was slowly taking his life. He wrote, "Without being definitely ill, I can't take walks, can't smoke half as much, have cut down meals one half, am sleeping poorly, have cut down on beer." Fort hesitated to go to a doctor. He was already planning a fifth book, Medi-Vaudeville, dealing with physicians, hospital horrors, miraculous cures and outlandish biological oddities. But his time was running out. In April 1932, he submitted Wild Talents to his publisher. Three weeks later, he was rushed from his Bronx apartment to the hospital. And on May 3, 1932, he died at the age of fifty-seven. The massive UFO wave of 1947 produced a kind of posthumous vindication of the man from Albany. For as onne writer pointed out, "those pesky saucers found their home port in the pages of Charles Fort." (See Charles Fort--Prophet of the Unexplained by Damon Knight. 1976; Dreiser by W. A. Swanberg, 1969, pages 244, 251 and 397; ad the New York Times for May 5, 1932.) Thjat's it for this week. Join us next time for more UFO and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup. See you then." UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2000 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may download news items from UFO Roundup to their websites or to newsgroups provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the dateof issue in which the item first appeared. ********************************************************* IMPORTANT Please Read: ====================== The Hunger Site --------------- http://www.thehungersite.com Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site and clicking on a button you can donate free food. There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation - the food is paid for by sponsors. Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference! If you have a web site download a banner and give a link! ********************************************************* E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart"... - From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:45:15 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:56:18 -0400 Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart"... - >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 19:02:38 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New Caledonia >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Regarding: >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:52:53 -0700 >>From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> >>Subject: CPR-Canada News: Giant "Forest Heart" in New Caledonia >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Paul wrote: >>The aerial photo shows a very large area of forest in New >>Caledonia (off the coast of Australia) which is much lighter in >>colour than the surrounding forest, and in a distinct, and quite >>symmetrical "heart shape" with well-defined edges. >Paul, >Sounds like this is a mangrove forest which features on the >cover of 'Earth from Above' - see: >http://abramsbooks.com/fall99/Earth%20from%20Above.htm - snip - James, That's the one! Thanks for the link. A beautiful photo. Now that I think of it, I think that book is in our 'Chapters' bookstores here, but I didn't recall the cover. I'll go take a look again. Seeing more of the surrounding terrain puts it in more perspective (which was cropped out of the photo in SI magazine). Paul Anderson
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Of Memory and JFK From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:48:43 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:58:22 -0400 Subject: Of Memory and JFK Hi Errol, All It would appear that my cognitive abilities are either warped by my raised body temperature, or I missed the mark with what I was trying to get at. So I am taking the time now to expand further on where I was hoping my prodding of the old grey matter was to lead. This is going to be a long one folks, but before I start I would like to thank all the people who wished me well on and off the list. I would also like to say to the small number of people who emailed me their theories about who killed JFK and why, sorry that wasn't what I was trying to point at. Right to the fray. Of Memory. There has been many, many studies on how memory works. And how it doesn't work. To cut a long story short there is three stages of memory, short term, medium term and long term. Short term is: Where did I just put my car keys? Medium term is: What did I have for supper monday last week? Long term is: What did I give my daughter for her first birthday? Just because a person's short term memory is crap doesn't mean that their long term memory is going to be crap. In almost everyone alive ( I don't know about the dead, yet) the long term memory is almost always the opposite quality to the short term memory, and medium term can be what ever it wants, completely ignorant of the other two. So the fact that my witness could not remember an unusual event from two days previous but remember a song from twenty one years before should not have surprised me. I could ramble on and on about other things with regards to memory, like for instance the quality of a person's memory has got nothing what so ever to do with their IQ. But I wont because I want to move onto the meatier subject: JFK What I said was: >The film that I was watching was Oliver Stone's 'JFK'. The >thought that occurred to me was this. JFK was taken out because >he wanted to take power away from the military. Was the military >leaders in power in 1963 the same military leaders back in 1947? >Who said there's no such thing as the "old boy network". Perhaps I should expand this a bit then I can better explain where I was trying to go with this. Oliver Stone's JFK was taken from Jim Garrison's book about the conspiracy surrounding the murder of Kennedy. Jim's argument was that Kennedy was killed by a plot between the military rulers at that time. I then queried if the military rulers of 1963 where the same as the military rulers of 1947. I'm not an American military history buff (nor do I intend to be) and I can think of no obvious way to check out if the military leaders of the various armed forces in 1947 where still "in power" in 1963. I personally think that they might have been. Now there are a few logical steps to be taken. It might actually help if you have seen the film JFK as what I am about to say will make a lot more sense. The reason I said about 1947 was of course that was the year of the infamous Roswell crash. In 1947 the military threatened the witness's with physical violence to them and their families. If you believe Jim Garrison's version of events in 1963 the military had escalated their tactics to murdering the witness's. In 1963 Jim Garrison alleges that the military leaders organised everything by word of mouth, _nothing_ was written down. Now if they where doing this in 1963 then they was doing this in 1947, or only documenting very little. And this is the crux of what I was trying to get at: If the military hierarchy had this practice in place back in 1947, perhaps this is why no real documents can be found to _prove_ what happened at Roswell. Because they aren't there to be found! I'm sorry if my shorter effort didn't bring this into what I though was the obvious conclusion, perhaps it was/is my addled brains or the lack of people on the list who have seen the film JFK to understand all that I was trying to get at. As I said _if_ they where the same military leaders then the "old boy network" is why nothing can be found _officially_ on really happened in the Roswell desert. Any old boy network is almost impossible to get into and impossible to get anything out of (unless you are a member of course). Perhaps some of you one the list that know a little more about Roswell or the military leaders of the forties and sixties might be able to validate this theory or completely blow it out of the water. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Research Enquiry From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:03:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:00:47 -0400 Subject: Research Enquiry Research Enquiry for UFO Updates List. Dear Colleagues, Currently I am trying to find further reference for the symbols reported in the controversial John Reeves, Brooksville, Florida Incident of March 2, 1965. To actually get a look at the symbols that were reported by Mr. Reeves? As far as I am aware, these were included in 'The Brooksville, Florida, John Reeves UFO Landing and Writings of March 2, 1965.' By Robert M. Snyder and Robert S. Carr, 1965. So far, I have been unable to get a copy of this or locate and contact the authors. If anyone has any information about this, or any other available reference that shows these symbols, I would be very grateful for information. Contact details of any researcher involved with this case would also be very welcome. All best regards Gary Anthony
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 17 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:02:18 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >>To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham >>forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness >>(Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: Hi, And my question to you was, would these people have ever seen the Orford Ness Lighthouse "Flashing" in relation to how long they served at the base? Would they have known from the direction of the red light where Orford Ness Lighthouse is situated? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:53:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:19:25 -0400 Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) - Myers >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 03:41:33 +0100 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> >Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:33:58 -0700 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> >>Subject: Re: The BS Overfloweth (CAUS) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>All of the above. Gersten is making ufology look silly and it is >>obvious that his motives are not in the best interest of >>ufology. Gersten took CAUS and compeltely destroyed its >>credibility in a short amount of time. Barry Greenwood had to >>leave the organization he worked so hard to make credible for 13 >>years because Gersten suddenly just popped up out of no where >>and decided to run CAUS into the ground. >>It's one thing to generate finances for an organization, its >>another to do so at the expense of the goal or the credibility >>of the subject matter for which the organization is dedicated >>to. Take a look at many of the strange and apocolyptic messages >>Gersten has generated. Take a look at some of the e-mails he >>chooses to send to people. Gersten puts up this facade, says one >>thing and then does another. I certainly don't want someone like >>him representing ufology and then having people not familiar >>with the subject somehow connect all of ufology to Gersten and >>his organization - no thank you. ><snip> >Royce, >Well done. Your "dirtbag" description on your site is splendid. >Thanks, >Josh Goldstein Josh, Thanks for the comments. Judging by the e-mail Gersten sent out, it is quite obvious he has side stepped some legal issues involving his UFO chain letter. I for one am not entirely certain it is totally legal because for your $10.00 you are getting something in return: The rights to distribute Gersten's dribble and the right to hit people up for some cash. Gersten wrote: "Hello Everyone: I know that you have been waiting anxiously for further information about the PADN, but unfortunately you will have to wait another day. It appears the PADN has taken on a life of its own and not since I wrote The Ultimate Secret am I being "given" so much information within a short period of time. Sedona is indeed a channel to a higher realm. I resurrected CAUS while living in Sedona in 1998. I have now returned to Sedona to create the PADN. I have revised the Planetary Appeal Proclamation at least 10 times and have refined the financial concept at least twice. And I still need to resolve a few legal issues. So I ask you to be patient a little longer. I promise you the PADN will be well worth the wait. Peter" Resurrected CAUS? More like crucified CAUS. Oh yeah. Let's not forget how much good old Sedona is helping out Gersten. Let us also not forget Gersten's "Ultimate Secret," aka "Peter's Delusional World Where He's the Hero that Slays the Dragon." And what legal issues is he referring to? The latest is that Gersten has sent a message out to those interested in his low-class scheme. Gersten sent the following: "If you have taken the time to review the PADN web site and decided against participating in the Planetary Appeal's distribution, can you also do me a favor and send me a brief e-mail explaining the reasons. There is always room for improvement. Specifically, I would like to know why you are reluctant to participate in a program that is 100% legal, only takes about 30 minutes of time, can be done from your home, is very easy to learn, and can produce hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. And you would be helping me spread the message of the extraterrestrial presence throughout the Internet. Is it because you no longer want to help me or because you would feel uncomfortable with a lot of money? Do the words "MLM" or "pyramid" turn you off? If they do, I suggest you transcend your programming, forget what your experiences have been in the past, and come aboard. I am the commander of this enterprise and together we can accomplish our objectives, efficiently and effectively. Please remember that I would never risk my reputation, my law license and my CAUS, if I were not positive that the PADN is legally sound, ethically fair, morally just, strategically viable, and economically rewarding. And for those of you who are still deciding, I suggest you "just do it." The PADN is a way for us to share in the monetary abundance on this planet as we awaken our brothers and sisters to the extraterrestrial presence. The PADN is a concept which time has come." That's right, kids! "transend your programming", throw your silly robes on, hop aboard the USS Pyramid and let good old Captain Gersten lead the way to wealth because his plan is after all "a concept which time has come." Didn't he use that cliche' for the Ultimate Secret? As far as Gersten risking his "reputation", well, you have to have something to risk... Regards, Royce J. Myers III eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind" eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 UFO Hall o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog (UFO Dirtbag of the Month for August 2000 - beCAUS you demanded 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:28:06 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:21:38 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Roy wrote: >And my question to you was, would these people have ever seen >the Orford Ness Lighthouse "Flashing" in relation to how long >they served at the base? Would they have known from the >direction of the red light where Orford Ness Lighthouse is >situated? Roy, Apparently not. Whilst the lighthouse beam was sometimes visible in the distance from 'east gate', the beacon itself couldn't bee seen from there. It was only from a vantage point further east (the lighthouse was almost exactly due east of 'east gate', some six miles distant) that the rotating beacon could first be seen through the forest trees. As the forest was outwith the base and the USAF's jurisdiction, it seems this was a new experience for all involved. Specifically concerning this question, we also have considerable proof that the beacon wasn't a familiar sight when seen as it became visible through the forest trees, as documented in the witness statements (all members of 81st Security Police Squadron) which Halt didn't request until the beginning of January, 1981: Airman First Class John Burroughs: Once we reached the farmer's house we could see a beacon going around so we went towards it. We followed it for about 2 miles before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse. Airman Edward N. Cabansag: We stopped the Security Police vehicle about 100 meters from the gate. Due to the terrain we had to go on by foot. We kept in constant contact with CSC. While we walked, each one of us could see the lights. Blue, red, white and yellow. The beacon light turned out to be the yellow light. We could see them periodically, but not in a specific pattern. As we approached, the lights would seem to be at the edge of the forest. As we entered the forest, the blue and red lights were not visible anymore. Only the beacon light was still blinking. We figured the lights were coming from past the forest, since nothing was visible as we passed through the woody forest. We could see a glowing near the beacon light, but as we got closer we found it to be a lit-up farmhouse. After we had passed through the forest, we thought it had to be an aircraft accident. So did CSC as well. But we ran and walked a good 2 miles past our vehicle, until we got to a vantage point where we could determine that what we were chasing was only a beacon light off in the distance. Our route through the forest and field was a direct one, straight towards the light. We informed CSC that the light beacon was further than we thought, so CSC terminated our investigation. Master-Sergeant J. D. Chandler: Each time Penniston gave me the indication that he was about to reach the area where the lights were, he would give an extended estimated location. He eventually arrived at a "beacon light", however, he stated that this was not the light or lights he had originally observed. He was instructed to return. Duty Flight Controller, Fred A Buran: At approximately 0300 hrs, 26 December 1980, I was on duty at bldg 679, Central Security Control, when I was notified that A1C Burroughs had sighted some strange lights in the wooded area east of the runway at RAF Woodbridge. Shortly after this initial report A1C Burroughs was joined by SSgt Penniston and his rider, AMN Cabansag. SSgt Penniston also reported the strange lights. I directed SSgt Coffey, the on duty Security Controller, to attempt to ascertain from SSgt Penniston whether or not the lights could be marker lights of some kind, to which SSgt Penniston said that he had never seen lights of this color or nature in the area before. He described them as red, blue, white and orange. SSgt Penniston requested permission to investigate. After he had been joined by the Security Flight Chief, MSgt Chandler, and turned his weapon over to him, I directed them to go ahead. SSgt Penniston had previously informed me that the lights appeared to be no further than 100 yds from the east road of the runway. SSgt Penniston reported getting near the "object" and then all of a sudden said they had gone past it and were looking at a marker beacon that was in the same general direction as the other lights. They continued to look further, to no avail. At approximately 0354 hours, I terminated the investigation and ordered all units back to their normal duties. [End] Penniston omits any reference to the lighthouse chase in his statement. Note this further confirmation above of how the lighthouse beacon was observed close to that 'glowing' farmhouse and as I mentioned: "Halt was asked about the assertion he had been deceived by the Orford Ness lighthouse and replied: 'First, the lighthouse was visible the whole time. It was readily apparent, and it was 30 to 40 degrees off to our right. If you were standing in the forest where we stood, at the supposed landing site or whatever you want to call it, you could see the farmer's house directly in front of us. The lighthouse was 30 to 35 degrees off to the right, and the object was close to the farmer's house and moving from there to the left, through the trees'. His comment that 'the object was close to the farmer's house', again places the light source in the line of sight to Orford Ness lighthouse, whereas he believed the lighthouse to be much further south [where the Shipwash Lightship was located]". Also, note the correlation with Cabansag's confirmation that the yellow light [they didn't notice a yellow light until in the forest] was the lighthouse beacon: HALT: There is no doubt about it - there is some type of strange flashing red light ahead. VOICE: There! It's yellow. HALT: I saw a yellow tinge in it, too. Weird! [End] As it was next seen "clear off to the coast", it seems this 'UFO' sighting is comprehensive explained by the evidence now available to us. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:29:45 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:23:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Easton In answer to a question I asked, an 'informed source' advises: Georgina Bruni's forthcoming book is called 'You Can't Tell the People' and it will be published by Sidgwick & Jackson on November 10. Amusingly, the publisher has put it in their Religion & Spirituality category! The publisher's blurb reads as follows: "The first full investigation into 'Britain's Roswell', with a foreword by UFO writer Nick Pope. The world's only officially-recognized UFO sighting took place in the UK. This casebook is an exploration of the 'lights in the sky' incident, and possible alien encounter that ensued, of December 1980 at the RAF/USAF Nato airbase near Woodbridge, Suffolk. Previous accounts of this Rendlesham Forest incident have been flawed: a ufologist with an axe to grind or little access to primary sources, or a discreditable single eyewitness account. Georgina Bruni has had access to police, Ministry of Defence and US military sources, along with fresh interviews, and her casebook reveals other never-before-reported incidents in the area, and the treatment meted out to those who wavered from the 'don't ask, don't tell' line of officialdom." I think you can tell this is going to be a rational, critical treatment, and above all will offer generous credit to all those who have researched the case before. Or perhaps not. [End] James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: 'Expert' - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:59:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:24:48 -0400 Subject: Re: 'Expert' - Hart >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:43:13 +0300 >From: UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi> >Subject: 'Expert' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Here is how I, for example, conceive a person called expert, both >in Crop Circles, or in UFO-research: ><snip> >Minna L from Finland Minna, I quite agree. And for the record, when Colin Andrews speaks about distortions of the earth's magnetic field he is speaking from the point-of-view of an Electrical Engineer as I do believe he has this degree. He knows how to test for the conditions he speaks of so I will be interested in seeing his research data. ~Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Mortellaro - For the Record From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:36:23 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:28:13 -0400 Subject: Mortellaro - For the Record Dear Listers and EBK, I wish to make clear my intentions regarding various matters on which I have commented here on UpDates. It is important to me, that this list appreciate the truth (finally) about the positions I have taken of late. I defend those in the province of UFOs and Abduction, who have been found to be guilty before all the evidence is in. I do not believe this to be at all fair, not just to the accused, but to the rest of us. It demeans all of Ufology. It makes us look like fools. We are in effect, engaged in the act of destroying ourselves. To me, that's pretty half-witted of us. Ufology becomes U Fool Ogy. And the worst part is that often, those of us who claim to be righteous, are just plain pigheaded and opinionated. Of course, this is not true of all of the posters. I have in the most recent past, insulted the integrity of some who are innocent of such wrongdoing. That's pretty doltish of me and I admit it. Wherever I have been guilty of such, I have written my apologies to the offendee. Even so, I found myself apologizing one too many times. And for me, that is very, very bad. Because I have become that which I have accused others of becoming. Cripes, what a maroon! Therefore I publicly apologize to Royce Myers for my uncalled for post. Interestingly, the issue of Peter Gersten and my relationship with him, has come up. This needs to be explained. I met Peter in August of 1998. He came home to the NY area, where he once practiced law, to visit friends. I had lunch with him. I enjoyed our conversation because it was of value to me. I was then well into making decisions regarding whether or not I should be regressed. I decided against hypnosis for me and Peter was one of those who gave me good reasons why I should not. So did Michael Lindeman, so did Jeff Rense and some others. Even my discussions with Budd Hopkins helped me decide. I told someone about that lunch and learned that telling him was a big mistake. That person had some interaction with Peter which was not positive (an understatement) and the two were, uh, not speaking. Any more. Apparently the words which had been spoken were sufficient to end that relationship. But I was at the very same time, engaged in a new relationship of my own. In the attempt to get help with my memories and my experiences, I began this new relationship with person number two. About eight or nine months later I found that I was at one time, thought to have been a spy for Gersten, brought into this new (for me) organization by Peter, in order to destroy it. This was told to me by the person who ran the org. Thankfully I was absolved of this potential crime, but the thought was there in the mind of this person. I hope you guys are getting the point. Today I was referred to as "defender of the offenders." I believe myself to be known as defender of fair play. I have also been referred to as someone who accuses those who attempt to bring the wrong doers to light, to be "evil" or "paranoid." Not even close. What is paranoid is the attempt to impale people with whom we disagree, with the characteristics which we perceive them to have. What is paranoid is to accuse me of being a spy, hired or engaged by Peter Gersten to bring down his organization. All I was doing was getting every possible answer I could get. From anyone and everyone I could get it from. Apparently this is not politically correct in the lexicon of some. People, there is a good deal of paranoia around. As to "evil," I give you my definition of it. Evil is a lack of empathy. And to end on an amusing note, something which I seem to have gotten away from, allow me a question. What disease did Hughey suffer from in the book "Dune?" LackaWanna. (You hadda be there) Jim Dr. Death (Morte)llaro
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:32:26 -0400 Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out Evil is the lack of empathy. This lady's got lots and lots of empathy. Jim Mortellaro ==============================> This is Mrs. John (Debra) Carpenter. I have just read a letter written by Larry W. Bryant, the MUFON Director of Governmental Affairs, wheren he discusses the "Carpenter Affair." I have retrieved Mr. Bryant's letter to the Members of the Executive Committee of MUFON from my home computer, along with all other addresses for which this message is copied. Let me tell you good, kind people of MUFON something. In my four years of knowing my husband, he has never once, in all the time I've known him, done, purported to have done, agreed to take part in, or otherwise taken part, in any way, shape or form, the selling of abductee's names to anyone else, for any purpose, nor have confidential files been released! These rumors are completely out of hand, and I want them to stop at this immediate juncture!!! John's whole purpose of being in the field of UFOlogy, since he was some 11 years old, has been to gain knowledge in this field and to share with others what knowledge he has gained. What Mr. Bryant refers to as the "Carpenter Affair" is nothing more than something started by his ex-wife, Elizabeth, in her scorn over their divorce and his marriage to ME. Have any of you not heard that, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned?" That goes for me, too, I might add! My husband, John Carpenter, chose not to share any of this with me, but it has been haunting him for some time, and after just tonight discovering Larry W. Bryant's letter to the Members of the Executive Committee of MUFON, I am compelled to stand beside my husband before all of you! I am here to advise Mr. Bryant, and anyone else who has defamed my husband's name over the internet, of the following: For one, I have contacted some of the best attorneys in this country regarding federal laws dealing with the unprecedented slander against my husband in what Mr. Bryant refers to as the "Carpenter Affair." I have the names of several of you in this most respected MUFON organization,who have copied, printed, reprinted, questioned, misappropriately forwarded, and in general, repeated, forwarded, or recopied or reprinted anything about this issue. I am now prepared to launch an all-out federal lawsuit against all of you. No one, and I mean NO ONE, has given more of their heart and soul into the issue of alien abduction than Mr. John Carpenter. I will tell you this. This whole outlandish story was begun by his ex-wife, Elizabeth (Carpenter) Chavez, whereby she rounded up several individuals and contacted attorneys in Kansas City to support a BOGUS suit against John, in her efforts to "ruin" him, and I have that in writing. So aren't you all just a little ashamed of yourselves? These lawyers have proven that there is absolutely no merit behind these most outrageous accusations, and they have shrugged it off. It's not worth their time, so why is it worth so much of yours?! I demand that a formal apology be given to John, and if any of you have any common sense whatsoever, you will drop this matter in its entirety, thank the Good Lord that you have the opportunity to have someone as good as John Carpenter in your organization, and I ask the good Lord to forgive those of you who have fallen prey to those in the snakes' den who started this whole mess! I have in writing a copy of a letter from someone who started the "Carpenter Affair", that she would make a great deal of money from a suit against John, and that is their ultimate goal here. The comment was something to the effect of, Wow, let's add another name here and we can really make some money on this lawsuit! I live with John every day. I know what agony this whole thing has caused him. Abductees and others are welcome to call our home, now and forever more, because he devotes literally hours and hours to this most beloved field in which we all share some common goals. One researcher who was supposedly a friend advised John over the phone, "I'm sorry, but being seen with you would hurt my reputation." This person should be so ashamed of herself! If any of you want to know the real scoop, I would suggest that you STOP this character assassination of my husband among this organization to which he has contributed so very much (all for free, I might add!) Where are all of you to stand beside us when we tell you right from wrong? Mr. Bryant, what do you expect to get out of this verbal crucifixtion of my husband?? Is there a Christian in the whole lot of you? You are spreading unfounded hearsay from a bunch of money-hungry hate mongers who saw an opportunity to make some real money at the expense of the man I love with my whole heart! Those involved should all be so ashamed of yourselves. To you, Mr. Larry Bryant, the best way, as you stated in your letter, "to resore the public's confidence in the purpose, operation, management, and integrity of (MUFON), " would be to gather your wits about you, and learn the whole facts before you wrongfully accuse my husband of improprieties which were not committed! Venue for a slander suit is here in the State of Missouri, and I have contacted the most prominent attorneys in this state regarding false accusations and slander against my husband. I have obtained copies of some of the most hateful, bitter, sad, and entirely FALSE remarks made about John throughout this whole incident. Those of you responsible are no better than toddlers who heard some gossip and spilled your milk all over your high chairs. I know the TRUTH of this matter, and I know all the parties responsible, and I am preparing to take immediate action. I have the greatest respect for those who know my husband, and therefore know John wouldn't commit this impropriety for which he has been accused. My love, respect, and highest regard for those of you, both men and ladies, who have stood by us through this disaster. We know who our friends are. The only reputation you are hurting, Mr. Bryant, is your own. I was taught to judge a man by the content of his character, and you letter certainly explains your character to me. I will stand by my husband come hell or high water, because I know the truth of this matter, I believe that it was started by a scorned ex-wife, and if any of you have the courage to approach ME with this issue, I gladly invite you to do so. How dare you criticize John in this fashion. He has devoted nothing but his heart and soul for these abductees, and MUFON, and for the field of UFO research for these past 34 years! I, for one, am ready to bring any of these accusations against my husband to a screeching halt, and unless you can come up with one shred, one iota, of evidence which proves something which our lawyers have been unable to come up with, then you had best keep your comments and slanderous remarks to yourself. And o those of you who have spread these evil, vicious, and slanderous remarks, please feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience! I am prepared to forward YOUR names to federal officials unless this matter is dropped immediately. I know what a fine person John is, how this has hurt him, and how it has made our family heartsick. Don't you people think before you forward this trash, do you think about the consequences of spreading false rumors? Or have you not reached that level of maturity at this stage in your lives? John Carpenter has helped far more people in the UFO field, and harmed no one. Those of you who are taking part in this slander against my husband will have to meet your Maker someday. Please forward any more of this nonsense to me, as it upsets me and my family greatly! Shame on you who know so little, yet are so eager to criticize before you know the facts! I ask for continued respect for John, apologies from those of you who owe them, and our Lord's blessings for all of you. Respectfully, Mrs. John (Debra) Carpenter Debra88207@aol.com ==================> Well said, Mrs. C. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Cydonian Imperative: Update 8-18-00 From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:06:19 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:34:47 -0400 Subject: Cydonian Imperative: Update 8-18-00 8-18-00 THE CYDONIAN IMPERATIVE A new photo section has been added to the Cydonian Imperative website, concentrating on the anomalies found in the Cydonia region: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydoniaphotos.html The most significant addition is the comparison between graphics specialist Mark Kelly's recent reconstruction of the Face with Mark Carlotto's prediction for the squandered May 7 imaging opportunity: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/facephotos.html --Mac Tonnies ===== Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) 239 E. Sea Independence, MO 64050 816-833-5910 Life on Mars: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html Reviews: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/bookreviews.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 01:03:07 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:40:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Research Enquiry - Hatch >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:03:38 +0100 >From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk> >Subject: Research Enquiry >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Research Enquiry for UFO Updates List. >Dear Colleagues, >Currently I am trying to find further reference for the symbols >reported in the controversial John Reeves, Brooksville, Florida >Incident of March 2, 1965. To actually get a look at the symbols >that were reported by Mr. Reeves? As far as I am aware, these >were included in 'The Brooksville, Florida, John Reeves UFO >Landing and Writings of March 2, 1965.' By Robert M. Snyder and >Robert S. Carr, 1965. So far, I have been unable to get a copy >of this or locate and contact the authors. >If anyone has any information about this, or any other available >reference that shows these symbols, I would be very grateful for >information. Contact details of any researcher involved with >this case would also be very welcome. Dear Gary: As my esteamed up colleague (Dr. Gripple) might say, Youse'a come da right place! Well, sort of. I have three listings which might bear some resemblance to your inquiry. #6503: 1965/03/15 0100 hrs 40 mins dur: 81:25W 26:25N 3333 NAM USA nr IMMOKALEE,FL:25M SCR ZAPS OBS : SEVERE EYE DAMAGE:BURNT GRASS: /r176p223+/r210v13#6 : Ref# 24 NICAP: UFO INVESTIGATOR Vol 3 #1 WETLANDS #7296: 1966/12/04 0200 hrs Oh, a few minures or so duration, give or take. 82:24W 28:33N 3332 NAM USA FLR It could have been six minutes. BROOKSVILLE,FL:SCR LANDS AGAIN:FOTOS/CIRC.TRACES::IND OBS/SCR/US19:/r214p144+ Ref# 210 The APRO BULLETIN, November 1966 #8254: 1968/8/21 0:0 2 82:23:0W 28:34:0N 3331 NAM USA FLR 8 6 BROOKSVILLE,FL:SCR NEARS CAR GOING THRU WOODS:ENGINE WONT WORK WHEN NEAR Ref# 79 RODEGHIER,Mark:UFO RPTS/VEHICLE INTF Page No. 42 FOREST The first listing is the most important, but that took place well away from Brooksville,FL. The date is all wrong, off by half a month, and the location is a good 70 miles (112 km) off target. May I ask your source? If you are referring to the case of the nearly blinded man on the swamp scooter, its a scary one indeed, and I wonder if there is some connection.. The second and third listings here ( from the *U* Database ) are from Brooksville,FL and probably irrelevant based on the date you kindly provided. As for John Reeve, and any strange symbols, I cannot pull up a thing. I do not store or retrieve the names of witnesses unless their last names resemble tri-colored italian ice cream. Anything related to "alien symbols" signs, numerals, any sort of alphabet and so on would be highly interesting of course. A larger question might be whether these would ever ever fall into our hands. Without any real knowledge of the matter, I would bet against it. Sorry - 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Scientific UFO Research [SUFOR) Webring From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:09:59 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:06:33 -0400 Subject: Scientific UFO Research [SUFOR) Webring I'm pleased to announce the creation of a new Webring: Scientific UFO Research [SUFOR) As briefly described therein: "This web ring features sites which embrace principles of scientific investigation. Participating sites must exhibit a critical, yet objective appraisal of UFO related evidence and demonstrably distance themselves from the non-scientific, often ludicrous, claims promoted to the subject's detriment. It's expected that comparatively few will meet these standards, however, the objective is to highlight those which do and ensure they are easier to locate amongst the many others in existence". The criteria and objectives are hopefully self explanatory. Applications are welcome and should be made via: http://edit.webring.org/cgi-bin/membercgi?ring=sufor;addform That basic criteria should of course be unexceptional, especially for any subject which expects to be taken seriously by the media and scientific world. Please feel free to forward this notification elsewhere. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 02:15:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:04:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Hatch >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:43:33 +0100 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Bowden >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:38:10 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >>>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >>>The problem with crop circle samples is that there is little, if >>>any, independent confirmation of the results. Further, no real >>>attempt is evident to study "ordinary" wheat throughout the >>>stages of its growth for comparison with "real" crop circle >>>abnormalities. It would be interesting to compare "real" circle >>>samples with those from lodging, animal disturbance, >>>sclerotinia, rust, etc. >>Why would it be interesting? You guys have already made up your >>minds it seems. Why don't YOU do the testing and _you_ find the >>scientists willing to look at it? >>>Our work has been extensively published and so is readily >>>available to check. >>Could you tell us what peer reviewed journals your work has been >>published in? I would like to read it. >>>Ask yourself this. Why would an alien intelligence spend >>>hundreds of years writing pictures in fields - specifically >>>locating most in one part of the world of late - and create a >>>seemingly all too human pattern of marks, game playing, even >>>punning? >>If you guys are going to start trying to think like an ET then I >>have lost a lot of respect for your work. Why would an alien >>intelligence do anything? I have no idea. I can't think like >>them. Can you? Anything on your part to try to think like them >>is total speculation and unscientific. >>>Would there not be good cause by now to create the marks (as >>>one assumes that they could do via their advanced technology) >>>in locations such as the grounds of Buckingham Palace or the >>>White House lawn? Where the whole world would then have to pay >>>attention. >>Gee, why don't they just land on the white house lawn? Do we >>still have to listen to this argument? Give me a break. You keep >>assuming that you can think like "them". You can't. Stop trying. >>It makes you look so amature. >>>What is needed to take seriously any contention that aliens >>>create circles is the evidence for some clearly structured >>>intelligently created pattern that was done in such a way that >>>humans could not possibly have created it without detection. Or >>>indeed one that left new science (eg the formula for an >>>anti-gravity drive or a cure for cancer might be a good place to >>>start). >>Who is saying aliens created them? Most of the people that have >>posted on this list have just stated their opinion that many of >>the circles remain unexplained. I don't recall seeing the word >>alien too often. It seems like that's your choice of words. >>>Are we really saying that the best a civilisation from another >>>star system can do is spend years doodling in a few crop fields >>>with images of whales, geometric shapes and pretty patterns? >>Do you know what they are thinking? If you do, please tell us. >>This is such bad scientific thinking. Actually, the word science >>doesn't even belong in that sentence. Speculation, guess work, >>trying to read ETs mind, etc.. Bascially, a joke and an insult >>to our intelligence. >>I do feel like we are being treated like kids now. Uninformed, >>stupid, un-scientific, unable to think like ET, kids. >>>Where do these wise aliens come from - the planet moron? >>I will refrain from responding to that one because it's just so >>juvenile. I rarely post to this List but this post has so many >>ridiculous aspects. You do make some good points but the bad >>points just totally destroy your credibility. >>You have still not explained or attempted to explain the balls >>of light that have been seen in the fields. Why not? >Hi Joe, >With regard to the balls of light I thought I might just point >out something you seem to have missed. While it is true the >balls of light have been seen and video taped in the circles >they have also been seen and taped in area's where there are no >circles. >Just recently I have been studying some daytime footage taken >only last month showing balls of light performing very intricate >movements near a crop circle formation in Wiltshire. There is >also footage of the same taken in the skies over London, could >be the best ever caught on film ;-) >Are there crop circles in London? I think I would have heard >about that one. >If someone is filming a mysterious object (crop circle) and >happens to capture another mysterious object (ball of light) it >is human nature to connect the two, they are both mysterious >after all. >Then again what do I know, I don't think like an alien :-) >All the best, >Dave Bowden. Dear Dave: I quite agree. What suburbia needs is crop rectangles, oh say 50 feet by whatever, most especially on this little block of modest homes. Certain other republicans around here like to cluck their tongues at my unkempt front lawn, but I believe it is best to leave the ancient oak tree, out front, in as natural a state as humanly possible. I only mow the lawn when the "artichokes" start attacking small innocent animals. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Carpenter-Gate - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:42:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:13:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Felder >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 06:02:58 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:50:01 -0500 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >>Subject: Carpenter-Gate >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >I don't recall anybody telling the abductees how to feel. I do >recall questions about complaints being filed with agency that >oversees regulations governing the professional conduct of >licensed social workers in the state of Missouri. I don't recall >that portion of the discussion being anything but legitimate >questions and comments. My understanding from reading the information presented to this List was that there are approximately 20 families who know about the sale of the files. Yet, when you checked... twice, I believe, there had been no complaints filed with the Missouri Board against Carpenter. This tells me that the families who know about it don't feel it necessary to report it to the governing board. In a couple of postings, you made reference to the "potential outrage" that these families would undoubtedly feel. Apparently the 20 that know about the sale don't feel that way. Or if they do, they don't feel as much outrage as you do. <snip> >I agree that this discussion has been >heated and confusing, but to imply that anybody but Carpenter >himself is responsible for the upset and bad publicity suggests >to me that you don't really understand the impact the sale of >these files without permission from the individuals has had on >the abductee community. Allow me to quote from one of your previous posts: >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 17:11:39 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 20:22:48 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter - Mulvey >>Myself and another staffer have been posting entire >>UpDates messages that are applicable to this issue [permission >>to post since 1997] but I don't see anything posted from you. >>The entire posts that are in UFO have either been from me or >>John Velez. You stated that the posts you passed along had been either from you or from Mr. Velez. You don't mention passing along any of the postgs from others on this List who have taken a position in opposition to yours. So you tell me, using the above as an example, who is responsible for bad publicity? Carpenter alone? I don't think so. I seriously doubt that he asked you to post only your side of this issue to the UFO forum on CS. If he did, please do provide evidence to support that event and I will gladly retract my statement. <snip> >As for this situation, I don't have to be an LCSW to empathize >with the violation that those 20 people feel who already know >their files were sold without their express permission. Have you been personally contacted by all 20 of these people? Have they specifically stated to you that they feel "violated" by the sale of their files? If so, please produce evidence to that effect. If not, the above is your _opinion_ as to how they _may_ feel. And again, I refer you to your post in which you reported that no complaints had been filed against Carpenter with the Missouri Board. This leads one to believe that these 20 people don't feel as violated as you apparently would like to see them feel. >Nor do >I have to be an LCSW to know the right thing to do now is to >notify the rest of those 120 families. Having a modem and the >ability to type makes me qualified. And having a modem and the ability to type qualifies me to state that I think this feeding frenzy on this List has caused more harm to Ufology in general than any other single event that I can think of at the moment. Having a modem and the ability to type, plus being a citizen of the US where I am guaranteed the right to free speech, qualifies me to state that, in my opinion, you have gone far overboard on your crusade to crucify Carpenter, despite finding out earlier that you were acting on incorrect information... reference what you called a "BS fest" in reaction to something Gary Hart said [applicable portions of the posting snipped and presented here]: >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:34:49 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:50:27 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Open Letter To Elizabeth Carpenter And Gary Hart - >>The people that haven't been notified _need_ to be notified >>_now_ Gary. That's what this is about. I'm beginning to think >>you wouldn't know 'responsible' if it bit you in your hoo-ha! >>Who made you spokesperson for these people? >>I resent like hell >>that my good intentions were used to fuel this BS fest. I would ask you who exactly appointed you as spokesperson for these people? Was a request of that nature posted to the List? I didn't find it in the archives. In spite of others urging calm, clarity, and a non-judgemental, non-emotional investigation into the whole affair, in spite of others urging that all the facts be collected before making public accusations of wrong-doing, you kept at it, stating that "the heat is on", and making the following remarks regarding "flaming" of others [again, applicable portions snipped and presented here]: >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:22:10 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:08:53 -0400 >>Subject: UpDate: Re: Open Letter to Elizabeth and Gary - Mulvey >>I'm not >>particularly fond of word flames either, but in a situation like >>this, where emotions are running so high and when people have >>such very emotional investments at risk, flames are to be >>expected. >>IOW, the >>flames aren't pretty, but they're part of this biz and, from >>time to time, provide a good system of checks, balances and >>boundaries - which imo we can never have enough of in Ufology. I think that statement speaks for itself..... >I recall no bashing of researchers. I'm also not so certain that >it's smart at this time for researchers to withold from posting >their administrative procedures regarding abductee files. Whether you mean it that way or not, the above sounds like a threat to me. If these researchers don't post what you want them to post, are you going to start flaming them, for the sake of "checks and balances" in the UFO field? >>This has turned into a feeding frenzy, and it isn't a pretty >>sight. >So what's the alternative? Silence? How about simply sticking to the facts, finding out exactly what the facts are before making flaming posts to email lists and message boards, making certain you have the facts straight before going off half-cocked and calling the state governing board on someone who has not been formally charged with a crime, who has not had a complaint filed against him by the very people he is accused of wronging, and who cannot possibly hope to defend himself against posts made far and wide on the internet... selective posting, I might add, by your own admission, that rarely comes close to giving the whole story. That might have been a better place to start..... But its too late now. The damage is done... to John Carpenter, to Bigelow, to MUFON, to NIDS, to abduction research, to abuctees, to the integrity of this List, and to the UFO field in general. And it can't be undone. I agree that the people whose files were sold should be notified. I am sorry that this apparently isn't happening quickly enough to suit you, but your continuing to rant about it isn't getting it done any quicker. I'm done with this subject now. Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Ontario Crop Circles From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:46:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:10:04 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Ontario Crop Circles CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 17, 2000 _____________________________ UPDATE #2 - ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP, ONTARIO CROP CIRCLES Following is a ground report on the crop circles at Oro-Medonte Township, Ontario, from June Mewhort. Additional images to hopefully be added on the web site as soon as possible. Paul Anderson _____________________________ On August 14th, 2000 at around 12:30 PM I had the privilege to visit a set of three crop circles in Orillia, Ontario. The circles had appeared overnight between August 9th and 10th. The farmer, Mr. Garnet Horne, found the circles on the morning of Thursday the 10th. They had not been there on the evening of the 9th. He was excited and awed by what he saw and immediately called over his brother to help him prove what had been obvious from the very beginning. There were no human footprints and there was no trail through the grain. In Canada, farmers do not use tram lines like they do in England. Even small animals leave a trail through grain when passing through it and humans tend to leave rather large ones. But here, in the area of these three precise circles, there was absolutely no evidence of human activity. Garnet and his brother measured the circles themselves and found that the first and largest was 70 feet in diameter, the second was 50 feet and the smallest was 30 feet in diameter: 20 feet difference between each. The grain was a combination of oats and barley. By the time I got to the circles there had been hundreds of visitors and the grain had been tramped down and flattened with unruly haphazard individual stalks standing up but bent. It was not a tidy formation. However, according to Garnet Horne, it had been. As he began to describe the sweep and wave of the fresh formation, I realised that it had been of a high caliber, just like the ones I had seen freshly laid in England. When I first arrived, I was alone and went about studying the circles the way I had learned in England. I did not find any blown nodes and I did not find any bundling. However, I noted that the grain had been seeded very sparsely in comparison to the seeding in England. There just was not as much to work on. I noted that all the seed heads were pointing in the same direction and that the force that created these circles was moving in a counterclockwise direction. I also noted that within a short distance of the formation were three microwave communication towers that one could see, and one even taller than those was situated just behind the forest. Since microwave energy has been associated with the circles by science, I thought this might be important. After doing a study, I sat in the centre of the second circle and found the energy to be very calm. Soon, I was joined by Garnet and a couple of reporters from Orillia. As I shared what I knew of the phenomenon and mentioned the fact that cameras often don't work in brand new circles because of remaining energy interference, Garnet remembered that on the morning that he discovered the formation, his two dogs refused to enter the circles. Later that first day, when more people came and entered, the dogs did too, but not when they originally encountered the phenomenon. This bit of information also helped to confirm the validity of the circles, not to mention the fact that Garnet Horne was obviously mystified by them. He has challenged people to come into his field and try to copy the formation in another corner to prove that the circles could not have been formed with board and string. So far, no-one has taken him up on it, possibly because most of the people visiting the site have embraced the mystery and do not need any more proof than what they see in front of them. June Mewhort _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 The PK Man From: Jeffrey Mishlove <Jeffrey@WilliamJames.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:53:59 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:40 -0400 Subject: The PK Man I invite you to visit my website: http://www.williamjames.com There you will learn about my forthcoming book, THE PK MAN, to be published next month by Hampton Roads Publishing Company. It is the story of Ted Owens whose claims I researched for over ten years. He provided more than 150 demonstrations supporting his contention that he was in telepathic contact with alien entities whom he called the Space Intelligences. These demonstrations involved climatic changes, lightning strikes, control of hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanos, UFO appearances, power blackouts, airplane crashes and many other unusual events. The foreword is written by Dr. John Mack. The website contains several essays about the Ted Owens case, written by independent observers. It also contains illustrations supporting the remarkable claims made in the book. In addition you will find a link to a web-archived, audio monolog I created about my experiences with Ted Owens. PK is the parapsychological term for psychokinesis or mind-over-matter. Sincerely, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:54:03 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:45:44 -0400 Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Velez >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >To: updates@sympatico.ca Hi All, The 'docca' tells us: >Evil is the lack of empathy. This lady's got >lots and lots of empathy. >Jim Mortellaro After reading this sad missive from the current Mrs. Carpenter the word "empathy" does not immediately spring to mind. "Angry, threatening, frustrated, and angst filled" yes, but "empathetic"? Not at all. Maybe it's time for you to hit the old Webster and refresh your knowledge of the definition of the word "empathy" jimbo. Does the complete lack of "empathy" that _you_ have demonstarted repeatedly towards the 140 abductees in this case make _you_ evil? >==============================> >This is Mrs. John (Debra) Carpenter. I have just read a letter >written by Larry W. Bryant, the MUFON Director of Governmental >Affairs, wheren he discusses the "Carpenter Affair." I have >retrieved Mr. Bryant's letter to the Members of the Executive >Committee of MUFON from my home computer, along with all other >addresses for which this message is copied. <snip> > Respectfully, > Mrs. John (Debra) Carpenter > Debra88207@aol.com >==================> >Well said, Mrs. C. >Jim Mortellaro You have to be in a very small minority of people who would describe that display of obvious pain, anger, and angst as "well said". Reading it made me feel sorry for her. (Empathetic) towards her. She's in a lot of obvious pain (just like the abductees whose files John sold!) over this whole sad business. It may have good for her to 'get it all out' for therapeutic reasons but her display of anger and the implied threats to sue anyone and everyone connected to this are far from anything that could be remotely considered as "well said". Only _you_ would/could consider such an angry rant as "well said". Does the fact that _you_ are presenting her to the List (involving her) mean that _you_ contacted her for the purpose of eliciting this very sad set of statements from her? Do you somehow feel that this has all been just a "win/lose" debate situation on the List? How sad that you should view such an important issue that affects so many of your fellow abductees as a personal 'win/lose' situation on an e-mail list. And to go out of your way to involve Mrs. Carpenter (who is so obviously upset about all this already) to vent her spleen on the List is by _far_ the worst thing that you have done so far on this thread. Involving a hurt and angry individual in business that is being directed toward her husband is inexcusable. Are you now using people for your own purposes without consideration for them - just to 'make a point'? I sincerely hope that we've seem you bottom out here. I'd hate to think that you are capable of sinking lower than this simply to assuage your own wounded ego. You complain of "name calling" and "paranoia". Why is it that you are the _only_ one engaging in it? Sincerely, The "Hateful, paranoid, King of the Abductees" (sound familiar dere Jimbo?) John Velez ;)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:07:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:50:33 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? - Hale >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:11:22 -0400 (EDT) >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Subject: Re: UFO Reports Over Luton (UK)? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >I have a contact at Luton do you have a date for the sighting or >are you looking for historial sightings, if they exist? >Terry Hi Terry, About one week ago, no date given but was hoping for a pick up on it from any source, e-mail me with your info if poss? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:55:11 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:52:01 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:28:06 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Regarding: >As it was next seen "clear off to the coast", it seems this >'UFO' sighting is comprehensive explained by the evidence now >available to us. Are you telling us, that as far as you are concerned Rendlesham is a closed case? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:56:23 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >>To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham >>forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness >>(Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: <snip> Roy wrote: >Hi, >And my question to you was, would these people have ever >seen the Orford Ness Lighthouse "Flashing" in relation to how >long they served at the base? Would they have known from >the direction of the red light where Orford Ness Lighthouse >is situated? This old chestnut comes up time and time again Roy - the automiatic assumption that just because witnesses - credible witnesses even - live or work near a particular object or light source, they can always identify it. It's a theory which is complete rubbish however. The annals of UFO research are bespattered with cases where witnesses - credible witnesses even- have completely misidentified a mundane object as a UFO. My favourite hobby horse, the Cracoe Case from the early 1980s is a case in point. Two policemen stood and watched a spectacular UFO hover against a cliff for an hour. The cliff was seen many times a day by the police officer who lived in the police house. Long story cut short..... they were seeing a rock reflection visible _every_ day (I can show anyone the Cracoe UFO!). Or how about the two Devon policemen who, in 1967, made headline news and were a focus of the legendary (and soon to be destroyed!) UK 1967 wave. They were seeing Venus, a planet they had seen a zillion times before except that on that particular night it was a UFO! So the myth of the credible witness is just that - a myth. Each case has to be taken on its own merits bearing in mind what we *know* about witness perception and similar cases. So It was quite possible - likely even - that the servicmen at Rendlesham were hopelessly confused on that night about what they were seeing. Happy Trails Andy ***************************************************** "Instead you destroy people's hopes and dreams, attack their beliefs, bring them down and use every low tactic at your disposal." Tim Matthews, July 2000 *****************************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:22:17 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> Andy, >>>To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham >>>forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness >>>(Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: >So the myth of the credible witness is just that - a myth. Each >case has to be taken on its own merits bearing in mind what we >*know* about witness perception and similar cases. So It was >quite possible - likely even - that the servicmen at Rendlesham >were hopelessly confused on that night about what they were >seeing. Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can be complacently ignored is, like so many beloved debunker beliefs, unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent testimony so that they can "explain" it. It's depressing -- though, alas, not surprising -- to see this sort of silliness being bandied about nearly 20 years after David Hufford's devastating debunking of the myth of the noncredible witness, in the classic The Terror That Comes in the Night (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982) -- a book that seems to have made a much greater impression on folklorists than on would-be debunkers of anomalous experience. That witnesses can be mistaken is, of course, a no-brainer. That they often are not, apparently, is a realization it takes greater wisdom to get to. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:00:51 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:23:30 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:28:06 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Regarding: >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Shortly after this initial report A1C Burroughs was joined by >SSgt Penniston and his rider, AMN Cabansag. SSgt Penniston also >reported the strange lights. I directed SSgt Coffey, the on duty >Security Controller, to attempt to ascertain from SSgt Penniston >whether or not the lights could be marker lights of some kind, >to which SSgt Penniston said that he had never seen lights of >this color or nature in the area before. He described them as >red, blue, white and orange. This may be a stupid question, but does the lighthouse in question have red, blue, white and orange lights? Just curious..... Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:13:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:25:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Felder >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:54:03 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >Maybe it's time for you to hit the old Webster and refresh your >knowledge of the definition of the word "empathy" jimbo. Does >the complete lack of "empathy" that _you_ have demonstarted >repeatedly towards the 140 abductees in this case make _you_ >evil? The man doesn't react the way _you_ do, doesn't conform to the attitude that _you_ have taken toward this whole business, and that makes him "evil"? I think that just makes him an individual who isn't afraid to speak his mind. And I think, based on your responses, you would seem to be a person who can't deal with it when someone else takes exception to your point of view. Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but that's the perception your writings are giving here. Since I don't know you, I only have what I read here to go on. And it seems that Jim has tried to maintain an air of fairness about this whole mess... fairness toward the abductees involved as well as fairness toward John Carpenter.....while you have apparently chosen to act out some personal vindetta you have against him. That's fine, if you feel you must take out your personal differences with someone on this list, and EBK doesn't mind if you do that. But don't insult us by trying to pass it off as something else. If you're pissed at Jim, just say something to the effect, "I am pissed at Jim and this is why..." Don't drag the 140 abductees, John Carpenter, Mrs. John Carpenter, and everyone on this list into it under false pretenses. We ain't quite as dumb as we seem, John :) And since you don't know me personally, you can take your best shot at me if you feel the need. I won't lose a moment's sleep over it :) Just my opinion based on my observations, of course..... Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:28:55 -0400 Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:54:03 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >Hi All, >The 'docca' tells us: <snip> >You have to be in a very small minority of people who would >describe that display of obvious pain, anger, and angst as To be determined. >"well said". Reading it made me feel sorry for her. (Empathetic) >towards her. She's in a lot of obvious pain (just like the >abductees whose files John sold!) over this whole sad business. >It may have good for her to 'get it all out' for therapeutic >reasons but her display of anger and the implied threats to >sue anyone and everyone connected to this are far from anything >that could be remotely considered as "well said". >Only _you_ would/could consider such an angry rant as "well >said". Does the fact that _you_ are presenting her to the List >(involving her) mean that _you_ contacted her for the purpose of >eliciting this very sad set of statements from her? It does not. I am carrying her complaint to the List but did not solicit or elicit same. As can be discerned by reading it, this post went to MUFON. It came here by way of my interest in this case. Nothing more. Imbedded therein, is an advise which should be considered. >Do you somehow feel that this has all been just a "win/lose" >debate situation on the List? How sad that you should view such >an important issue that affects so many of your fellow abductees >as a personal 'win/lose' situation on an e-mail list. And to go >out of your way to involve Mrs. Carpenter (who is so obviously >upset about all this already) to vent her spleen on the List is >by _far_ the worst thing that you have done so far on this >thread <snip> Since this is something which is assumed by at least one of the members of this List, and since it is false, I shall conclude that it is not by far the worst thing I've done on this List. As for being a win/lose? Wrong again. It is a right/wrong situation which I have described previously. >I sincerely hope that we've seem you bottom out here. I'd hate >to think that you are capable of sinking lower than this simply >to assuage your own wounded ego. >You complain of "name calling" and "paranoia". Why is it that >you are the _only_ one engaging in it? I am the only one identifying an already extant scenario, I am not creating it. <snip> >The "Hateful, paranoid, King of the Abductees" (sound familiar >dere Jimbo?) Yes. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:31:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:30:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:36:23 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Mortellaro - For the Record >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Dear Listers and EBK, >I wish to make clear my intentions regarding various matters on >which I have commented here on UpDates. It is important to me, >that this list appreciate the truth (finally) about the >positions I have taken of late. >I defend those in the province of UFOs and Abduction, who have >been found to be guilty before all the evidence is in. I do not >believe this to be at all fair, not just to the accused, but to >the rest of us. It demeans all of Ufology. It makes us look like >fools. We are in effect, engaged in the act of destroying >ourselves. To me, that's pretty half-witted of us. Ufology >becomes U Fool Ogy. Having been on the receiving end of a character assassination hachet job via the internet, having been judged guilty in the past of something I didn't do but was judged guilty anyway by rumor, inuendo, misleading statements, flat out lies, and no investigation into the matter before the ones who did the bashing started shooting off their mouths, I can see the point that Jim has tried to make. And it is a valid point, I think. Harm done to another, even under the guise of "righteous indignation", cannot be undone if it turns out that the inital facts were incorrect. It had already been three years since the files were sold... would it really have made _that_ much difference if we waited a little longer, investigated what happened, and got the facts straight before holding a public crucifixion of a man's reputation? >All I was doing was getting every possible answer I could get. >From anyone and everyone I could get it from. Apparently this is >not politically correct in the lexicon of some. "Political correctness" ranks right up there with Barney the purple dinosaur in my book... the world would be a better place if both just went away and died a natural death..... Keep speaking your mind, Jim. I think the UFO field could use a little more independent thought and a little less of the "herd instinct"...... Just my opinion, of course..... Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso -0 From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:41:30 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:33:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso -0 >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:58:32 -0400 >To: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> >Subject: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: updates@sympatico.ca >In short; Corso gives every indication of truthfulness in his >claims that he was a principal player in exploiting technology >which came from wreckage resulting from a crash of an >extraterrestrial craft; likewise, he gives every indication of >truthfulness when discussing the actuality of biological remains >recovered at the site. Dear List Members, When I sent Mike the Bell/Corso interview, I knew he had no knowledge of Col. Corso, and that he had not read 'The Day After Roswell'. Because I had worked with him before, I knew I could trust him to sort out the truth from the lies. I had felt that Col. Corso was telling the truth, and any mistakes were only mistakes, nothing more. But I wasn't sure. Who would be after the rancorous discussion I had with members of this List who seemed so sure of themselves and equally sure that Col. Corso was a liar, and that I was probably crazy for defending him. Now it seems these critics were wrong. Isn't their silence a sign of acceptance? I assume that now we'll be able to use the information Col. Corso provided without worry that it is somehow tainted by lies. I also assume that unless something new comes along to convince us otherwise, we can all agree that Col. Corso was trying to tell us the truth about the genesis of our modern technology and its connection to the crashed Roswell 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:38:50 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham >>>forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness >>>(Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: ><snip> >Roy wrote: >>Hi, >>And my question to you was, would these people have ever >>seen the Orford Ness Lighthouse "Flashing" in relation to how >>long they served at the base? Would they have known from >>the direction of the red light where Orford Ness Lighthouse >>is situated? >The annals of UFO research are bespattered with cases where >witnesses - credible witnesses even- have completely >misidentified a mundane object as a UFO. > >My favourite hobby horse, the Cracoe Case from the early 1980s >is a case in point. Two policemen stood and watched a >spectacular UFO hover against a cliff for an hour. The cliff was >seen many times a day by the police officer who lived in the >police house. >Long story cut short..... they were seeing a rock reflection >visible _every_ day (I can show anyone the Cracoe UFO!). >Happy Trails >Andy Hi, Ufology is often about mundane objects being seen in extraordinary ways. The history of IFOs is littered with examples and too many of us ignore the lessons that these cases teach. For instance, I recall one case from Staffordshire where a landed UFO and an alien in front turned out to be a telegraph pole silhouetted against the full moon. There was no doubt of this resolution. The facts fitted too well. The witness had of course seen the moon and the pole many many times. So why on that night were they the source of such a grand mal deception? This is one of the most fascinating questions that IFO cases pose (one reason Andy and I - and Dave Clarke - wrote a book telling their stories). You learn a huge amount about the UFO phenomenon from studying misperceptions. After all they do represent 95% of all our data and yet we tend to sweep this all under the mat. Each case is something different and has its own lessons. But the equation stimulus + witness = IFO can occur in many different ways. For instance, the stimulus might be slightly unusual (eg the moon shining through mist, or a star via a temperature inversion creating a mirage). In that case the cause of the misperception is obvious. The thing looks odd and so fools the percipient. Ordinary things can combine in unusual ways (as above the chance alignment of pole and moon that would not be in these linked positions on most nights). Another case - for instance - occurred in early l975 when Venus and jupiter were in conjunction and spectacularly bright side by side for a few days. This unusual astronomical anomaly provided witnesses with a novel stimulus and provoked many to think the stars were lights on a craft. Their minds literally 'joined the dots' and turned these planets into an alien machine. On other occasions it is the witness in this equation that has the problem. For instance, they are of a mind set that wants to see UFOs and so eagerly reads more into what is there out of expectation (although this is actually fairly rare in my experience). Or, there could be an altered state of consciousness that provokes hallucinations and causes a mundane stimulus to take on extraordinary properties. The ASC can itself be generated in many interesting ways as well! I had one case where a witness saw a garage as a landed UFO during a time when they admitted they felt 'very strange' and their senses 'were not all there' - cause of this effect unknown. But the UFO was clearly nothing but a grossly distorted image of an ordinary thing they had seen a thousand times before. All of these things happened beyond a shadow of a doubt. The IFO cases prove themselves to any rational investigator. But they pose fascinating questions about how often misperception occurs in other situations where most Ufologists would dismiss it as being impossible because surely the witness could not mistake something so obvious. In Rendlesham, as most people know, I have for years thought that very thing about the lighthouse. John Burroughs categorically told me that it was not the lighthouse because he was not a newcomer to the base and had picnicked in the forest before. So he knew what the lighthouse was. He had seen it. Moreover 'I have never once seen a lighthouse that flew' he said. Charles Halt also told me he saw BOTH the lighthouse and the Shipwash lightship in the forest as well as the UFO. If he did that's case closed so far as the lighthouse is concerned. And I certainly don't have reason to think he was lying. I even spoke to the lighthouse keeper at Orford Ness and he didn't buy the idea that his light created the UFO. Seems overwhelming doesn't it? That's why in my books I have long argued against the idea (championed by Ian Ridpath and latterly James Easton) suggesting the balance of evidence says it is surely wrong. Not through wishful thinking. Not desperation to prove an alien contact. Simply sheer common sense that these witnesses were so adamant. Moreover, having been to the site many times (and most importantly before the devastating hurricane that wrecked it some years ago) I knew that you could not miss the lighthouse BEAM (not the beacon) from the east gate. It sweeps over the trees. So anyone leaving on a UFO hunt from here had to know there was such a light out there all the time. Given all of this powerful stuff - why have I changed my opinion? Partly, the sum total of cases where IFOs are grossly misperceived (as above) by totally honest and intelligent witnesses (my cases include a doctor, a PhD scientist and an airline pilot!). But mostly the crucial new evidence that when you put it all together seems to make it hard not to conclude the UFO experience was triggered by the lighthouse. There is that newly surfaced statement by Burroughs in l981 that he WAS briefly fooled by the lighthouse on the same night. Possibly what he thought of as the lighthouse was in fact the lightship and so he was not lying when he insisted to me he knew the lighthouse. Just mistaking which one he meant. Similarly, as the Halt comments from the net interview cited by James Easton show - he thought the lightship was the lighthouse. He saw the UFO to the left of the lightship - but the lighthouse was right there. He never mentions both lighthouse and UFO being seen side by side as they simply would have to be from where he was. Its odd that he wouldn't mention such a bright light so near the UFO - especially as he does mention the house that was virtually adjacent to the lighthouse in his line of sight - but its possible, of course, that he wouldn't. It is hard balancing all of this together. I have no reason to distrust Halt at all when he tells me he saw BOTH lighthouse and lightship. If he did then the lighthouse wasn't the UFO. That's that. I found John Burroughs a persuasive witness and he believes he could recognise the lighthouse. Yet his signed statement unearthed by James Easton shows that on the night in question he apparently didn't. He says so in his own words. As things stand we have two witnesses - both in their own words apparently demonstrating an unfamiliarity with the lighthouse as opposed to the lightship. We have the UFO in the exactly right position looking and acting much as the UFO did. Its hard to ignore all that, isn't it? There remain some problems. Aspects of the sighting do not seem like the lighthouse and the close encounter effects described by Burroughs and Penniston (electrical fields, time distortions etc) are obviously not your everyday consequence of seeing a lighthouse. So its viable that more was going on. There are some hints in the case that suggest we might have to consider the lighthouse PLUS 'factor X'. That is something that may have caused the lighthouse to be seriously distorted. Some clues - for instance - suggest a prismatic mirage in force. And there were some pretty odd OTH radar experiments that had occurred locally (officially ceased by l980 - but Halt intimated to me that research there still went on and led to Bentwaters having to sort out problems created) There is a good circumstantial chain of evidence that this research provoked EM fields and other odd effects in the area of the forest when they were occurring. So I do not say this case is definitely solved. Like I said in 'The UFOs that Never Were' Rendlesham isn't dead, but it does need a doctor. The case made by those arguing for the lighthouse cannot just be laughed away - easy as it is and tempting as it must be. I have tried to pursue this case openly and honestly and share all my findings with you all in a series of books over the past 17 years. And nobody would like to believe more than me that this is a really major event. I seem to have spent half my life thinking about it so if you like I have a major vested interest in it. But facts are facts and this case has taken worrying turns of late. Not necessarily fatal turns (as I explained in an article in International UFO Reporter last year about all this - there are some mitigating circumstances we have to take into consideration). However, we would be less than honest with ourselves if we failed to take seriously the possibility that the main planks of this case are potentially resolvable. Because there is a case to answer that says they are. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Hubbell From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:15:56 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:42:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Hubbell >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:36:23 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Mortellaro - For the Record >To: updates@sympatico.ca< Mr. Mortellaro, Listers and EBK, <snip> >And the worst part is that often, those of us who claim to be >righteous, are just plain pigheaded and opinionated. This, in addition to being labeled a "paranoid" abductee, is the icing on the cake of my day. >Of course, this is not true of all of the posters. Only the ones who agree with your position are the righteously indignant? >I have in the most recent past, insulted the integrity of some who >are innocent of such wrongdoing. That's pretty doltish of me and >I admit it. Those who do not know their files were sold are the innocent. <snip> >Cripes, what a maroon! Spell-checker alert! <snip> >I hope you guys are getting the point. Today I was referred to >as "defender of the offenders." Loud and clear. Because I have an opinion that disgrees with yours, I am now "pig-headed". <snip> >I have also been referred to as someone who accuses those who >attempt to bring the wrong doers to light, to be "evil" or >"paranoid." Now you know what it feels like. <snip> >Evil is a lack of empathy. And would you define compassion as being in the "no news is good news" department... or... "what they don't know won't hurt them" department... or in the "who gives a tinker's d*mn anyway" department? Let me be _pig-headed_ one more time and ask you something. When you told others outside this field of your experiences, what was their reaction? A raised eyebrow? Laughter? Did those outside of this field call you names like delusional, mentally ill, hallucinating, schizophrenic? How about liar? No? You then, Mr. Mortellaro, are the exception to the rule because that's what it's like outside of this field. If they had, then your alleged lack of empathy and compassion is more than puzzling. One last question. Did it ever occur to you that all this could have been avoided if just a teensy-weensy bit of _empathy_ was extended to the abductees whose files changed hands? Regards, Katherine
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:46:13 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:36:03 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:00:51 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:28:06 +0100 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Regarding: >>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>Shortly after this initial report A1C Burroughs was joined by >>SSgt Penniston and his rider, AMN Cabansag. SSgt Penniston also >>reported the strange lights. I directed SSgt Coffey, the on duty >>Security Controller, to attempt to ascertain from SSgt Penniston >>whether or not the lights could be marker lights of some kind, >>to which SSgt Penniston said that he had never seen lights of >>this color or nature in the area before. He described them as >>red, blue, white and orange. >This may be a stupid question, but does the lighthouse in >question have red, blue, white and orange lights? >Just curious..... Bobbie, Bobbie, Bobbie... (sighs)... we can dress yo up but darned if we can take you anywhere! What am I gonna do wit yous? Of course it does. All around the sides of it. But you forgot to aks the best question. Does this lighthouse move, land, make smoke and mess up communications? And best of all, does it scare the crap out of soldiers? 'Sammata wit yous? Anyway? Jim Mortellaro: --->center median divider on Canal Street (Back Woods) --->New York City (More backward than Alabama) --->USA (Changed forever - by Democrats) --->planet Earth (Losing the fight) --->somewhere in the cosmos (And they wish we weren't 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:09:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:42:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi, Thanks for your comments Jerry. >Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are >mistaken, and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can >be complacently ignored is, like so many beloved debunker >beliefs, unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent >testimony so that they can "explain" it. Not at all Jerry. As usual you have a knee-jerk reaction to what is demonstrable fact - that some, many, witnesses mistake the mundane for the mysterious. It isn't my _opinion_ that this is the case Jerry it's fact. What's more it's fact in several big cases in the UK and probably in the US as well. So unfortunately, whether you like it or not - and I suspect you don't - you have to accept the reality of it. The fact that many witnesses who are mistaken as referred to as credible because of their occupation or alleged specialist knowledge makes it all the more odd. But policemen, aircrew, military personel etc etc are, it seems, just as subject ot radical misperception as the next person. As for your: >because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, that isn't what I said. See above. But to take it a step further _no_ witness who ever claims to have seen a gen-u-ine flying craft which was not of terrestrial origin has _ever_ been proven correct. Despite all the sightings, not on one single occasion. But it is a _fact_ that on _many_ occasions people who claim to have seen such a thing have been proven wrong because of radical misperception. So therefore, when dealing with sightings of anomalous aerial objects we have to take on board the fact - and it _is_ a fact Jerry - which I stated above, that witness perception is unreliable in this area. Why people can spectacularly misperceive something mundane one day but see it 'correctly' the day before or after I have no idea. But it _is_ the case in ufology. So I see nothing unreasonable - bearing in mind the evidence put forward by James Easton, Ian Ridpath and many others - that the Rendlesham people were not subject to the same radical misperceptions. For you to argue against the possibiliy of this is illogical because as I have said, it is demonstrable fact. Of course ufologists conveniently 'forget' the solved cases where radical misperception has been at the root. But they shouldn't. And it rather surprises me Jerry that you react in this way to what is now a fundamental tenet in the subject. Even when dealing with events and object which are known about and accepted there are massive problems in the area of perception. I'm sure I don't have to tell you - although it seems you have forgotten - that if you speak to anyone from a law enforcement agency they will tell you that by and large witness testimony is not very good. And that's dealing with the _known_! >That they often are >not, apparently, is a realization it takes greater wisdom to get >to. Perhaps you'd like to cite me a case Jerry, just one case, where the witness or witnesses to a 'UFO' were proven correct in what they saw and reported. Thanks Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:21:24 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:45:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:41:30 -0800 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >When I sent Mike the Bell/Corso interview, I knew he had no >knowledge of Col. Corso, and that he had not read 'The Day After >Roswell'. Because I had worked with him before, I knew I could >trust him to sort out the truth from the lies. I had felt that >Col. Corso was telling the truth, and any mistakes were only >mistakes, nothing more. But I wasn't sure. Who would be after >the rancorous discussion I had with members of this List who >seemed so sure of themselves and equally sure that Col. Corso >was a liar, and that I was probably crazy for defending him. >Now it seems these critics were wrong. Isn't their silence a >sign of acceptance? I assume that now we'll be able to use the >information Col. Corso provided without worry that it is somehow >tainted by lies. I also assume that unless something new comes >along to convince us otherwise, we can all agree that Col. Corso >was trying to tell us the truth about the genesis of our modern >technology and its connection to the crashed Roswell craft. Silence is not at all a sign of acceptance. My own reaction to the voice stress analysis was, "So what?" I don't know the qualifications of the person who did the analysis. Nor do I know how reliable voice stress analysis is. I'd need much more before I took this as proof of anything. Wendy Christensen noted one obvious problem -- if someone believes he's sincere but in fact is deluded, a polygraph or voice stress test won't uncover any lies. At the very least this voice stress analysis should be replicated by another tester. But, Ed, you're moving much too fast if you assume you've now proved that Corso was telling the truth. We'd all be happy if there was some infallible way to separate truth from lies, but unfortunately there isn't. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:59:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:24:36 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>>>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>>>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> Jenny, >On other occasions it is the witness in this equation that has >the problem. For instance, they are of a mind set that wants to >see UFOs and so eagerly reads more into what is there out of >expectation (although this is actually fairly rare in my >experience). Or, there could be an altered state of >consciousness that provokes hallucinations and causes a mundane >stimulus to take on extraordinary properties. The ASC can >itself be generated in many interesting ways as well! What evidence do you have that witnesses are undergoing altered states of consciousness? I hope you don't mean it this way, but it almost sounds like an argument that validates itself. If you can't explain it otherwise, it's an ASC. In science, the allegation that one has undergone an ASC requires evidence, and evidence is not just that the individual claims an extraordinary experience. The Magic Lighthouse theory about Rendlesham, at least as I understand it, necessitates radical alterations of consciousness and perception of a sort I'd like to see better documented than I see here. As far as I can tell, all you've established is that at one point during a complex and frightening episode which occurred over a period of time, witnesses were briefly confused by a conventional stimulus. So what? Hardly the first time that's happened. If we're to believe your latest interpretation of this case, you and your skeptical friends are proposing a hypothesis that is extraordinary in itself, and just as hard to believe. It would be far easier for me to believe that the major witnesses were lying outright than that they underwent the states of consciousness necessary for the ML theory to make sense. From everything I've seen about the Rendlesham case, I see every reason to be cautious -- about ALL interpretations, including this latest claimed final solution of the Magic Lighthouse (one of whose most enthusiastic believers is the guy who professes to believe, in defiance of both common sense and physics, that Ken Arnold saw pelicans) -- and none to jump, or even creep, to conclusions which stretch the evidence farther than it will go. Ever heard of agnosticism, or the possibility, even likelihood, that we will never know precisely what happened at Rendlesham? Rather than conjure up dubious solutions, maybe it's time to let this one go and to turn our attentions to potentially more rewarding -- and recent -- cases. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:57:29 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:26:43 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>So the myth of the credible witness is just that - a myth. Each >>case has to be taken on its own merits bearing in mind what we >>*know* about witness perception and similar cases. So It was >>quite possible - likely even - that the servicmen at Rendlesham >>were hopelessly confused on that night about what they were >>seeing. >Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, >and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can be complacently >ignored is, like so many beloved debunker beliefs, >unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent testimony so >that they can "explain" it. Jerry, calm down a minute and think before you hit the keyboard again. The "myth of the credible witness" refers to the fact that some ufologists believe that there are people who, because of the job or their training, are unlikely to be mistaken no matter what they report. Typically these are policemen, airline pilots, astronomers, servicemen, librarians (oops, sorry, that one seemed to just slip in), and the assumption is that their reports are more reliable than that of any old Joe Soap because they are a (small fanfare) "credible witness". Well, I don't think that's so. I think you have to take each witnesses report on its own merits, and not give it more value because it was made by a policeman, or less because it was made by a UFO editor in a town in the mid-West. That's all that Andy was saying. And I think probably you actually agree with that, but you just couldn't resist taking a slug at another British psychosociologist. >It's depressing -- though, alas, not surprising -- to see this >sort of silliness being bandied about nearly 20 years after >David Hufford's devastating debunking of the myth of the >noncredible witness, in the classic The Terror That Comes in the >Night (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982) -- a book that >seems to have made a much greater impression on folklorists than >on would-be debunkers of anomalous experience. That witnesses >can be mistaken is, of course, a no-brainer. That they often are >not, apparently, is a realization it takes greater wisdom to get >to. I'm not quite sure what Hufford's classic book has to do with this argument. As you will remember, I was recommending this book to ufologists back when it was first published. I don't think Hufford limited his discussions of Old Hag experiences exclusively to those made by policemen, pilots or scientists. Yes, there are credible witnesses, but they are credible because of the nature of their report and the circumstances under which it was made, and not because investigators are impressed by the nature of their jobs. Oh, and while I'm on it. Why have people who are sceptical about particular explanations for anomalous experiences suddenly become "debunkers of anomalous experiences". I don'y buy into the ETH for example, but that doesn't mean I don't accept that abductees have very real experiences *of some kind* - but I don't have to take any particular proffered explanation as fact. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:48:56 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:03:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Mulvey >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:42:57 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Felder >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 06:02:58 -0400 >>From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:50:01 -0500 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >>>Subject: Carpenter-Gate >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>I don't recall anybody telling the abductees how to feel. I do >>recall questions about complaints being filed with agency that >>oversees regulations governing the professional conduct of >>licensed social workers in the state of Missouri. I don't recall >>that portion of the discussion being anything but legitimate >>questions and comments. >My understanding from reading the information presented to this >List was that there are approximately 20 families who know about >the sale of the files. Yet, when you checked... twice, I believe, >there had been no complaints filed with the Missouri Board >against Carpenter.< I called weeks ago and haven't had a chance to call back again. I posted the phone number for others too call if they wanted. The reason I bothered to research this at all was to verify Carpenter as a LCSW. I had read posts where this was being questioned. The complaint issue was also being questioned, so I asked and reported what I was told. How unfair of me.<g> >In a couple of postings, you made reference to the >"potential outrage" that these families would undoubtedly feel. >Apparently the 20 that know about the sale don't feel that way. >Or if they do, they don't feel as much outrage as you do. So what's your point? I'm guilty of too much empathy? >You stated that the posts you passed along had been either from >you or from Mr. Velez. You don't mention passing along any of >the postgs from others on this List who have taken a position >in opposition to yours. So you tell me, using the above as an >example, who is responsible for bad publicity? Carpenter alone? >I don't think so. I seriously doubt that he asked you to post >only your side of this issue to the UFO forum on CS. If he did, >please do provide evidence to support that event and I will >gladly retract my statement. If you had really done your homework, you would know that along with my resposts from this List, other members of the UFO Forum have properly reposted all kinds of information regarding this issue. Your accusation that my July 23rd post is proof of my reposting only one side of this issue is ridiculous and illustrates complete ignorance of the facts which don't suit your particular agenda to attack me because I chose to comment on your previously whiney post. >Have you been personally contacted by all 20 of these people? >Have they specifically stated to you that they feel "violated" >by the sale of their files? If so, please produce evidence to >that effect. If not, the above is your _opinion_ as to how they >_may_ feel. And again, I refer you to your post in which you >reported that no complaints had been filed against Carpenter >with the Missouri Board. This leads one to believe that these 20 >people don't feel as violated as you apparently would like to >see them feel. What is your point? Is it that I'm not entitled to my opinion? Is it that by virtue of the information obtained from a call that I made weeks ago, these abductees are comfy with the sale of their files? Are you trying to nail me for believing that filing a complaint makes sense in this situation? Shame on me.<g> >Having a modem and the ability to type, plus being a citizen of >the US where I am guaranteed the right to free speech, qualifies >me to state that, in my opinion, you have gone far overboard on >your crusade to crucify Carpenter, despite finding out earlier that >you were acting on incorrect information... reference what you >called a "BS fest" in reaction to something Gary Hart said >[applicable portions of the posting snipped and presented here]: The incorrect information you refer to was regarding two conflicting pieces of information that Gary Hart gave me, both publically and privately. I called him on it. If you really did your homework on trying to single me out as the main sinner here, you would also find that I nailed Gary on posting an accusation against Carpenter using an anonymous source. If I were really on some crusade against Carpenter, I wouldn't care what crap was posted about him. >I would ask you who exactly appointed you as spokesperson for >these people? Was a request of that nature posted to the List? I >didn't find it in the archives. I never claimed to be anybody's spokesperson. I'm entitled to post my views here just like you are. If you don't like my views - don't read them. If you think you can bully me into silence by using pure manipulated BS as your ammo, you're wrong. EBK decides what is appropriate for this list - not you. >In spite of others urging calm, clarity, and a non-judgemental, >non-emotional investigation into the whole affair, in spite of >others urging that all the facts be collected before making >public accusations of wrong-doing, you kept at it, stating that >"the heat is on", and making the following remarks regarding >"flaming" of others. You quote me below: >>IOW, the flames aren't pretty, but they're part of this biz >>and, from time to time, provide a good system of checks, >>balances and boundaries - which imo we can never have enough >>of in Ufology. >I think that statement speaks for itself..... Of what? Do you think any bozo claiming anything in this field should be embraced? I don't. My sole point in posting which you chose to quote in an effort to drape me in shame was to illustrate that "flames" [the definition of which apparently varies] and heated arguments are part of this field and provide a system to weed out the liars, frauds, and creeps who, in my experience, often target the most vulnerable members of Ufology - the abductees. Are flames and accusations only sanctioned when you're the one creating them?<g> >Whether you mean it that way or not, the above sounds like a >threat to me. If these researchers don't post what you want them >to post, are you going to start flaming them, for the sake of >"checks and balances" in the UFO field? I said: "I'm also not so certain that it's smart at this time for researchers to withold from posting their administrative procedures regarding abductee files. " Where's the threat? How many abductees have talked to you regarding this issue? I've talked to dozens in the past weeks and will stand my by statement that coming forward with specific administrative procedures will help ease the concern that these people have voiced to me, and thus help heal some of the harm done to the abductee community via Carpenter's sale of those 140 files without expressed permission from those abductees. >How about simply sticking to the facts, finding out exactly what >the facts are before making flaming posts to email lists and >message boards, making certain you have the facts straight >before going off half-cocked and calling the state governing >board on someone who has not been formally charged with a crime, >who has not had a complaint filed against him by the very people >he is accused of wronging, and who cannot possibly hope to >defend himself against posts made far and wide on the >internet... selective posting, I might add, by your own >admission, that rarely comes close to giving the whole story. I recently posted that I learned early on in participating here that verification of information was essential [reference the Gary Hart exchange]. Since that time, I've done just that. You want proof? As I stated above, there was talk in the UFO Forum that Carpenter wasn't a LCSW. I called and verified that he is and posted that information. Need more proof? Also, as posted above, I took on Gary Hart his anonymous posting about Carpenter's Austrialian video sale without expressed permission of those who appeared in the video. Your half-cocked accusations are just that. You chose to only research posts from me which you could twist and manipulate to suit your own need to nail me as being some prime instigator in Carpenter's problems. At the same time you're claiming unfairness. You didn't do all the homework. You're the one who's being unfair. >I agree that the people whose files were sold should be >notified. That's generous of you. >I am sorry that this apparently isn't happening quickly >enough to suit you, I'm sorry this is apparently not happening quickly enough to suit those 120 families who have been hung out to dry for over three years. >but your continuing to rant about it isn't getting it done any >quicker. I guess you told me Bobbie. I've got some noive ;) >I'm done with this subject now. Since your philisophy is apparently not to post accusatory rants, I think your decision to excuse yourself from this discussion is more than wise. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 18 Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:06:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:55:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mulvey >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:31:37 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Harm done to another, even under the guise of "righteous >indignation", cannot be undone if it turns out that the inital >facts were incorrect. <snip> Really? What about the hatchet job you just tried to do on me? Blaming me for Carpenter's failing reputation is nothing to joke about given that his current wife is blasting through email-land with legal threats. Your accusations were not based in fact, yet you zipped right on through your post with plenty of righteous indignation against me. Now you want to poise yourself as some pillar of protocol and fair play? LOL
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:06:30 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:09:10 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Andy, >>Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >>take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are >>mistaken, and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can >>be complacently ignored is, like so many beloved debunker >>beliefs, unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent >>testimony so that they can "explain" it. >Not at all Jerry. As usual you have a knee-jerk reaction to what >is demonstrable fact - that some, many, witnesses mistake the >mundane for the mysterious. It isn't my _opinion_ that this is >the case Jerry it's fact. What's more it's fact in several big >cases in the UK and probably in the US as well. So >unfortunately, whether you like it or not - and I suspect you >don't - you have to accept the reality of it. Since I specifically stated that witnesses can be mistaken -- a fact no one disputes, and that has been demonstrated often over the course of the UFO controversy; I have discussed a number of examples in print -- you apparently are addressing a strawman's point. You're certainly not addressing my point. >The fact that many witnesses who are mistaken as referred to as >credible because of their occupation or alleged specialist >knowledge makes it all the more odd. But policemen, aircrew, >military personel etc etc are, it seems, just as subject ot >radical misperception as the next person. Persons with the appropriate professional background to make them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best sightings, just as one would expect. The Battelle report documented that long ago. That's why sightings such as, say, Tombaugh's and Hess's are still unaccounted for five decades later. Sightings by astronomers, pilots, and the like are those most likely to withstand the most comprehensive investigation and to remain unexplained. That's a fact, Andy, whether you like it or not -- not that there's any possibility of the former.. >But to take it a step further _no_ witness who ever claims to >have seen a gen-u-ine flying craft which was not of terrestrial >origin has _ever_ been proven correct. Despite all the >sightings, not on one single occasion. But it is a _fact_ that >on _many_ occasions people who claim to have seen such a thing >have been proven wrong because of radical misperception. According to you. In fact, I have long suspected that when the dust settles, future historians of science will wonder why the UFO question was not settled -- in the affirmative -- no later than the Nash-Fortenberry sighting (in 1952, for those of you with hazy memories). Ruppelt once asked memorably, what constitutes proof? He said that cases like the most puzzling pilot sightings may indeed be seen as that proof. >So therefore, when dealing with sightings of anomalous aerial >objects we have to take on board the fact - and it _is_ a fact >Jerry - which I stated above, that witness perception is >unreliable in this area. Witness perception is sometimes reliable, sometimes unreliable, depending upon a lot of things. Anything that is said in this area needs to be appended with an asterisk, rather than full-throated expressions of belief, as you do here. >Why people can spectacularly >misperceive something mundane one day but see it 'correctly' the >day before or after I have no idea. But it _is_ the case in >ufology. And it's also the case in ufology, as in all of life, that reliable people reliably report out-of-the-ordinary phenomena. Another interesting question: why do otherwise intelligent theorists propose such dumb "mundane" explanations for sightings when such explanations are so often clearly inadequate and even absurd? >So I see nothing unreasonable - bearing in mind the evidence put >forward by James Easton, Ian Ridpath and many others - that the >Rendlesham people were not subject to the same radical >misperceptions. And I ask, reasonably, for much better documentation of "radical misperceptions" -- itself an extraordinary claim demanding the same sorts of good evidence that other radical claimants (such as those who say the witnesses observed the landing of an alien craft, possibly with occupants) are reasonably asked to produce -- than we have seen so far. My friend Marcello Truzzi coined the phrase (usually misattributed to Carl Sagan) that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. Since then he's been forced to repeat over and over again, albeit to no avail, that only those who make no claims have no obligation to produce proof. Since you are making claims, where's your proof? If you have none, maybe it's time to say nothing at all. >For you to argue against the possibiliy of this is illogical >because as I have said, it is demonstrable fact. Huh? The Magic Lighthouse theory is "demonstrable fact"? Or, as I think it, a theory for which significance evidence is missing -- just as conclusive evidence for the opposite theory, that an alien craft was encountered, is missing? Again, you have as much obligation to produce persuasive evidence as do those advocating other kinds of extraordinary theories about Rendlesham. >Of course ufologists conveniently 'forget' the solved cases >where radical misperception has been at the root. But they >shouldn't. And it rather surprises me Jerry that you react in >this way to what is now a fundamental tenet in the subject. I am touched by the profundity of your beliefs, Andy, but as moving as they are, they don't seem to have much to do with anything we're discussing here. Unless, as I suspect, you're trying to change the subject , that subject being the foolishness of your sweeping statements about issues, from witness reliability to the nature of the Rendlesham event, that are far more complex, many-sided, and equivocal than you can bear to think about. Talk about an intolerance of ambiguity. >Perhaps you'd like to cite me a case Jerry, just one case, where >the witness or witnesses to a 'UFO' were proven correct in what >they saw and reported. Well, the Mantell case. Mantell's description of the object he tragically chased was accurate. He saw a giant balloon (a Skyhook) without knowing what it was, since the project was top secret at the time. See my reconstruction of the case in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed. Where accurate descriptions of other sorts of anomalous phenomena and experiences are concerned, with all sorts of implications for UFO-observing and reporting, see David Hufford's book, a devastating debunking of the myth of the noncredible witness. Beyond that, it's an odd question. I suppose I could point to the obvious, namely that we have plenty of bogus proposed solutions to UFO cases which, in the fashion of "skeptics" everywhere, you seem to have dropped into the memory hole. But I suppose that what you're really dropping are some red herring into the rhetorical water, such as what case "proves" -- by your definition, I take it -- UFOs to be somebody else's technology. Of course, if by common consensus that was "proved," they wouldn't be UFOs, would they? I gather that by your reasoning since you can't "prove" (by your definition) that UFOs exist, any explanation, however lousy, for any sighting, however seemingly credible, will do. If so, you've shown me once again why I am not, and never will be, a member of the skeptical party. I don't qualify. I'm far too skeptical. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:17:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:09:51 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:57:29 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> John, >>Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >>take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, >>and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can be complacently >>ignored is, like so many beloved debunker beliefs, >>unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent testimony so >>that they can "explain" it. >Jerry, calm down a minute and think before you hit the keyboard >again. The "myth of the credible witness" refers to the fact >that some ufologists believe that there are people who, because >of the job or their training, are unlikely to be mistaken no >matter what they report. Typically these are policemen, airline >pilots, astronomers, servicemen, librarians (oops, sorry, that >one seemed to just slip in), and the assumption is that their >reports are more reliable than that of any old Joe Soap because >they are a (small fanfare) "credible witness". Yes, they are more likely to be reliable. If, say, pilots weren't trained to see things and make judgments, there would be far more plane crashes than there are. That doesn't say there aren't plane crashes. Likewise, pilots are better UFO witnesses on the whole. No one, however, says they are never wrong. Just less likely to be wrong. Calm down, John -- that's nothing to get excited about. Just the way things are. >I'm not quite sure what Hufford's classic book has to do with >this argument. As you will remember, I was recommending this >book to ufologists back when it was first published. I don't >think Hufford limited his discussions of Old Hag experiences >exclusively to those made by policemen, pilots or scientists. No, he didn't. Hufford argued powerfully, using a body of empirical evidence, that witness testimony is ignored at the explainer's peril. And your point? >Oh, and while I'm on it. Why have people who are sceptical about >particular explanations for anomalous experiences suddenly >become "debunkers of anomalous experiences". I don'y buy into >the ETH for example, but that doesn't mean I don't accept that >abductees have very real experiences 'of some kind' - but I >don't have to take any particular proffered explanation as fact. Okay, here's your chance. Explain to us how your approach differs from the standard debunking approach of Klass, Ridpath, Menzel, Sheaffer, and the like, and why you think they're wrong. I'm not saying this to be snotty. I'm genuinely curious. I once thought I know, but reading Magonia and your various contributions to the list over the year, I confess I no longer know the difference. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Mulvey From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:24:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:12:40 -0400 Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out - Mulvey >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:13:11 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Just my opinion based on my observations, of course..... Yes.....you are certainly the pillar of proven and fair observations ;) [eyeroll]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 On TV This Weekend From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:27:18 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:40 -0400 Subject: On TV This Weekend Sat 19 2:00 PM 33 DSC Beyond Bizarre: UFOs and Alien Implants Segments include a museum's collection of biological oddities and exhibits connected to UFO sightings, such as photos. Sun 20 5:00 PM 2B TRAVEL American Journey: Believers; The Car Artists UFO believers hike into the Pleiades Mountains outside of Seattle to "make contact." Also: a car artist.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:20:09 -0400 Subject: Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:59:46 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Jenny, >>On other occasions it is the witness in this equation that has >>the problem. For instance, they are of a mind set that wants to >>see UFOs and so eagerly reads more into what is there out of >>expectation (although this is actually fairly rare in my >>experience). Or, there could be an altered state of >>consciousness that provokes hallucinations and causes a mundane >>stimulus to take on extraordinary properties. The ASC can >>itself be generated in many interesting ways as well! >What evidence do you have that witnesses are undergoing altered >states of consciousness? I hope you don't mean it this way, but >it almost sounds like an argument that validates itself. If you >can't explain it otherwise, it's an ASC. In science, the >allegation that one has undergone an ASC requires evidence, and >evidence is not just that the individual claims an extraordinary >experience. Hi, I'm not specifically talking about Rendlesham here, but in certain close encounter situations where witnesses describe alterations to their state of awareness, discontinuities in recall, changes to the rate of flow of time and visual hallucinations, I think those are pretty big clues that they are not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. At least not how I experience everyday waking consciousness. Sadly its unlikely we'll ever get an abduction where the witness is wired up to an EEG at the time and get the evidence you require. But you never know! >The Magic Lighthouse theory about Rendlesham, at least as I >understand it, necessitates radical alterations of consciousness >and perception of a sort I'd like to see better documented than >I see here. As far as I can tell, all you've established is that >at one point during a complex and frightening episode which >occurred over a period of time, witnesses were briefly confused >by a conventional stimulus. So what? Hardly the first time >that's happened. With respect this is skirting round the key issues. Lets be clear. I don't know what happened in Rendlesham Forest. I know what the witnesses say they experienced and if that's what happened - literally - then obviously it wasn't the lighthouse. But you have to range that against three - far from irrelevant - things: 1: That from all of our experience as Ufologists we know that witnesses can - sometimes - see mundane stimuli in extraordinary ways. Its happened and it could - potentially - have happened in this case. In ways like I set out in my last message. 2: That we know the key witnesses failed to recognise the lighthouse for what it was at some point on the night in question (although they also were insistent it WAS NOT like the UFO they had earlier seen) (one of the points I make in my IUR article as you know Jerry). That Halt is even quoted as saying that what he thought was the lighthouse is located where the lightship was and what he thought was the UFO was located where the lighthouse was. In this game of musical UFOs, the UFO is bumped out and has no place to go. Because there were two known stimulii visible (lighthouse and lightship) and only two (not three) are being described. 3: That in most ways you can measure the witnesses were looking AT the lighthouse when they saw the UFO. The lighthouse is clearly visible from where they were. They never mention the UFO AND the lighthouse together in any report. Thus, we have to choose between various options. The UFO sat right in front of the lighthouse and blocked it from view. The UFO was the lighthouse. The UFO magically abducted the lighthouse (possibly David Copperfield was flying it) . The UFO caused an EM effect that turned off the lighthouse. (There may be others but these are the most obvious). Where does that leave any objective reviewer? With problems, that's what. I don't have any great desire for this case to be the lighthouse - a spaceship - an experiment - a flying dinosaur - or anything. I just want to try to figure out the clues and say what is most likely to have happened. You are right we may never know. But we can and should make reasonable value judgements. No question. The lighthouse theory is not home and dry. It still leaves serious matters outstanding (like the physiological symptoms reported by Burroughs and Penniston and the (not proven - but I believe valid) radar tracking at Watton). But equally - no question - you cannot - with any integrity - just run away from the fact that the lighthouse was where the UFO apparently was and seems not to have been witnessed simultaneously. If you look at the sky at noon on a cloudless day and see a large orange ball of course there's a chance that it might _not_ be the sun. But if its where the sun ought to be and you cannot see the sun as well - then how many of you would not think we ought to seriously consider that this orange ball IS the sun (even if its a bit strange looking for some reason or another?) Otherwise you have two problems to solve. What was the 'UFO' and what happened to the sun? Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:57:58 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:30:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Mortellaro >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:15:56 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:36:23 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Mortellaro - For the Record >>To: updates@sympatico.ca< >Mr. Mortellaro, Listers and EBK, <snip> Dear Katherine, Listers, EBK and lurkers lurking, But mostly you, Katherine ... Please, call me Jim. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:33:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:08:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record - Felder >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:06:45 -0400 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Mortellaro - For the Record >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Really? What about the hatchet job you just tried to do on me? >Blaming me for Carpenter's failing reputation is nothing to joke >about given that his current wife is blasting through email-land >with legal threats. Your accusations were not based in fact, yet >you zipped right on through your post with plenty of righteous >indignation against me. I wasn't doing a "hatchet job" on you. You responded to my original posting. My response was geared to you for that reason. I didn't realize I was supposed to drag other people into something based on things _you_ said. Don't blame me because your own words show your part in this feeding frenzy. You don't need me to point out your degree of involvement in this mess... your own words show it clearly enough to anyone who wants to read the archives of this List. Engage brain before posting... that usually prevents things like this. Try it sometime... you might like it :) As for the current Mrs. Carpenter's post... I think the man has a damn good basis for a defamation of character lawsuit. Maybe if he persues it, things like this won't happen in the future. And based on your postings in the archives of this List, I wouldn't be surprised if you were named as a defendant. I would think a judgement against someone for several hundreds of thousand of dollars in damages from a lawsuit could prove to be an effective system of "checks and balances". Perhaps we shall see :) Good luck, dear... you're probably gonna need it. Sorry, EBK....I am truly done with this thread now. Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:34:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:17:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Silence is not at all a sign of acceptance. My own reaction to >the voice stress analysis was, "So what?" I don't know the >qualifications of the person who did the analysis. Nor do I know >how reliable voice stress analysis is. I'd need much more before >I took this as proof of anything. Wendy Christensen noted one >obvious problem -- if someone believes he's sincere but in fact >is deluded, a polygraph or voice stress test won't uncover any >lies. It is quite true that there is no such thing as a 'magic truth machine'. The very best any of them can do is evaluate whether or not the speaker believes what he says. As to my qualifications, I hold a B.S. in chemistry, Tulane University, '72. I am a self-taught electrical, process, and process control engineer, and spent many years in design and in nuclear power plant startup. Though I am a life-long civilian, I was a consultant to the United States Army, where I taught their personnel the safe methods of disassembling, *safing*, and destroying cluster bombs containing chemical (nerve) agents. My qualifications for voice stress analysis, though extensive, are strictly informal; I am fascinated by the constant lying of our alleged 'public servants', and the deception of snitches, provocateurs, etc., and have devoted hundreds of hours to the analysis of taped statements. Some had a verifiable truth or falsity, and from these verifiable statements, I have calibrated the analysis. Yes, I can be fooled; yes, liars can evade detection, but usually in a circumstance where there is stress, but the source of stress is unclear, and the patterns not definitive... but most usually, there is stress. The trick is analysis. To address the point of Col. Corso believing what he is saying, but is just repeating lies which he believed, I must repeat that there are circumstances which make this unlikely, perhaps highly unlikely. Firstly, he gives a resume, which can be largely affirmed by public records. This resume places him squarely in a position of *in the know*. Secondly, his bona fides are largely affirmed by Alexander. Both gentlemen display normal, conversational stress. Both Corso and Alexander make statements which are internally consistent with common-sense truth; both make statements which are intuitively true. The stress patterns of these 'true' statements are highly consistent with the remainder of their statements. This lends high credibility to their entire statements. If either have committed errors of fact, I strongly suspect that the statements are simple mistake. It is possible that the military could have contrived to make Corso believe that he was dealing with alien artifacts and biology; I don't think this passes the test of reasonability. >At the very least this voice stress analysis should be >replicated by another tester. But, Ed, you're moving much too >fast if you assume you've now proved that Corso was telling the >truth. We'd all be happy if there was some infallible way to >separate truth from lies, but unfortunately there isn't. No, there is not an infallible method of truth/lie detection. The good news is that my results and conclusions can be replicated by any of you. I have gone out of my way to provide a link to download the free software, and will provide clips from the tapes for analysis, if you don't otherwise have access to them. Further, I would strongly suggest that you download the software and set out to tape and analyze conversation and public statements from radio, tv, any and everywhere. Do what I have done; use the software, and apply psychology and human experience with thorough knowledge of the scientific basis of the method, and the scientific basis of the *fight or flight* syndrome which produces the stress in the voice. I would also offer to analyze statements which you provide to me. I would not know speakers, nor anything else. Don't send casual and inconsequential lies; subjects have to be relevant to elicit the proper response. I don't have a dog in this fight; I analyzed voices on tape. I find that the statements made therein by the principals of the interview were believed by those making the statements. Mike Kemp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:40:36 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:20:30 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:46:13 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:00:51 -0500 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>This may be a stupid question, but does the lighthouse in >>question have red, blue, white and orange lights? >>Just curious..... <snip> >What am I gonna do wit yous? Of course it does. All around the >sides of it. But you forgot to aks the best question. Does this >lighthouse move, land, make smoke and mess up communications? >And best of all, does it scare the crap out of soldiers? Well, Duh!! I thought it was a given that all lighthouse lights move, land, smoke... which is really bad for their health... and mess up communications. Are you now telling me this is _not_ normal behavior for a lighthouse??? Oh, geez.....I'm totally shocked....I'll probably be in therapy for years now..... LOL >'Sammata wit yous? Anyway? >Jim Mortellaro: One too many helpings of grits, I guess.....ROFL Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 00:56:18 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:22:48 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Felder >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:00:51 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >This may be a stupid question, but does the lighthouse in >question have red, blue, white and orange lights? >Just curious..... >Bobbie >Bobbie "Jilain" Felder > --->backwoods of Mississippi > --->USA > --->planet Earth > --->somewhere in the cosmos Hi, Its a valid question. Some of the orange and blue lights that were seen as the witnesses walked straight at the object staring at it remind me of the optical effects you get when staring at a bright light (ie retinal images). These are often - in my experience - orange and blue. But there is also some evidence that the lighthouse beam may have shone through mist and created a prismatic mirage effect - with the light being split into colours. Indeed at one point the description that 'pieces are shooting off' was offered and the witness sketch I have seen shows what very much looks like a bright light source projecting a beam forward and downward. Yes, this is circumstancial. But there are two separate witness references to the UFO having a bank of mist below it. So there is testimonial support too. If you combine a bright lighthouse, its beam, mist, the splitting of light as in a prism you do start to get a result very like what these witnesses are describing - which is not, in of itself, certainly a lot more spectacular and strange than what the Orford Ness lighthouse looked like at the time from the forest. I dont believe these airmen _just_ saw the lighthouse and mistook it. The gulf between what this looks like and what they saw is too great. But the evidence that they saw the lighthouse is strong. So it is worth suggesting ways thwy might have seen the lighthouse in a sort of 'exotic' mode. It also explains two big problems with the case - where was the lighthouse (on this scenario it was there but unrecognised because of the mirage effect). And why did these witnesses not recognise the lighthouse when they saw it later as being the same as the UFO just observed. For then they saw it in its normal guise (clear of this prismatic effect) and not the presumably very strange appearance it had before. I make clear this is speculation. Because I too have wondered about the colours described. It may not be what happened at all. But it works surprisingly well. Best wishes, Jenny
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:25:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:33:13 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:31:05 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:37:35 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:58:53 +0100 >>>>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>>>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Andy, >>>>To reiterate why the "strange flashing red light" in Rendlesham >>>>forest has been evidenced as the beacon from nearby Orford Ness >>>>(Orfordness) lighthouse; I published the following in 1998: >>So the myth of the credible witness is just that - a myth. Each >>case has to be taken on its own merits bearing in mind what we >>*know* about witness perception and similar cases. So It was >>quite possible - likely even - that the servicmen at Rendlesham >>were hopelessly confused on that night about what they were >>seeing. >Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, >and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can be complacently >ignored is, like so many beloved debunker beliefs, >unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent testimony so >that they can "explain" it. Jerry, This is a can of worms, but having just found two cents in my pocket... For starters, Andy says that "each case has to be taken on its own merits bearing in mind what we know about witness perception and similiar cases." Surely you're not arguing with that? If so, I suggest you go back and re-read Allan Hendry's The UFO Handbook, which is replete with mistaken observations by eyewitnesses. Against this is your contention that all witnesses aren't always wrong. With which I agree, but see below. (Incidentally, I thought this was one reason why investigations into eyewitness accounts were conducted in the first place -- in an effort to determine whether they were right or possibly mistaken in their original perception.) >It's depressing -- though, alas, not surprising -- to see this >sort of silliness being bandied about nearly 20 years after >David Hufford's devastating debunking of the myth of the >noncredible witness, in the classic The Terror That Comes in the >Night (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982) -- a book that >seems to have made a much greater impression on folklorists than >on would-be debunkers of anomalous experience. That witnesses >can be mistaken is, of course, a no-brainer. That they often are >not, apparently, is a realization it takes greater wisdom to get >to. Your summary of Hufford's work borders on the depressing as well, although I'm sure you'll set me straight here if I've misinterpreted you. Let me see if I've got it right. Hufford confirmed that many people (roughly 15% of any given population) reported the Old Hag experience across cultures. Does that make them witnesses or experiencers? If witnesses, does that mean that you (or Hufford) believe in the physical existence of the Old Hag Herself? That is, that which was testimonially witnessed? If not, what's going on here? Something that takes place in an altered state of concsiousness -- in which case you answer many of the questions you recently asked of Jenny Randles. I don't want to get into an ego-fight here. As you well know, from previous correspondence, I've assiduously pushed Hufford's work on as many people as you have -- both pro-UFO and con -- and with about equally similar (and dismal) results. To this date, I've yet to see Hopkins, Jacobs or Mack adequately address Hufford's work. Make that _absorb_ and address. Now _that_ is depressing. But I bet you can put a shine on it. And I'll be your witness. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Antarctic Rover Paves The Way From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:21:17 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:35:48 -0400 Subject: Antarctic Rover Paves The Way Source: Red Herring Magazine, http://www.herring.com/mag/issue81/mag-nomadic-81.html Stig *** August 19, 2000 Nomadic wanderer An Antarctic rover paves the way for future interplanetary robotic explorers. By Gael Core From the August 2000 issue * Walking the frozen landscape of Antarctica is a trek only the rugged and determined endure. Explorers like Amundsen, Scott, and Shackleton risked their lives in the early 1900s, braving winter temperatures of -70 degrees Fahrenheit and summer highs that never broke zero. And now, a new breed of explorer is roaming this harsh continent. Only this time, it isn't human. Nomad, a four-wheeled robotic vehicle built by Carnegie Mellon University's Robotics Institute in Pittsburgh, is going where few humans have. Its mission: to locate extraterrestrial rocks. On all counts it has been a smashing success, operating without the assistance of humans -- a first for robotics. During a four-day mission in January, Nomad, a 1,600-pound robot about the size of a small car, excited scientists when it alerted them that it had found an interesting rock. That rock turned out to be, in fact, a meteorite. The robot discovered four meteorites altogether and correctly classified three of them. Nomad's ability to operate autonomously, gathering data and making its own judgments about the rocks it encounters, is paving the way for a new generation of robotic vehicles. The technology could be applied to future rovers for a series of Mars missions beginning in 2005, which are designed to bring samples back to Earth. Such autonomous rovers would be a tremendous improvement over the rover sent to Mars in 1997. That remote-controlled machine simply followed the commands beamed up from Earth and sent its data back down for analysis. In contrast, Nomad, which is powered by a gasoline-driven generator, navigates its way around using a laser range finder that creates digital maps of the terrain. These allow it to calculate distances to objects and detect obstacles. A panoramic camera is mounted on the robot to capture 360-degree views. A high-resolution camera enables the robot to take images of rocks, helping it to identify the origin of the rock based on visual cues like color, shape, and size. A movable arm that includes a closeup minicamera helps the robot perform a more detailed examination of a suspected meteorite. Nomad is also equipped with a reflection spectrometer that allows it to analyze the spectrum of the reflected light and identify what elements are present. The robot has a metal detector to determine the presence of iron, a major component of some meteorites. And it's able to run computations that help it classify the sample. * �1997-2000 Red Herring Communications. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Firmage Sheds E.T. Aura For Science Site From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:43:27 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:38:10 -0400 Subject: Firmage Sheds E.T. Aura For Science Site Source: CNET, http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2556219.html Stig *** Joe Firmage sheds E.T. aura for science site By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 18, 2000, 1:30 p.m. PT * From a position far in the "X-Files" fringes of the scientific world, Silicon Valley's most controversial E.T.-hunter, Joe Firmage, is climbing back into the mainstream. For several months, Firmage and Carl Sagan's widow, Ann Druyan, have been working on the early stages of an ambitious science-focused media project, hoping to re-create and expand on the success of Sagan's "Cosmos" TV show both online and in film. The pair has attracted more than $23 million in funding led by Softbank Venture Capital, outstripping many of the hottest Net start-ups. Last week, the first tangible signs of the venture, code-named "Project Voyager," materialized when the founders said the project would work with the Sagan-founded Planetary Society. As a part of that deal, the budding media organization will revitalize the SETI@Home project, which has tapped tens of thousands of volunteers to donate idle computer time to finding evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. Later in the year, Voyager is slated to settle on a name and announce media distribution deals that its founders say will bring it into the big time, both online and off. In the meantime, the venture's story focuses much more on the odd-couple relationship between Druyan, a highly regarded professional skeptic, and Firmage, who made headlines around the world with his unconventional opinions last year. Caution to the wind? Firmage achieved something beyond ordinary dot-com millionaire notoriety in 1998 when he went public with his beliefs that the earth has been visited by extraterrestrials and that science is on the verge of breakthroughs that would enable space travel. Although Silicon Valley has long been home to iconoclasts and freethinkers, Firmage's well-publicized opinions sent ripples of worry through Wall Street, which was then closely scrutinizing the merger of Firmage's USWeb with rival consulting house CKS. A suddenly controversial figure, he stepped down from his position as the company's chief strategist not long after the merger to focus on other projects. At least one of those projects has been fairly conventional, at least by Silicon Valley standards. IntendChange, which Firmage started with USWeb co-founder Toby Corey, was designed to help Web start-ups develop business plans and learn the lingo of venture capitalists. But Firmage continued work on his book, "The Truth", much of which he published online and which outlines his more unconventional beliefs. He also has helped support scientific research in areas that interest him. He doesn't quickly bring up these efforts in interviews today, but Firmage is still pressing hard to find solid, scientific evidence to back his beliefs, well aware that the ideas remain controversial. "It's moving along, but it's not like the Internet. There's no way you can incubate physics faster than nature lets you," he said. "The type of work we're doing is about a fundamental physics discovery, like (the invention of semiconductors). That's why it's so controversial." Druyan, by contrast, has almost precisely the opposite reputation in scientific circles. Along with Sagan, she co-wrote and helped produce the popular "Cosmos" TV show. She also served as secretary of the Federation of American Scientists for a decade and worked on other media projects. The duo met nearly two years ago after Firmage introduced himself to Druyan with an email. He quickly won a high place in her respect by instantly committing $1 million to a children's hospital project in the Bronx that Druyan was spearheading, she said. "Joe really cares about this planet," Druyan said. "I have found him to be very reasonable. We talk constantly, and we have huge areas of agreement and affinity." But even with this promising beginning, it took at least another year for the two to see eye-to-eye on Project Voyager. Discovery Channel on steroids When news of Druyan's venture with Firmage first started leaking out, she was criticized in some scientific circles for linking hands with such a controversial figure. The mild tone of censure still angers her, and she likens it to the kind of thought control that open-minded scientific experimentation is meant to counteract. Nevertheless, she's protected herself against possible tainting of her hard-won reputation. "Joe has a different set of ideas and believes a set of things that I don't believe," she said. "But we have a very clear legal arrangement that will let traditional scientific methodology resolve any of our disputes." And if there are any questions about the science in Project Voyager's products, that legal language lets her walk away, she notes. The project itself is ambitious, linking Druyan's Cosmos Studios with a planned Net portal dedicated to science-focused entertainment. Media projects that have made money online have been almost as rare as verified E.T. sightings, but the founders note that Cosmos Studios was always profitable and that there is a huge audience around the world for smart, scientifically credible entertainment. Firmage calls the venture "the Discovery Channel with 25 more IQ points" and says it aims to create "scientific works of art." In the process, Firmage is winning respect even from those in the scientific community who firmly disagree with his ideas. "(His views on extraterrestrials) are not our views," said Louis Friedman, executive director of the Planetary Society. "But that area has been dominated by anecdotes and pseudoscience in the past. I think Joe would like to see it evolve into something that gets more scientific attention." The success of Project Voyager is still up in the air, as it struggles with other media ventures to find its place in the converging area of new and old media. But Firmage's work has given him a foothold in a world that may attract him even more than the Silicon Valley that gave him his wealth. "I've worked with a lot of people whose conventional religious views are much harder to credit than are Joe's views," Druyan said, defending her partner. "Let's not shun people who disagree with us." * Copyright �1995-2000 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. *Privacy policy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:35 -0300 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:41:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:21:24 -0700 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:41:30 -0800 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>When I sent Mike the Bell/Corso interview, I knew he had no >>knowledge of Col. Corso, and that he had not read 'The Day After >>Roswell'. Because I had worked with him before, I knew I could >>trust him to sort out the truth from the lies. I had felt that >>Col. Corso was telling the truth, and any mistakes were only >>mistakes, nothing more. But I wasn't sure. Who would be after >>the rancorous discussion I had with members of this List who >>seemed so sure of themselves and equally sure that Col. Corso >>was a liar, and that I was probably crazy for defending him. >>Now it seems these critics were wrong. Isn't their silence a >>sign of acceptance? I assume that now we'll be able to use the >>information Col. Corso provided without worry that it is somehow >>tainted by lies. I also assume that unless something new comes >>along to convince us otherwise, we can all agree that Col. Corso >>was trying to tell us the truth about the genesis of our modern >>technology and its connection to the crashed Roswell craft. >Silence is not at all a sign of acceptance. My own reaction to >the voice stress analysis was, "So what?" I don't know the >qualifications of the person who did the analysis. Nor do I know >how reliable voice stress analysis is. I'd need much more before >I took this as proof of anything. Wendy Christensen noted one >obvious problem -- if someone believes he's sincere but in fact >is deluded, a polygraph or voice stress test won't uncover any >lies. >At the very least this voice stress analysis should be >replicated by another tester. But, Ed, you're moving much too >fast if you assume you've now proved that Corso was telling the >truth. We'd all be happy if there was some infallible way to >separate truth from lies, but unfortunately there isn't. I, for one, would very much like to know what factual claims were made by Corso in the interview, that we now know to be true. Did he claim he was a member of the NSC? Did he claim that he was head of the FTD branch under Trudeau and for which dates? Did he explain how he knew who the members of the control group were? Did he discuss seeing an alien body on July, 6, 1947, at Ft. Riley and how he knew the date and why there were no full time guards there and no mention of some way of cooling the body? Did he claim he was a colonel or a Lt. Colonel? Or was it all idle chitchat? Nobody says he lied about everything he ever said. Did he provide any facts about just how any area of new technology was benefitted by what he did: names, dates, companies? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Hale's 'Lost Haven' - New Site From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 05:20:09 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:44:24 -0400 Subject: Hale's 'Lost Haven' - New Site Hi All, I have just uploaded my latest web site. The URL is: http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk Please take a moment to have a look around. For those of you who are in need of data for your research, you may want to try my UFO research download page, bringing you all different kinds of information on the UFO topic. You can also download some UFO related programs, all totally free of charge. I hope this comes in handy. The web site has been designed painstakingly by myself' so please don't give me too much grief! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 13:32:14 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:49:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity - Bruni >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:13:54 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I repeat - the posting on crop circles was from UFOIN. >I copied it onto this list, hence my name appeared on >it that way, but it reflects the views of several UFOIN >team members long associated with this subject Jenny, you wrote a reply agreeing with the message entirely, so it's understandable that, as you are also a part of UFOIN, one cannot be criticised for making said comments. you wrote: >Excuse me, but I respectfully ask - what bragging? you answered your own question in the next sentence: >Yes, I resolve about 95% of the cases that I investigate. 95% is a remarkable percentage. >I don't think that I have been solving any more cases than usual >of late and hardly bragging about them when I do. Jenny, you have just stated that you solve 95% of your cases, and assuming you were likely to solve more � that would imply that you are close to solving 100% of your cases - an even more remarkable percentage and something well worth bragging about! >since nobody can ever be certain that they know all the answers >in this phenomenon It's understandable that I am somewhat confused here. >>Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >>famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >>lighthouse, is silly. >Well, it would be silly if I made such a bald claim, but I don't. Then please turn to page 217 and read what you wrote: "It has taken almost twenty years, but we have gradually worked our way towards a solution." >Perhaps your desire to champion the case has something to do >with your own forthcoming book about it . Yes, I am confident that my book will put an end to your theories. >By the way, the promo for your book suggests it is the first to >tell the full story as previous ones (I assume from the context >you mean mine) were written by a Ufologist with an axe to grind >and who had little access to witnesses. (please see my reply to James Easton) I believe you are referring to the blurb on www.amazon.co.uk I had nothing to do with that. For your information the original (put out by my publishers) reads quite differently and does not mention anything about ufologists, and especially not �a� ufologist. >Were you talking about me here? I think we have gone through this many times before and my answer has always been: �this book is not about Jenny Randles' With regards to "the first to tell the full story", well, it certainly is the first time the 'true' story has been told and when you read the book you will see this for yourself. >And I have had plenty of access to those involved (civilian >witnesses, military personnel, MoD personnel, MPs, the local >police, forestry commission, scientists, etc). If that is the case, why then in 17 years have you not written the true story? >What I do say - and justify saying - in the book is that >gradually various parts of this case have eroded and the role >that the lighthouse played in the case has become increasingly >apparent when weighed against the sum of the evidence. I think you are going to be very surprised Jenny. >But what I set out in 'The UFOs that Never Were' is an honest >appraisal of the sum total of the evidence as I currently see >it. Exactly, "as you see it". My book is not about what I see Jenny. It is not about my theories or what I might think is the truth. It is about the facts of the case. It comprises of 440 pages (not including the foreword) 33 photographs and 40 pages of appendix. What is more, it will dispell your previous suggestions that my book is based on gossip. >Again, you seem somewhat confused. I have not 'solved' the >Lakenheath case. I have uncovered aspects to it that call into >question key claims made in the past, e.g. that there was a visual >contact by the RAF crew sent on an intercept that night. But >that's very different from saying that I know what caused this >case to happen. It would be a good idea to look back on your old posts on this subject. >As for not publishing evidence. Firstly, I don't generally >respond to bullying tactics. I don't think my earlier questions were bullying. >Our investigation has taken interesting turns that do not favour >premature revelations.. What premature revelations? You made a big point that your evidence seriously questioned the Lakenheath case. Are you now suggesting that your revelations were premature? >Basically so many circles are hoaxes that a huge amount of time is >wasted looking for the few interesting cases. Three years ago I challenged circle maker Rob Irving to make the Julia Set - but the dear man managed to get out of it. My challenge still stands for anyone wanting to give it a try. Only instead of overnight I now suggest 48 hours. However, the completed design must be identical to the original. We hear so much about the so called hoaxers � but they only claim their fame after the fact. Now let's see if they are prepared to show us how they make a perfect Julia Set Greetings Georgina
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 13:32:19 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:52:48 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:28:06 +0100 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >In answer to a question I asked, an 'informed source' advises: >Georgina Bruni's forthcoming book is called 'You Can't Tell the >People' and it will be published by Sidgwick & Jackson on >November 10. James, the "informed source" would have got that information from www.amazon.co.uk where they are advertising advanced orders of the book. >Amusingly, the publisher has put it in their >Religion & Spirituality category! Actually, it was not the publisher who did that, it was Amazon who placed it that category, as they do with many books on this subject. >The publisher's blurb reads as follows: >"The first full investigation into 'Britain's Roswell', with a >foreword by UFO writer Nick Pope. The world's only >officially-recognized UFO sighting took place in the UK. This >casebook is an exploration of the 'lights in the sky' incident, >and possible alien encounter that ensued, of December 1980 at >the RAF/USAF Nato airbase near Woodbridge, Suffolk. Previous >accounts of this Rendlesham Forest incident have been flawed: a >ufologist with an axe to grind or little access to primary >sources, or a discreditable single eyewitness account. Georgina >Bruni has had access to police, Ministry of Defence and US >military sources, along with fresh interviews, and her casebook >reveals other never-before-reported incidents in the area, and >the treatment meted out to those who wavered from the 'don't >ask, don't tell' line of officialdom." I should point out that this is not exactly like the blurb I have seen from the publishers. There is no mention of ufologists and certainly not "a" ufologist. Maybe Amazon designed the blurb from the original release, which is not unusual. The original reads: "...too many discreditable single eyewitness accounts and axes to grind..." I should also point out that there is another error. It states that my book has 240 pages when in fact it has 440 pages. >I think you can tell this is going to be a rational, critical >treatment, and above all will offer generous credit to all those >who have researched the case before. >Or perhaps not. It is a definitive account of the case based on three years of intensive investigation, revealing a great deal of valuable new information... and yes, I certainly do give generous credit to those who have genuinely researched this case in the past and I am grateful to those researchers for opening their files for me. Hope this helps Georgina
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:49:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:54:21 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 15:59:46 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>The Magic Lighthouse theory about Rendlesham, at least as I >>understand it, necessitates radical alterations of consciousness >>and perception of a sort I'd like to see better documented than >>I see here. As far as I can tell, all you've established is that >>at one point during a complex and frightening episode which >>occurred over a period of time, witnesses were briefly confused >>by a conventional stimulus. So what? Hardly the first time >>that's happened. >With respect this is skirting round the key issues. Jenny, I appreciate your detailed, thoughtful response, but I reject the notion that I am "skirting round the key issues." The key issues focus on testimony so extraordinary -- and so at variance with the notion that the whole episode arose from simple misperception of a lighthouse -- that clearly we are dealing with anomalies of perception far beyond what mere mistaken observation can account for. That seems to me the crux of the case, and the new skeptics are reduced merely to hand-waving and ideological posturing. I am not referring to you, of course. It seems to me that the explanation you and your friends are proposing is itself a radical one which -- as you alone are honest enough to acknowledge -- begs many questions. Really, if I were trying to dispose of Rendlesham (though in fact I have no stake whatever in the outcome), I would charge the witnesses with lying and be done with it. Far easier to do that, which at least is consistent with our experience of ourselves, our fellow human beings, and our respective failings, than to propose fanciful, unfalsifiable theories about mistaken perceptions which could not occur in ordinary consciousness. The skeptics are seeking to substitute one extraordinary hypothesis for another, and I, for one, remain skeptical. And properly so. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:52:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:56:24 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Jerry, Thanks for your reponse......... >And I ask, reasonably, for much better documentation of "radical >misperceptions" -- itself an extraordinary claim demanding the <snip> >Since you are making claims, where's your proof? If you >have none, maybe it's time to say nothing at all. So, Jerry, exactly _how_many_ cases of radical mispecrception would you like exactly? I think Jenny and I have already run through a few. I'll be happy to provide you with many more but just say how many please. Unfortunately I suspect that if we came up with 100 cases of radical misperception (and I reckon that could be done from UK cases alone with a little time) you would still fail to accept that we must extend the theory to the possibility that _all_ UFO sightings are radical misperceptions of one sort or another. >In fact, I have long suspected that when the >dust settles, future historians of science will wonder why the Have you any predications as to when this might be Jerry. The UFO literature of the last 50 0dd years has been saying this. I'd be interested to hear your opinion of when the dust might settle and how near the dust is to settling at this moment in time. >Well, the Mantell case. Mantell's description of the object he >tragically chased was accurate. He saw a giant balloon (a Exactly - Mantell mistook the mundane for the mysterious. Secret or not he still wasted his life chasing something which many people had knowledge of and was not in any way - other than to him at the time - unusual. If mistaking a balloon for something mysterious isn't radical misperception then do share with us what is. Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:57:23 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:58:00 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Fleming >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 13:00:51 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >This may be a stupid question, but does the lighthouse in >question have red, blue, white and orange lights? It's certainly an awkward question for the lighthouse theorists. The beacon light was white. In the tape recording transcript, Halt described the light he observed as red while someone else said it was yellow. One reasonable possibility would be that the observed light was of variable color, but the lighthouse theorists have posited some sort of extraordinary properties of the atmosphere at the time to explain the mismatch in color. The distance from the lighthouse to Halt's position was 7 miles, which is not enough for the atmosphere to block a significant amount of shorter-wave (blue) light, as it does to redden the sun when it rises or sets. City lights on tall office buildings are visible from the suburbs at greater distances than 7 miles, and I've never observed any noticeable difference in color with distance, even near cities known for their air pollution. Someone also gave a compass reading for the light's position on the Halt transcript which was, as I recall, about 10 degrees off the lighthouse position when the difference between magnetic and true north are taken into account. Lights were described that clearly were not coming from the lighthouse during the first incident with Penniston's group. Maps published by Easton and Randles tracing the routes both Penniston and Halt took into the forest show they were not walking due east toward the lighthouse, nor did their paths even trend in that direction. If people are in hot pursuit of a lighthouse, I would think they would take the most direct route possible to apprehend it. The evidence suggests to me that the lighthouse played only a minor role in the events. In the general confusion caused by other events going on at the time, it was temporarily mistaken for one of the anomalous lights by Penniston while he pursued the other lights his group mentioned. They ended up chasing the lighthouse because the other lights went away and the lighthouse was the only one left to pursue -- quite naturally, since it wasn't going anywhere. Halt's group may have seen the lighthouse in proximity to the UFO and simply didn't remember it because light beacons are such familiar and prosaic things that it simply didn't register on their consciousness while their attention was focused on something that, from the description in the Halt transcript, was completely unfamiliar. A map I have shows there are several radio towers in the area that might have been more visible than the lighthouse, assuming they were present at that time. Radio towers usually have flashing red lights at their tops to warn planes. Halt didn't mention any radio towers. But even though their flashing red lights match Halt's description better than the lighthouse beacon, his failure to mention any radio towers has not been made much of by the lighthouse proponents. Even if they weren't built at the time, there were certainly other flashing artificial lights in the area that could have been seized upon as an explanation for the incident; Rendlesham is not exactly the Forest Primeval free of artificial light of all sorts. Presumably the positions of none of the other artificial lights were close enough to the reported UFO, so the lighthouse will have to do even though its beacon was the wrong color. It's very difficult to believe that the sighting of a lighthouse that had been there before the air base was built could have resulted in the general security alert described by Airman Smith in Easton's own report.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:04:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:10:49 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:25:43 -0500 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Dennis, >Your summary of Hufford's work borders on the depressing as >well, although I'm sure you'll set me straight here if I've >misinterpreted you. Always happy to depress you. >Let me see if I've got it right. Hufford confirmed that many >people (roughly 15% of any given population) reported the Old >Hag experience across cultures. Does that make them witnesses or >experiencers? If witnesses, does that mean that you (or Hufford) >believe in the physical existence of the Old Hag Herself? That >is, that which was testimonially witnessed? Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about, though I can easily infer that it's been some time since you've read Hufford. I take it that we're to read Hufford as an authority on altered states of consciousness, and nothing else. In fact, he was using the Old Hag experience as a point of departure for a discussion of larger issues on how science and academia deal, or fail to deal with, a range of heretodox experiences. See below. >If not, what's going on here? Something that takes place in an >altered state of concsiousness -- in which case you answer many >of the questions you recently asked of Jenny Randles. So the witnesses to the Magic Lighthouse were suffering sleep paralysis and having hallucinations associated with such? >I don't want to get into an ego-fight here. As you well know, >from previous correspondence, I've assiduously pushed Hufford's >work on as many people as you have -- both pro-UFO and con -- >and with about equally similar (and dismal) results. David Hufford tells me I have always understood his work better than most. That's one reason he wrote those kind words on the back cover of The UFO Encyclopedia. He has complained about the misreading of his work by persons who mistake him for a fellow debunker, when in fact it's hard to imagine a more devastating critique than his of debunkerdumb's approach. Think "traditions of disbelief" and go from there. Hufford's essential point is that witnesses should be listened to, that complacent assumptions about their inability to recount accurately what they saw or experienced can and often do lead to thoroughly wrong-headed theories by scientists who are explaining only what they have invented, not what actual human beings have experienced. Hufford explicity did not confine his remarks to those scientists, psychologists, and academics who rejected witness testimony to Old Hag experiences (sleep paralysis + hallucination + unknown, to those of us unfamiliar with his work). He wrote bluntly, in his book and elsewhere, on the lessons we can draw when it comes to other attempts to explain away anomalous occurrences, including -- sorry to tell you this, Dennis -- UFO sightings. >To this date, I've yet to see Hopkins, Jacobs or Mack adequately >address Hufford's work. Make that _absorb_ and address. Or you, either. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 [canufo] Re: Yukon UFO Report From: Martin Jasek <mjjasek@yknet.yk.ca> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:04:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:18:43 -0400 Subject: [canufo] Re: Yukon UFO Report >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:27:56 -0500 (CDT) >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca> >Subject: [canufo] Re: Yukon UFO Report >To: canufo@egroups.com >Martin Jasek writes: >>Just got back from vacation and want to thank you for >>plugging the report on canufo. You have outlined the essence >>of it most effectively. Official responses to the report are >>slowly coming in and I will post these up on the web site. >>Hopefully soon. [Rutkowski wrote: "...just wanted to note that I have just received and read Martin Jasek's report on the Giant UFO in the Yukon Territory. It is actually a small book, and is well-written, well-researched and well-designed." See: http://www.ufobc.org/yukon/22index.htm --ebk] Chris Rutkowski wrote: <snip> >What about your trip to Europe? Did you connect with any >British ufologists? Hilary? Any in other countries? <snip> I managed to connect with two well known UFO researchers: author Timothy Good and the editor of "Flying Saucer Review" Gordon Creighton. Both very knowledgeable and personable gentleman who have been at this puzzle a long time. Not much UFO activity being reported in Britain lately except for a few flying triangle cases. Met with Timothy Good on the south bank of the Thames on a bright sunny and hot afternoon. We were situated between the London Aquarium and the new "Millennium Wheel". As we were sipping our cappuccinos we peered across the river at the Ministry of Defence and wondered what information it could hold. Further up river were the buildings housing british intelligence. Timothy Good will have a new book out on October 5th called "Unearthly Disclosure". Later that afternoon I took a train out well past the suburbs of London to the home and office of Gordon Creighton. He is getting on in age but is still sharp and is able to get around quite well. Interesting man that is not afraid of forming conclusions based on the years of research he has under his belt. The one thing he says the puzzles him, and I have to agree is why only a few people get obsessed with the UFO issue while the majority of the populace appears that it could care less. I also spoke on the phone with Marek Tzaznamnik a UFO researcher in the Czech Republic. His organization that only covers about a 80 km radius of the country receives about 40 to 50 UFO reports per year. Together with another organization the total for the country comes in around 80 per year. There have been 19 crop circles to date this season and 50 total last year in the Czech Republic. They had a good close-up multiple witness disc sighting last year. My Czech is not the best so it was hard for me to get more specific details. There was an apparent fireball sighting this year that made the press in the country. Based from eye witness accounts Marek and his colleagues determined that the fireball may had an unusual trajectory reversing its direction at some point. The home page of this organization can be found at: http://freeweb.coco.cz/klub.zablesk/vstupte.htm but only appears to contain mostly crop circle information. Martin
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 CPR-Canada News: Statement By Colin Andrews From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 10:33:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:21:20 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Statement By Colin Andrews CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 19, 2000 _____________________________ STATEMENT FROM COLIN ANDREWS REGARDING CROP CIRCLE ANNOUNCEMENT IN UK Following is a formal statement from CPRI founder Colin Andrews (CPRI is the parent organization of CPR-Canada) regarding his recent and provocative announcement on the crop circle phenomenon this past week which has generated much interest in the European media and much controversy among researchers and the public. This statement is to clarify his position and to correct some errors and misquotes in the mainstream media. I also wish to note that the conclusions reached by Colin do not necessarily reflect the total views of myself or CPR-Canada in general (all of us will always have various opinions on specific points). I do concur, and always have, that some or even many formations are hoaxed as pranks or "land art", but the percentage (in my opinion) is still uncertain at this point, until conclusive evidence is presented. If Colin has that evidence, I'm sure it will be presented in a timely manner as he has indicated. I still feel that there is also ample evidence for a real phenomenon as well; I would not still be doing this work if I did not think that evidence was substantial enough to continue (and some of the best direct physical evidence has come from Canadian and US formations, I might add). I have known Colin for about nine years now, and respect both him and his work; I do not think, as has been alleged by some, that he is part of some disinformation campaign. While for me personally the jury is still out on many aspects of this whole issue, I agree with Colin and have always maintained that we need to go where the evidence leads, and be willing to accept the findings we make, whatever they may be... Paul Anderson Director Circles Phenomenon Research Canada (CPR-Canada) _____________________________ FORMAL STATEMENT BY COLIN ANDREWS FINDINGS OF A MAGNETIC SIGNATURE IN SOME CROP CIRCLES AN ESTIMATED 20% OF CROP CIRCLES SHOW NO EVIDENCE OF BEING MADE BY PEOPLE, WHILE 80% DO On Wednesday the 9th of August, I announced on national television and radio the outcome of an ongoing investigation into aspects of the crop circle mystery. Four years ago I began measuring the Earth's magnetic field in and around crop circles. The project was initiated by on-going reports of anomalous magnetic phenomena such as spinning compass needles inside crop circles (witnessed by me amongst others during the 1980's), unusual failures of electronic equipment and radio frequency interference. The project enlarged findings of a German-based study conducted in the early 1990's. The magnetometer survey included complex crop patterns as well as simple circles. Results showed a descriptive magnetic signature in a hand full of simple circles and basic geometric patterns. This signature consists of an increased magnetic reading which replicates the actual design of the crop pattern being measured, but occurs out of sync with the design by 3-5 degrees in a clockwise direction. These findings may prove to be the basis of a natural mechanism involved in the creation of the formations or it may be a residual magnetic effect resulting from the creation of the crop circle. The model I have been developing, and will be collaborating on with further scientific input, is that the magnetic flux involved creates an electric current which effects the plants. The question of what causes the magnetic flux still remains. A full technical paper of my findings and developing theory are being prepared. THE LEVEL OF MAN MADE CREATIONS For a number of years I have been aware of a growing level of man-made creations. During the mid-1980's I was shown privileged information by a BBC journalist who had gone undercover for two years working closely with Dave Chorley and Doug Bowers in an effort to establish the truth behind their claims to be making crop circles. I was shown letters mailed by Doug & Dave where they drew the patterns that they planned to make in Hampshire and Wiltshire, along with the dates and places that they planned to make them. On the envelopes of some of the letters they sketched the planned design and placed the stamp over it, which was then date-stamped by the Royal Mail. Those patterns did appear, as had been proclaimed. Unknown to Doug and Dave, they were being filmed as they made the circles by the BBC journalist. In ensuing weeks, other hoaxers were tracked and their handy-work also filmed. I did not want to believe the evidence being handed me, as others now do not want to believe me. To satisfy my own need for honest research, I began my own investigation into human involvement. I would suggest that anyone who disagrees with my conclusion, investigates hoaxing themselves, rather than falling back on the argument that it can't be done by humans. In 1997, I was given a video of a formation at Oliver's Castle being made by balls of light. Although I wanted to believe it was real, things weren't adding up and I hired a private detective to unravel the loose ends. The investigation turned up irrefutable evidence that the video and the formation were hoaxes. Peter Sorensen, acting on his own information, came to the same conclusion. During 1999 I began another special project into people making crop circles. My research has included detective work, site inspections, physical evidence, aerial photography, personal experiences, information from media who have paid to have formations created for upcoming programs, and from undercover researchers. My findings at this time are that ample evidence exists that an estimated 80% of crop circles are man-made. On the other hand, 20% revealed no evidence of human involvement. A handful of these 20% also displayed the newly discovered magnetic profile (all these were simple formations). Some of the filmed evidence will be seen in an upcoming Channel Four production and a BBC documentary scheduled for early next year. The latter will also be shown on BBC2 and American TV. It should be emphasized that NO EVIDENCE of human involvement could be found in 20% of the formations. All investigation has been done on crop circles in the UK and therefore, the results refer only to the situation in the UK. Since making my announcement last week, a great deal of excitement and interest has been generated from scientists in several countries. I have already accepted an invitation to present my findings in Moscow next March. Why did I make the announcement now? I have received criticism from the crop circle community for releasing this information before scientific input into my magnetic results. I did this to give the research community an opportunity to know about it and to provide feedback. However, the primary reason for the announcement was due to the responsibility I feel for having been the largest worldwide voice spreading information for the past 17 years. The subject has been presented to and impacted governments, scientists, the British Royal Family, Indigenous people in many countries, individual seekers of truth and even religions. With this type of impact, truthfulness with self and others is paramount for all researchers. Unfortunately, more and more there has been a tendency for researchers to promote all crop patterns as being genuine. I have evidence that this is false and I must provide it. The full article of evidence is being prepared for release in the fall. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to enter their own evidence into the debate. I would be very happy to say I am wrong. I believe these findings will allow a breath of honest, fresh air to blow through this subject and will be appreciated by the public in return. The scientific community has already shown how much they appreciate an honest picture by the many e-mails and letters I have received from scientists around the world. We all should feel more comfortable exposing the man-made crop designs for what they are - hoaxes and/or works of art. I have no axe to grind with anybody. I set out to research crop circles 17 years ago, this week has been a very exciting one revealing more directions to investigate with more interest than at any time in the past several years. For those who have listened with an open mind, even if my views do not agree with yours - thank you. Colin Andrews _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 16:09:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:03:27 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> List, Here are the conclusions David Hufford reached at the end of his "The Terror That Comes in the Night: An Experience-Centered Study of Supernatural Assault Traditions," a phenomenological study of the Old Hag experience: 1. The phenomena associated with what I have been calling the Old Hag constitute an experience with a complex and stable pattern, which is recognizable and is distinct from other experiences. 2. This experience is found in a variety of cultural settings. 3. The pattern of the experience and its distribution appear independent of the presence of explicit cultural models. 4. The experience itself has played a significant, though not exclusive, role in the development of numerous traditions of supernatural assault. 5. Cultural factors heavily determine the ways in which the experience is described (or withheld) and interpreted. 6. The distribution of traditions about the experience, such as those involving the Old Hag or the Eskimo augumangia, has frequently been confounded with the distribution of the experience itself. 7. The frequency with which the experience occurs is surprisingly high, with those who have had at least one recognizable attack representing 15 percent or more of the general population. 8. The state in which this experience occurs is probably best described as sleep paralysis with a particular kind of hypnagogic hallucination. 9. Although there may be some connection between the etiology of this experience and narcolepsy, and although certain illnesses could be confused with the experience, the Old Hag experience itself does not indicate the presence of any serious pathology. 10. The contents of this experience cannot be satisfactorily explained on the basis of current knowledge. Where do we go from here and what are some of the major implications of these conclusions for the study of belief? First, the experience needs a name so that it can be easily discussed. "Sleep paralysis with hypnagogic hallucinations" comes close. As discussed in Chapter 4, however, in current usage this term includes some experiences that are different from the Old Hag and omits many primary and secondary features of the Old Hag. Despite the theoretical importance of this connection, then, the term is too general. "Nightmare," if it could be restricted to its older meaning, would be an excellent name. Unfortunately, the additional connotations the word has picked up over the centuries are too firmly entrenched for it to be used. [Hufford goes on to settle on Old Hag, and then suggests, p. 246, that "the next step should be to confirm and extend my findings." Unlike some abductionologists (apparently), Hufford is fully aware that "the data presented in this book are very sensitive to interviewer effects..."] Here, in its entirety, is the one and a half pages, out of 278, that Hufford devotes to the UFO subject (footnotes deleted): Having considered malign entities with long folk histories, I shall now present one example of an agent of the numinous who is generally considered to be of very recent vintage: the UFO creature. The UFO literature and related topics have always seemed to me to be worth consideration by folklorists and other students of belief. Scholars have made some forays into the area over the years, but there has been little indication of sustained serious interest, even though some authors of UFO books provide material from field interviews. Although problems arise regarding the difference between the methods and canons of accuracy of journalism and those of academia (and the difference is not always as great or as complimentary to professional academics as we might wish), these books and articles are often well worth reading. Their interest lies both in what they tell us about the beliefs and experiences of those involved with UFOs and in their effects in shaping those beliefs. John Keel's work is important in both regards. In a popular book, Strange Creatures from Space and Time, published in 1970, he included a chapter entitled "The Bedroom Invaders." He writes: In the past three years we have published two popular magazine articles on these bedroom invaders and we were amazed by the amount of mail those pieces drew. Many readers wrote to tell us, sometimes in absorbing detail, of their own experiences with this uncanny phenomenon. In most cases these experiences were not repetitive. They happened only once and were not accompanied by any other manifestations, In several cases the witnesses experienced total paralysis of the body. The witness awoke but was unable to move a muscle while the apparition was present. Keel notes the connection between the paralysis of these attacks and the paralysis often reported in UFO encounter narratives. Granting that this is not much to go on, he proposes the possibility that both experiences are "unreal visions," which are "not entirely subjective but�caused by some inexplicable outside influence. He added to his own connection of "bedroom invaders" with UFOs in another hook published first in 1970 called Why UFOs [Operation Trojan Horse]. Here he described a series of strange phenomena experienced by himself and acquaintances subsequent to his decision to launch a "full-time UFO investigating effort in 1966." He ended a list of such occurrences with the following: "More than once I woke up in the middle of the night to find myself unable to move, with a huge dark apparition standing over me.� The Old Hag, then, can be as easily assimilated to UFO beliefs as it can to vampirism, witchcraft, or anxiety neurosis. [End of quote.] I'll leave it up to the individual reader to determine whether the above represents a ringing endorsement of witness reliability in terms of claims that some UFOs represent someone else's technology. Hufford is asserting that some witnesses reporting some experiences deserve to be taken more seriously than they have been in the past. In shorthand, it may be that, rather than culture causing experience, experience has caused culture, at least in the case of such "supernatural assault" phenomena as the Old Hag. No argument there. He is certainly not asserting that because some people have witnessed an Old Hag in their bedroom that Old Hags are physical, flesh and blood creatures who routinely invade our bedrooms. That is, what was seen and reported wasn't necessarily there. It's not hard to see, then, why Hufford would be interested in UFO creature and abduction reports: they present the possibility of uncovering an underlying pattern and phenomenology -- and therefore an experience -- on a par with the Old Hag. But that's a far cry from Hufford confirming or validating the "average" UFO sighting as something out of this world, simply because some witness claimed it so. Hufford says of his own work, "A plausible hypothesis linking these attacks to a known psychophysiological state has been offered. On the other hand, the explanation of the contents of that state appears more difficult now than when I began." Fair enough. Now if the abductionologists -- without taking their witnesses quite so literally -- would only admit as much. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 23:08:40 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:05:26 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:17:49 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:57:29 +0100 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Oh, my. "The myth of the credible witness." In other words, I >>>take it, because some witnesses are mistaken, all are mistaken, >>>and the hypothesis that eyewitness testimony can be complacently >>>ignored is, like so many beloved debunker beliefs, >>>unfalsifiable. And debunkers are free to reinvent testimony so >>>that they can "explain" it. >>Jerry, calm down a minute and think before you hit the keyboard >>again. The "myth of the credible witness" refers to the fact >>that some ufologists believe that there are people who, because >>of the job or their training, are unlikely to be mistaken no >>matter what they report. Typically these are policemen, airline >>pilots, astronomers, servicemen, librarians (oops, sorry, that >>one seemed to just slip in), and the assumption is that their >>reports are more reliable than that of any old Joe Soap because >>they are a (small fanfare) "credible witness". >Yes, they are more likely to be reliable. If, say, pilots >weren't trained to see things and make judgments, there would be >far more plane crashes than there are. That doesn't say there >aren't plane crashes. Likewise, pilots are better UFO witnesses >on the whole. I give a fuller response to this point in my other posting on Andy Roberts's side of this thread, suffice to say that "trained observers" are not always trained to observe the kind of things which get reported as UFOs. I'll again quote from Allen Hendry's "UFO Handbook": 'I was once told by a member of the FAA control at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, "Do you know how many times we have cleared Venus to land?" Another FAA controller has been teased for years as "Mr UFO" because of the press coverage of his UFO sighting. the "UFO" turned out to be an advertising plane.' >>I'm not quite sure what Hufford's classic book has to do with >>this argument. As you will remember, I was recommending this >>book to ufologists back when it was first published. I don't >>think Hufford limited his discussions of Old Hag experiences >>exclusively to those made by policemen, pilots or scientists. >No, he didn't. Hufford argued powerfully, using a body of >empirical evidence, that witness testimony is ignored at the >explainer's peril. And your point? And your point is? Whose arguing? > >>Oh, and while I'm on it. Why have people who are sceptical about >>particular explanations for anomalous experiences suddenly >>become "debunkers of anomalous experiences". I don'y buy into >>the ETH for example, but that doesn't mean I don't accept that >>abductees have very real experiences 'of some kind' - but I >>don't have to take any particular proffered explanation as fact. >Okay, here's your chance. Explain to us how your approach >differs from the standard debunking approach of Klass, Ridpath, >Menzel, Sheaffer, and the like, and why you think they're wrong. >I'm not saying this to be snotty. I'm genuinely curious. I once >thought I know, but reading Magonia and your various >contributions to the list over the year, I confess I no longer >know the difference. I'm a little surprised that you should lump those four sceptics together and label them all as debunkers. I'll forbear comment on the three Americans, but Ridpath is respected by British ufologists as a sceptical but fair researcher and commentator who actually goes out and does legwork. He's certainly spent more time at Rendlesham and talking to the people involved than those who've been gracing UpDates lately sniping at Jenny Randles' courageous change of heart on the case. Most of them have probably never been near the place, and they're experts already! -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:53:23 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:08:01 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Persons with the appropriate professional background to make >them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best >sightings, just as one would expect. The Battelle report >documented that long ago. That's why sightings such as, say, >Tombaugh's and Hess's are still unaccounted for five decades >later. Sightings by astronomers, pilots, and the like are those >most likely to withstand the most comprehensive investigation >and to remain unexplained. That's a fact, Andy, whether you like >it or not -- not that there's any possibility of the former.. Well no, Jerry, I'm afraid they don't. Allan Hendry has demonstrated that pilots and law enforcement officers (typical "reliable witness" types) are no better at distinguishing UFOs from IFOs than other occupational groups that make no claim to be "trained witnesses". The proportion of IFOs to all reports made by pilots and air personnel was 75% (i.e. 75% of all reports were subsequently identified) which was on the lower end of the range, it was the same as the proportion for "skilled trades", in which Hendry placed architects, musicians, photographers, engineers, and quite possibly librarians. Worst of all, with 94% of their reports turning out to be IFOs were law enforcement officers. Hendry suggests that the reason why the latter proved so ineffective in distinguishing IFOs from UFOs was that their training made the more conscious of small details during quiet night patrols. This raises an important point: yes there are "trained observers", but they are usually trained to observe something quite specific. Pilots are trained to observe objects with the flight characteristics of an aeroplane. they are not for instance trained to observe meteors, which explains why quite a few "near miss" UFO encounters with planes turned out to be meteors may tens of miles away. policemen are trained to notice _anything_ out of the usual and report and act on it. Which explains why they are prone to take particular notice of scintillating stars and tend to go haring off across the countryside after them. So being a trained observer _doesn't_ mean you're better at spotting and reporting UFOs than Joe Soap. >>But to take it a step further _no_ witness who ever claims to >>have seen a gen-u-ine flying craft which was not of terrestrial >>origin has _ever_ been proven correct. Despite all the >>sightings, not on one single occasion. But it is a _fact_ that >>on _many_ occasions people who claim to have seen such a thing >>have been proven wrong because of radical misperception. >According to you. In fact, I have long suspected that when the >dust settles, future historians of science will wonder why the >UFO question was not settled -- in the affirmative -- no later >than the Nash-Fortenberry sighting (in 1952, for those of you >with hazy memories). If this case is so important and, you suggest, may settle the UFO question I am surprised that it receives just about a page in your UFO Encyclopedia. I would be interested to know just what kind of settlement you are suggesting this case may produce. Are you for once going to say what you think may have caused a _real_ UFO report, or are we to be treated to another exhibition-quality demonstration of fence-sitting? -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-19-00 From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 17:20:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:13:22 -0400 Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-19-00 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Week Ahead 8-20-00 thru 8-25-00 Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories From rense.com Jeff Rense E-News is distributed exclusively by Free Subscription. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * GUEST CORNER * EM/RF Weather Control and Western Fires By John Quinn/ NewsHawk(r) Inc. 8.16.00 We thank Joe Bowling for his interesting and timely observations on this subject, reprinted below. Joe describes phenomena he observed in Montana, in which phone lines with no direct contact to the earth or other materials like metal (structures) and unconnected to any source of electrical power, were being powerfully charged up with electrical energy. A number of others have noted this precise effect, and we have as well, in Northern California and in Oregon. There is in fact only one way this can happen--through electromagnetic induction via EM/RF transmissions. According to a HAARP consultant who has divulged other information to us, this phenomenon noted by Joe is a direct result of extremely high-powered HAARP transmissions targeting the western U.S. To be sure, federal land management policies are to some degree a factor in what is happening to western forest lands right now: as Joe noted, the "let-it-burn" methods and recent reductions in firefighting crews combining with excessive buildup of dead wood, along with the usual summer heat and dryness. The main "reason," however, is the massive, relentless and constant weather control manipulation being implemented by covert (and OVERT) factions of the federal government. Readings taken over the past couple of days show that weather-modification EM/RF transmissions are being driven at previously-unrecorded high levels of power. These transmissions are being pumped at such high gain levels at this time that a clearly audible tone or audio "artifact" can actually be heard across much of the northwest coast of North America: somewhat similar it seems to the well-known "Taos hum." Confidential sources have told NewsHawk that HAARP and other related technologies are being used to manifest a "virtual Venturi device" on a gigantic scale in the upper atmosphere. Science students will remember that a Venturi device can separate warmer air from cooler air and re-direct the different streams with great force. The whole deal is being further intensified by chemtrail spraying of weather modification substances. THIS is one of the primary tactics currently being used in the tremendously extensive and severe "weather war" being waged by federal forces which is causing the western wildfires to become so extremely destructive. Again, "more trees" due to minor reductions in logging in some few areas are a VERY minor element of this entire mix. Other sources have suggested to NewsHawk that, contrary to a supposition we noted in an earlier article on this ever-more-crucial subject, one of the probable hidden agendas behind burning up vast tracts of forest lands is, in fact, to make these regions EASIER to develop for mass human habitation in the future. The supposed reasoning behind this, is that rising sea levels from the now-irrefutable and steadily-intensifying global warming will within several years destroy the habitat of a huge percentage of humanity�by submerging the coastal plains of North America and the rest of the world, whereupon such large percentages of the human race now reside. These western forest lands are at an elevation and inland location which makes them relatively safe from the rising sea levels engendered by global warming, and once "cleared" of forests will be vastly easier to develop for mass human habitation. Could this possible explanation of the agenda behind massive weather control operations correct, and true? Unfortunately we cannot answer that question at this point. John Quinn/ NewsHawk(r) Inc. ��������������� Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:38:45 -0500 From: Joe Bowling To: John Quinn <hawk_news@yahoo.com> Subject: electromagnetic energy and fires Possible observation of an artificially produced electromagnetic phenomenon You mention electromagnetic energy being used in weather manipulation. I (and others) did note a phenomenon which can only be explained by electromagnetic energy, while working in Eastern Montana (Roosevelt County, to be specific). A Little background: I am a scientist (Geologist) with some background in physics and chemistry. I also have four years experience as a firefighter. I make my living by evaluating rock samples on an oil rig, while the well is being drilled. Small (domestic) oil companies help our national security, there have been no environmental disasters in the Williston Basin (the region I work in), or I'd be doing something different to earn my pay. Be that as it may, I remember enough physics to know that the only way to get a shielded, four conductor, outdoor phone line about 150 ft. long to charge up, like a capacitor, when it is disconnected from all potential power sources is through electromagnetic induction. The phenomenon was noted when there was an arc from the shielding (while the phone line was connected) to a conductor terminal in a standard four wire to modular connector junction box, such as those used in most houses. Please note that the arcing produced a loud 'snap', loud enough to awaken me from a nap in a bunk at the other end of the mobile lab (noisy place), some 20 ft. away, while my partner was watching the gas detectors. The wires were then disconnected from the phone line coming in from the pedestal; there was some concern about damaging the phone which was hooked up. All four conductors and the shielding each subsequently obtained a sufficient charge to deliver an uncomfortable shock or arc about three centimeters to a ground. This happened repeatedly� the conductors were discharged, could be handled without shock, and recharged within a minute or two to their previous charge level. The only voltmeter available was not functioning correctly, so no readings were obtained. We (I was not alone in noting the phenomenon) even checked to make sure the jacket of the line was not worn through and in contact with any metal which may have been a source of power through bad grounding. That can happen on an oil rig, but was not the case. The jacket and conductors' individual insulations were intact. The center 75 feet remained suspended about 15 feet above ground, tied in place with dry, nonconductive material. The only possible, reasonable?, explanation is that a thunderstorm some 5 to 10 miles south may have had some effect, but if other data show that there may another cause, I would like to know about it. Call it scientific curiosity, if you will. While I cannot wholly agree that the absence of limited clearcutting is not a factor in the severity of the fires in the American west, I firmly believe that the stage has been carefully set by federal policy for the fires out west to be of the magnitude they are. Decisions made at Cabinet level and above have caused fuel loads to be at record highs, firefighting infrastructure at a low, and some fires (like Los Alamos) have been the direct result of federal action (they set that one). Unemployment will cause someone to leave a line of work, as those of us in the domestic oil industry know, and "let it burn" policies have reduced the job opportunities for career forest firefighters, and thus the number of experienced firefighters trained sufficiently to act in a supervisory capacity. Rumor has it that dwellings have been burned after people have been evacuated on short notice with none of their posessions or documents as part of 'backfire' areas. The list goes on, all in lockstep with an administration which deeply desires to remove people from the land as much as possible. Please understand that this is not harassment, nor intended to be an aggravation. As a scientist, I just want to see the data for the last week of July, for eastern Montana, to try and find a correlation between the phenomenon which I and others observed and artificially produced electromagnetic energy. Thank You, Joe Bowling ------------------- Opinions presented in Jeff Rense E-News are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent those of Jeff Rense, Sightings, sightings.com or the newsletter editors. Past and present guests: to be showcased in "The Guest Corner", please email mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=Guest_Corner --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- "A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty ... We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive." -- Albert Einstein Got a favorite quote? Feel free to send it: mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=quote --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Learn Remote Viewing Discover the real paranormal!! Developed by the U.S.Military for espionage. Ascertain information with no distance, space or time limitations. See if you've got what it takes to become a "remote viewer". History, articles, examples, resources, training. http://www.rvsystems.inuk.com/enter1.htm --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * TOP STORIES * Just a few of last week's most intriguing! http://rense.com * The Tesla Files * 'We Saw TWA 800 Shot Down By Missile' Ad Placed In Washington Times * Earth's Greenhouse Gas Build-Up Worst In 20 Million Years * West Nile Virus Sprayings Bogus And Dangerous Say Physicians * US Military Now Calling For West Nile Virus Vaccine * Ben And Jerry's Ice Cream Contains HIGH Dioxin Levels - Study * US Broils Under Hottest First 7 Months On Record * Two Blasts Monitored Saturday Where Russian Sub Sank * Sunken Submarine's Nuclear Reactors Pose Threat - Explosion Possible * Britain - Little Children Being Treated For VD * Cell Phones May Damage Nerves In The Scalp * Third Anniversay Swissair Near Miss With UFO - Week's Sightings * Chemtrails Now Over Melbourne, Australia * UPDATE Russian UFO Research Revealed * Radioactive Strontium Found Buried in New Jersey Backyard * Computer Monitors 1,000 Thinner Than The Human Hair * The Rabin Murder Express Rolls Along * Dick Cheney To Get $20 Million Retirement Package * US Frog And Amphibian Die-Off Causes Determined * Only 40% Of British Bombs Hit Kosovo Targets * The MGS 'Face On Mars' Image In A Different Light * To Terraform Or Not To Terraform - Problem For Mars Researchers * Super High-Tech Equipment Making US Soldiers Veritable Cyborgs * Another Amazing Crop Formation In England * Coca-Cola, The CIA, And The Courts * Egypt Wants Radar Data Witheld By US In EgyptAir Crash Probe * Mexico's Drinking Water Called An Environmental Catastrophe * CBS Regrets 'Snipers Wanted For Bush' Graphic Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- The Biggest Secret We are proud to announce we now have The Biggest Secret available, David Icke�s explosive �book that will change the world..." check out the SPECIAL this week at: http://www.immunotex.com/e-news/bigsecret.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS * 8-20-00 thru 8-25-00 (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can change due to late breaking stories, etc). SUN 8-20 Encore - Brad Steiger: A Paranormal Evening MON 8-21 Barbara McBeath/Brendan Cook: Recordings Of Ghost Voices (EVP) TUE 8-22 Graham Conway UFO*BC - Canada UFO Report John Kirk: Lake Monsters Of The Northwest Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo - New Chupacabras Attacks WED 8-23 From England - Paul Johnson/Ian Hopwood: Haunted Ambulance Station THU 8-24 Scott Enyart: The Missing RFK Murder Photos FRI 8-25 Scott Mandelker: Soul Evolution And The Cosmic Plan Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Primogenesis By Howard Rand, L.L.B Written by an attorney and a Hebraic, Chaldean, and Greek language scholar, Primogenesis is a verse-by-verse exposition of the Bible story from the beginning, covering the five books of the Pentateuch, then through the division of the kingdoms to the commencement of the Great Captivities. http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index102.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * PROGRAM INFORMATION * Program Show Times Live Coast-To-Coast-now broadcast nationally over the Talk Radio Network a total of over 200 hours a month. Monday-Friday 7-10 pm Live 10-1 am Immediate Rebroadcast 1-3 am First 2 hours of prior night's show Saturday 9p-3 am Best Of Rense - 2 shows Sunday 8-11 pm Live Call in Line: 800 TRN 4123 Sightings Artwork/Digital Illustration & Webdesign http://www.anc.net/~neff/ Program Audio Tapes 888 456-4340 Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives http://www.sightings.com Advertising-Over 3 MILLION visitors to sightings.com each month Cost effective exposure for YOUR product or service http://www.sightings.com/adv.htm Sightings.com info/email center http://www.sightings.com/1.mail/infocenter.html Free Greeting Cards featuring the artwork of James Neff: http://www.immunotex.com/rense/cards/cards.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Share with your friends! Please feel free to forward this issue of the Jeff Rense Weekly E-News to any and all who are interested... but please forward in its entirety and do not modify it in any fashion without permission. Thank you! Past issues are archived at http://www.egroups.com ------------------------- To subscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-unsubscribe@egroups.com -------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News is independently produced by TGS in cooperation with Jeff Rense. The material and views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Jeff Rense, sightings.com, or the Jeff Rense - Sightings Radio Program, except for the *Jeff's Desk* segment. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:45:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:10:38 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:52:55 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Andy, >So, Jerry, exactly _how_many_ cases of radical mispecrception >would you like exactly? I think Jenny and I have already run >through a few. I'll be happy to provide you with many more but >just say how many please. Unfortunately I suspect that if we >came up with 100 cases of radical misperception (and I reckon >that could be done from UK cases alone with a little time) you >would still fail to accept that we must extend the theory to the >possibility that _all_ UFO sightings are radical misperceptions >of one sort or another. You're damn right I'd fail to accept the thoroughly unverified -- and unfalsifiable -- belief that "all UFO sightings are radical misperceptions of one sort or another." UFO study has long been crippled by wishful thinking, and wishful thinking is all I see here. Words like yours ought to raise all sorts of red flags to any outside observer, who should also wonder what evidence you require to back up your allegation that any sighting otherwise inexplicable is due to "radical misperception." Is "radical misperception" really common in UFO reporting -- or is it the last refuge of the debunker when all else has failed? Radical misperception is itself an extraordinary claim which needs to be as carefully verified as its opposite. >>In fact, I have long suspected that when the dust settles, >>future historians of science will wonder why the >Have you any predications as to when this might be Jerry. The >UFO literature of the last 50 0dd years has been saying this. >I'd be interested to hear your opinion of when the dust might >settle and how near the dust is to settling at this moment in >time. And the UFO literature of the last 50 odd years has been right. Prediction: sometime in the coming century, after biology has taken its course and a new generation of scientists, unencumbered by the bigotry of the generation that came before it, looks at the UFO question with fresh eyes. A second prediction: scientists looking -- unsuccessfully -- for ETI via radio telescopes and the like will finally be forced to look for evidence in UFO sightings. >>Well, the Mantell case. Mantell's description of the object he >>tragically chased was accurate. He saw a giant balloon (a >Exactly - Mantell mistook the mundane for the mysterious. You've got the moral of the story turned on its head, my friend. Apparently, this is a case you don't know much about. Mantell -- and plenty of other witnesses in the air and on the ground -- described a Skyhook pretty much exactly accurately. No radical misperceptions whatever, I'm sorry to tell you. It was not radical misperception that misled observers, it was their ignorance of the Skyhook project. The Mantell case underscores the point, known to all serious investigators, that most IFO cases can be solved on the basis of witness descriptions alone -- which means, of course, that most of the time witnesses are right, even when their interpretations may be in error. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:57:06 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:17:18 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:49:24 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>With respect this is skirting round the key issues. >Jenny, >I appreciate your detailed, thoughtful response, but I reject >the notion that I am "skirting round the key issues." The key >issues focus on testimony so extraordinary -- and so at variance >with the notion that the whole episode arose from simple >misperception of a lighthouse -- that clearly we are dealing >with anomalies of perception far beyond what mere mistaken >observation can account for. That seems to me the crux of the >case, and the new skeptics are reduced merely to hand-waving and >ideological posturing. I am not referring to you, of course. Hi, This is indeed the crux of the issue, but it is tied without question to the facts that indicate the serious likelihood that the lighthouse was a major factor in this case. However much we abhor the possibility facts dictate this contemplation. How can they not do? Unless Georgina is willing to tell us what 'the truth' is - given that she apparently knows - the rest of us are left with the dilemma of trying to resolve the often conflicting and confounding testimony that fills mountains of books already in this case. That's certainly what I have been trying to do for nigh on 20 years. I certainly have not come to even consider the lighthouse as a major force in this case with any degree of pleasure or comfort. You might say I have been dragged screaming towards this unpalatable awareness by the old foe of all Ufologists - the plain and simple facts (and I am sure Ian Ridpath will concur as I recall him claiming years ago that this case would one day prove a ghastly embarrassment to the subject). However, nor am I at all unaware of the serious problems doing so entails. It is not a simple matter of saying - game set and match to the lighthouse. But the facts as we have to view them still require resolution and it has to be pretty apparent that some of those facts are hard to square with any other option but that the lighthouse was precisely where the UFO was in certain phases of this case. Its an uncomfortable reality. It sits precariously with some of the testimony. It challenges the perception of anyone who (like me) has been immersed in this case for so long. And I can promise you on the UFOIN list its been hotly debated and I have (at times) felt a little like General Custer as I offer any sort of defence against the idea that many other UK Ufologists believe to be case solved. As such its really quite funny to see how on this list things are so different and I am one of the enemy! In truth I am really trying to sort out the conflict in my own mind over all this. All I have ever tried to do is be honest about this case. And that requires you to view both sides of this argument and accept that there are two sides to this debate with some reason to hold their views. Those who argue the role of the lighthouse do have a case to answer. And it needs to be answered. I have suggested some of the things that need to be considered in opposition (the close encounter effects, the radar, the many civilian witnesses who saw things and who certainly knew the lighthouse, etc). These have to be addressed by the people really standing up and saying this case is dead and buried (of which I am not yet one). Equally, those who feel there is anything exotic left to this case have to answer the challenge that is posed by the very clear evidence of the role that the lighthouse played. It is very apparent this was more than any of us (me included - and I suspect most of the witnesses) gave credit for. So what is needed is less hyperbole and posturing from us all and more a sober discussion of the hard facts surrounding this pivotal case. We should centre on aspects of it that challenge perceptions of both sides . That is the evidence that contradicts those sure that the lighthouse cannot be a factor (such as why the witnesses in the forest never report seeing it right next to the UFO). And (for those who are sure the lighthouse is the answer) - what caused the close encounter effects described by Burroughs and Penniston and what was witnessed by, for example, the witness at Sudbourne whom I interviewed and who saw the triangular object come from the north, hover briefly at rooftop height, then fall into the forest. This certainly was nothing to do with the lighthouse. So, yes, there are big questions still to answer here on both sides of this divide and I am certainly not pretending this case is closed - regardless of what Georgina Bruni seems curiously determined to prove about me. In 'The UFOs that Never Were' I try to balance these arguments by presenting the conflict and show that we have to take the lighthouse far more seriously as a factor in this case than I previously imagined. But we cannot just write it off as the answer because it fails to completely resolve some outstanding issues. That to put it bluntly is the way that is. I do not have any doubt that this case is less strong than I once thought it was. And unless Georgina has really good new evidence that overturns all this - i.e. things that she can tell us about and that transforms such opinion - then its all I can honestly say right now. If she does, then fair enough, I will certainly be listening. Because I don't have any interest in proving something at all costs that is at odds with common sense or the facts. I am only seeking a better perspective on what actually occurred - which is all any of us can do (Georgina not excepted) when judging second hand evidence 20 years removed. Like I said the case is clearly in some trouble but it isn't dead. And I know that will upset virtually everybody. The ones who want me to say - case closed its a lighthouse. The ones who want me to say - no way can a lighthouse explain all this. All I can really do is tell it as I find it, and the truth is that both these views have some merit as it stands . And I don't mind admitting that I don't know, because its the only responsible view to adopt right now. We certainly know a lot more than we did even two or three years ago and maybe post Georgins we will know even more. But all cases are about evaluating the evidence as it accumulates and all sides should be willing to let the evidence direct what they believe not seek evidence to prove any preconceived opinion as to what happened. I would hope that's what I have been trying to do here. Undoubtedly I am veering more towards caution on this case. The recently garnered evidence decrees that. But its unfair to suggest that I am trying to magically explain it all away. I have no interest in doing that and I will only accept this case is closed when we have all the facts straight that make that certain (if, of course, we ever do). So - the challenge remains to both sides here. If the lighthouse was not seen then how do we account for all the problems set out on this list over the past two days? And if it is the lighthouse, how does this accommodate things like the Sudbourne sighting, or the close encounter effects described by Burroughs and Penniston? The debate will progress better if we focus on these issues and not on attacking one another as this list has a wont to do. Here we have many primary investigators on one of Ufology's big cases gathered together. Lets use that opportunity to thrash it out thoroughly and see if we can take this forward not sidetrack into some swamp. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 01:00:00 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:25:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 13:32:14 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:13:54 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles: A Plea For Sanity >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >you wrote: >>Excuse me, but I respectfully ask - what bragging? >you answered your own question in the next sentence: >>Yes, I resolve about 95% of the cases that I investigate. >95% is a remarkable percentage. Hi, 95% is not a remarkable percentage and that you think it is a bit worrying. I suspect most seasoned investigators will tell you they solve between 85 - 95% of cases to their satisfaction. You see figures of that order quoted all the time. So why you think reporting this number of cases (as the ones that I consider explained to my satisfaction) is 'bragging' remains a puzzle. Are you suggesting that to lie - that is to say I can only come up with reasonable solutions to 10% of my sightings - would be fine and dandy? But to honestly report the level of cases that appear to be resolvable (and a level that is clearly not much at odds with what many other Ufologists out there either) is somehow bragging? Why??? If so then our concepts of what constitutes Ufology's seem light years apart. >>I don't think that I have been solving any more cases than usual >>of late and hardly bragging about them when I do. >Jenny, you have just stated that you solve 95% of your cases, >and assuming you were likely to solve more � that would imply >that you are close to solving 100% of your cases - an even more >remarkable percentage and something well worth bragging about! Hang on. Firstly, you now twist it on its head and say I _should_ be bragging (which I am not) - when what you actually told this List was that I am bragging. That's two very different things. So which is it? Secondly, nothing I have ever said suggests that I am working towards solving every case. That's impossible and I don't personally believe it will ever happen even in ideal circumstances because I have never hidden my belief that there are genuine UFOs that offer new science behind some cases. Hence I do not expect to ever bat a thousand and only you seem to assume otherwise. Thirdly, 95% of say 100 cases per year means 5 unsolved and interesting cases every year. That's well over 100 cases in my own UFO research that I consider scientifically interesting. Are you really suggesting that most other Ufologists would claim far more? >>since nobody can ever be certain that they know all the answers >>in this phenomenon >It's understandable that I am somewhat confused here. >>>Your claim in "The UFOs That Never Were" of having solved the >>>famous Rendlesham case, believing it was nothing more than a >>>lighthouse, is silly. >>Well, it would be silly if I made such a bald claim, but I don't. >Then please turn to page 217 and read what you wrote: >"It has taken almost twenty years, but we have gradually > worked our way towards a solution." Which is precisely true. Towards a solution describes the practice all serious Ufologists employ - that is an attempt to resolve a case. That's what many people have been trying to do with the Rendlesham case. Work towards a solution as the pieces have slowly fallen into place. But working towards a solution - in the ways I have set out in messages on this list over the past few days - is quite different from having solved the case conclusively or simply as just the lighthouse - a flippant, clearly false perception that I don't think you truly believe that I believe. So why are you constantly kidding people that I do? I have made abundantly clear on this List my views on the strengths and weaknesses of the lighthouse and the role it played in the case (for its only a part of the solution at best and cannot be _the_ solution because of things like the close encounter effects and the radar tracking). Nothing in 'The UFOs that Never Were' differs from what I have said to this list. And no amount of effort to make that so will change the facts. >>Perhaps your desire to champion the case has something to do >>with your own forthcoming book about it . >Yes, I am confident that my book will put an end to your >theories. Well good on you. How about sharing with the list (as I have freely shared with this list without requiring them to buy my book) some of your arguments that dispose of the lighthouse and that answer the reasons why some people find it hard to not see this light as having played a major role in this case? Saying - my book will do such and such - is good PR. Unfortunately it doesn't further the debate on this list. So how about helping in that endeavour - since we are all simply trying to get to the truth as Ufologists and it appears that you believe you can help us to achieve that? >With regards to "the first to tell the full story", well, it >certainly is the first time the 'true' story has been told and >when you read the book you will see this for yourself. >>And I have had plenty of access to those involved (civilian >>witnesses, military personnel, MoD personnel, MPs, the local >>police, forestry commission, scientists, etc). >If that is the case, why then in 17 years have you not written >the true story? I ask people to judge which best encompasses the word 'bragging'. My suggestion that I have simply reported in my books what I have found, shared my ideas on this case with readers and worked towards a solution. And yours that - without telling us a single concrete thing about the basis of your book - that you write what you call 'the truth'? I am sure you think that's what it is. I am sure we all do. But I would never presume to claim that I have written the only true truth in the history of the case. But then I wouldn't do so since I am merely a braggart. >>What I do say - and justify saying - in the book is that >>gradually various parts of this case have eroded and the role >>that the lighthouse played in the case has become increasingly >>apparent when weighed against the sum of the evidence. >I think you are going to be very surprised Jenny. Well, if I am then fine. That will not cause me distress. Like you and all on this list (I trust) my only interest is finding out what really happened in Rendlesham Forest. And what you have to say will, of course, be fascinating. Especially as you know 'the truth'. >>Again, you seem somewhat confused. I have not 'solved' the >>Lakenheath case. I have uncovered aspects to it that call into >>question key claims made in the past, e.g. that there was a visual >>contact by the RAF crew sent on an intercept that night. But >>that's very different from saying that I know what caused this >>case to happen. >It would be a good idea to look back on your old posts on this >subject. I have - and as you well know they say exactly what I say here. That I have come upon evidence that calls into question key aspects of the case and I have been pursuing an attempt to clarify the confusion these create in an effort to try to understand this case. >>Our investigation has taken interesting turns that do not favour >>premature revelations.. >What premature revelations? You made a big point that your >evidence seriously questioned the Lakenheath case. Are you now >suggesting that your revelations were premature? Of course not - as you well know. You have been working on your Rendlesham book for three years - you tell us - and would not even reveal its title let alone tell us any of the truth you have apparently exposed! Yet because I say that I am spending a few extra months working towards a report on this l956 case rather than reveal all before it is complete that this is somehow a misdemeanour. The words double and standards come to mind here. There is nothing sinister behind wanting to dot the 'i's and cross the 't's on a case investigation before publishing results. Unfortunately, when there are pit bulls in the UFO world determined to rip you to shreds at every turn and who seem to take pleasure in attacking every word, you might stop and think and understand why I might feel the need to do so. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 19 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:27:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:46:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:35 -0300 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:21:24 -0700 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> >>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:41:30 -0800 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >>>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I, for one, would very much like to know what factual claims >were made by Corso in the interview, that we now know to be >true. The factual claims were not necessarily of the type called 'claims' so much as simply discussing what he was doing, where, and when, and the gadgets encountered along the way. There are three hours of tape. Corso does the bulk of the talking. He speaks about chips, and fiber optics, and some device which ran on water, and a solid, infinitely plastic material (one which may be completely deformed and return to its proper shape). You would have to listen to the tapes to review all the subjects mentioned. >Did he claim he was a member of the NSC? I don't honestly remember. I was highly engrossed in analyzing the stress patterns, and only incidentally and tangentially interested in what was being said. The tapes are clear. Again, listen to them. >Did he claim that he was head of the FTD branch under Trudeau >and for which dates? Yes. This I recall. He made mention of dates, and it was in the '47 time frame, on in to the 50's, and perhaps beyond... again, as I recall. Perhaps Ed Gehrman could best answer these questions of content. >Did he explain how he knew who the members of the control group >were? He mentions several congresscritters by name. >Did he discuss seeing an alien body on July, 6, 1947, at Ft. >Riley and how he knew the date and why there were no full time >guards there and no mention of some way of cooling the body? He did talk of several alien bodies, which he claimed to have seen in transit on some date, which he mentions specifically; it may well have been the date you cite. He said that he was the duty officer that night and many other nights at Riley, and that there was indeed security. At that point in the game, '47, I highly suspect that there were indeed guards about. It was immediately after WWII, cold war cranking up. He makes mention that the bodies were awash in some liquid; he did not mention refrigeration, as I recall, one way or the other. In another discussion, he makes mention of the nature of the bodies, and refers to them essentially as genetically engineered cyborgs, a marriage of biological computer and more-or-less sentient biped, without alimentary canal, nor ears. He talks of them being an integral, engineered part of the craft's guidance system. >Did he claim he was a colonel or a Lt. Colonel? Or was it all >idle chitchat? It was most certainly not idle chit-chat, and I don't recall whether I ever heard the exact rank mentioned. Art Bell and John Alexander referred to him, where they did, as "Colonel". Again, it's all on the tapes, and everything said exhibited essentially the same stress pattern-- along with a lot of things which are verifiable, either externally or in context. >Nobody says he lied about everything he ever said. Did he >provide any facts about just how any area of new technology was >benefitted by what he did: names, dates, companies? There are discussions of fiber optics, micro electronics and chips... let Ed comment on minutia of content. I can state that at no time did I see a stress pattern which indicated deception. I routinely saw higher stress (though not of a level nor of a pattern indicating deception) in Art Bell's voice than in either Corso's or Alexander's. I would categorize this (Bell's stress) as the excitement upon confirmation of really astounding facts. Mike Kemp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 18:21:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:22:56 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:53:23 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Persons with the appropriate professional background to make >>them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best >>sightings, just as one would expect. <snip> >Well no, Jerry, I'm afraid they don't. Allan Hendry has >demonstrated that pilots and law enforcement officers (typical >"reliable witness" types) are no better at distinguishing UFOs >from IFOs than other occupational groups that make no claim to >be "trained witnesses". The proportion of IFOs to all reports >made by pilots and air personnel was 75% (i.e. 75% of all >reports were subsequently identified) which was on the lower end >of the range, it was the same as the proportion for "skilled >trades", in which Hendry placed architects, musicians, >photographers, engineers, and quite possibly librarians. Worst >of all, with 94% of their reports turning out to be IFOs were >law enforcement officers. > >Hendry suggests that the reason why the latter proved so >ineffective in distinguishing IFOs from UFOs was that their >training made the more conscious of small details during quiet >night patrols. This raises an important point: yes there are >"trained observers", but they are usually trained to observe >something quite specific. Pilots are trained to observe objects >with the flight characteristics of an aeroplane. they are not >for instance trained to observe meteors, which explains why >quite a few "near miss" UFO encounters with planes turned out to >be meteors may tens of miles away. policemen are trained to >notice _anything_ out of the usual and report and act on it. <snip> Just some minor points: 1) On the higher 94% IFO rates for policemen, this may actually work in their favor. Its almost a movie clich for an English policeman to be scribbling notes into his little notebook at some crime scene, while the direct witnesses are more likely losing their heads. ( I suspect movie fans here would be disappointed if this failed to occur. ) If a good cop takes note of many details, great and small, this would inevitably lead to a higher rate of identification, since most well investigated UFO reports do turn out to be mundane. I would offer this as an indication that the policeman was indeed a better witness, not just average or poorer. A good command of the details must necessarily imply a better witness! 2) As for airline pilots and crew, I cannot offer such a good argument, just my personal opinion based on pilots I have met, a rather no-nonsense lot, and what I have heard of them in general. When it comes to in-flight sightings, I would take the testimony of any airline pilot over some passenger on the very same plane... perhaps at a two to one ratio. Throw in the copilot, others in the crew, and I would call that pretty darned good credibility. ( The "strangeness" rating is of course a separate issue, and would depend on the description. ) Even Joe Soap can provide some good testimony, if accompanied by George, Jill and Roger Soap .. and their descriptions tally. I would nevertheless give greater weight to a pilot, or even a beat-cop, than some person taken at random. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Myers From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 18:37:11 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:24:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response - Myers >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:38:10 -0400 (EDT) >From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:01:31 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Crop Circles: The UFOIN Response >>To: Updates@sympatico.ca >>The problem with crop circle samples is that there is little, if >>any, independent confirmation of the results. Further, no real >>attempt is evident to study "ordinary" wheat throughout the >>stages of its growth for comparison with "real" crop circle >>abnormalities. It would be interesting to compare "real" circle >>samples with those from lodging, animal disturbance, >>sclerotinia, rust, etc. >Why would it be interesting? You guys have already made up your >minds it seems. Why don't YOU do the testing and _you_ find the >scientists willing to look at it? I agree with Joe. Why haven't you conducted such a study? Dr.Levengood has indeed done extensive studies regarding crop formations. He has compared the obvious area where the formation has taken place and he utilizes several control samples from the surrounding area to compare it with it. Dr.Levengood has also grown several specimens from seeds and has compared the growth of affected seeds with the growth of control seeds. >>Our work has been extensively published and so is readily >>available to check. >Could you tell us what peer reviewed journals your work has been >published in? I would like to read it. As far as I know, Dr. Levengood is the _only_ person to have scientifically peer reviewed papers published on this subject. >>Ask yourself this. Why would an alien intelligence spend >>hundreds of years writing pictures in fields - specifically >>locating most in one part of the world of late - and create a >>seemingly all too human pattern of marks, game playing, even >>punning? Would you care to tell me that? You seem to be some kind of an expert on alien intelligence here... <snip> >>What is needed to take seriously any contention that aliens >>create circles is the evidence for some clearly structured >>intelligently created pattern that was done in such a way that >>humans could not possibly have created it without detection. Or >>indeed one that left new science (eg the formula for an >>anti-gravity drive or a cure for cancer might be a good place to >>start). Then I would ask that you produce evidence that shows exactly how some humans are altering the structure of these formations at a cellular level. Please show me the person that is carrying around a microwave generator large enough to zap a formation that is several hundred feet in size. As for the alien part of this, not everyone is screaming aliens... <snip> >>Are we really saying that the best a civilisation from another >>star system can do is spend years doodling in a few crop fields >>with images of whales, geometric shapes and pretty patterns? >Do you know what they are thinking? If you do, please tell us. >This is such bad scientific thinking. Actually, the word science >doesn't even belong in that sentence. Speculation, guess work, >trying to read ETs mind, etc.. Bascially, a joke and an insult >to our intelligence. Anyone here with a degree in the area of extraterrestrial psychology, would you please raise your hands. Okay, that takes care of that... >>Where do these wise aliens come from - the planet moron? >I will refrain from responding to that one because it's just so >juvenile. I'd step in here, but the Joe pretty much covered it there... Some of us simply are saying that several of the formation are simply mysterious. While some are the work of humans, many remain anomalous... Regards, Royce J. Myers III eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind" eXpos News http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3 UFO Hall o' Shame http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog (UFO Dirtbag of the Month for August 2000 - beCAUS you demanded 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 'Lost Haven' Updates... From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 02:44:51 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:27:45 -0400 Subject: 'Lost Haven' Updates... Hi All, I have just updated the site. Yes I know I have just launched it but UFO data comes pretty quick around here. Please check the following link, where you will see fresh UFO images from London and Wiltshire as well as Farnborough. Also you can download a recent piece of quite remarkable UFO footage taken in London: http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Chrismart.htm This page is dedicated to the sheer hard work by Chris Martin on capturing such amazing pieces of UFO film. Also check out the following updated page where you can see the very excellent UFO Graphic work from our very own Dave Bowden. http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Grafikfx.html 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 03:09:15 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:33:33 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:57:06 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>Here we have many primary investigators on one of Ufology's big >>cases gathered together. Lets use that opportunity to thrash it >>out thoroughly and see if we can take this forward not sidetrack >>into some swamp. <snip> A very good point here, lets not get bogged down in quotes from books of ancient history let fact raise it's head! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Hall & Maccabee In Fairfax, Virginia From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 21:50:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:31:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Hall & Maccabee In Fairfax, Virginia If you live within driving distance, the past and present Chairmen of the Fund for UFO Research will be on hand to sign their latest publications this coming Saturday (August 26th) in Fairfax, Virginia. The event will be from 2:00 until 5:00 pm at the Best Western Hotel in Fairfax, conveniently located just off of Interstate 66 on Route 123 South (approximately six (6) miles from the Capitol Beltway). The Fund's first Chairman, Bruce Maccabee, will be on hand to autograph "The FBI-UFO Connection". Bruce has collected thousands of pages of FOIA material from the FBI and other agencies which tell an interesting story about the early days of UFO research and how the Federal Government and Military often said one thing in public while reacting quite differently in private. His publication, which had a working title of "The Real X-Files", will be available for purchase at the event and this is your chance to meet the author and perhaps ask a question or two. Richard Hall, who took the reigns from Bruce following his retirement as Chairman, has written a Fund publication highlighting sighting reports from the late 1890's until Kenneth Arnold's famous sighting of 1947. "Airships to Arnold" will be on hand for purchase, and Richard will be available to autograph your copy. The current Chairman of the Fund, Don Berliner, will be available to autograph "The Best Available Evidence", which was recently published by Dell for mass distribution. This publication was originally limited to 1,000 copies distributed to a targeted audience of Government, Business, and Media leaders. However, as the first in a series of UFO related publications planned by Dell, it is now available to the general public. If you have questions about the current state of UFO research, or how we have arrived at where we are today in UFOlogy, this is perhaps the most distinguished group you could ask. You might also learn more about publications now in the works. Complimentary refreshments will be served, and all you have to bring is your interest (and perhaps a few dollars to buy a book or two if you're interested). If you have any questions, please let me know. Steven Kaeser
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:12:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:35:31 -0400 Subject: Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:49:24 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >It seems to me that the explanation you and your friends are >proposing is itself a radical one which -- as you alone are >honest enough to acknowledge -- begs many questions. Really, if >I were trying to dispose of Rendlesham (though in fact I have no >stake whatever in the outcome), I would charge the witnesses >with lying and be done with it. Far easier to do that, which at >least is consistent with our experience of ourselves, our fellow >human beings, and our respective failings, than to propose f>anciful, unfalsifiable theories about mistaken perceptions >which could not occur in ordinary consciousness. The skeptics >are seeking to substitute one extraordinary hypothesis for >another, and I, for one, remain skeptical. And properly so. >Jerry Clark Seems to me another form of "pelicanization" of ufology. Read Prosaic Explanation, the Failure of UFO Skepticism at: brumac.8k.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:44:10 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts Hi Jerry, Thanks again for your illuminating response to, and denial of, factual information. I wrote: >>that could be done from UK cases alone with a little time) you >>would still fail to accept that we must extend the theory to the >>possibility that _all_ UFO sightings are radical misperceptions >>of one sort or another. And you replied: >You're damn right I'd fail to accept the thoroughly unverified >-- and unfalsifiable -- belief that "all UFO sightings are >radical misperceptions of one sort or another." UFO study has >long been crippled by wishful thinking, and wishful thinking is >all I see here. Words like yours ought to raise all sorts of red >flags to any outside observer, who should also wonder what >evidence you require to back up your allegation that any >sighting otherwise inexplicable is due to "radical >misperception." Is "radical misperception" really common in UFO >reporting -- or is it the last refuge of the debunker when all >else has failed? Radical misperception is itself an >extraordinary claim which needs to be as carefully verified as >its opposite. So Jerry, despite all the evidence in, say Hendry's book, despite all the evidence gathered by British ufologists about radical misperception you are still doubting that it exists? Just how much verification do you need? Who would you like it from? I can supply numerous examples from a PhD if you are worried about the 'credibility' angle. Even your old chum Jenny - although she is not as hard core as I am about it - believes that radical misperception lies behind numerous classic and non-classic UFO sightings. Do you therefore just forget about the UFO cases which have been resolved in this way? Do they not inform as yet unresolved cases? If not then why not? Or do you choose just to ignore them and move on to champion the next big 'unexplained' case until that too falls? And so on and so forth in the ufological wheel of case death and rebirth. I wrote: >>Have you any predications as to when this might be Jerry. The >>UFO literature of the last 50 odd years has been saying this. >>I'd be interested to hear your opinion of when the dust might >>settle and how near the dust is to settling at this moment in >>time. You replied: >And the UFO literature of the last 50 odd years has been right. >Prediction: sometime in the coming century, after biology has >taken its course and a new generation of scientists, >unencumbered by the bigotry of the generation that came before >it, looks at the UFO question with fresh eyes. A second >prediction: scientists looking -- unsuccessfully -- for ETI via >radio telescopes and the like will finally be forced to look for >evidence in UFO sightings. So, we've had to endure 50 years of persistent failure in the UFO prediction department and you nicely move the goal posts to 'sometime in this century'? Even Arthur Shuttlewood was a tad more precise. Unfortunately few of us will make it past the half way stage (if we're lucky) but I'll log your prediction accordingly. You wrote: >You've got the moral of the story turned on its head, my friend. >Apparently, this is a case you don't know much about. Mantell -- >and plenty of other witnesses in the air and on the ground -- >described a Skyhook pretty much exactly accurately. No radical >misperceptions whatever, I'm sorry to tell you. It was not >radical misperception that misled observers, it was their >ignorance of the Skyhook project. The Mantell case underscores >the point, known to all serious investigators, that most IFO >cases can be solved on the basis of witness descriptions alone >-- which means, of course, that most of the time witnesses are >right, even when their interpretations may be in error. Why are people 'your friend' when you are having difficulty discussing things with them Jerry, old bean? I beg to differ about the Mantell case - he radically misperceived a man made object and died for the stupidity of it. None of his or anyone else's descriptions on that fateful January day described a balloon. What they did describe was - and you should know because it's in your (excellent) books a 'parachute', an 'ice-cream cone', something of 'tremendous size' for a few. Not to mention the fact that Mantell attributed great speed to the object - something I believe Skyhook balloons were not generally known for. In retrospect - when it was _known_ what the object was it was easy to say, 'well, yeah, like Mantell was describing a balloon'. But at the time he was misperceiving a mundane object with descriptions which are not immediately those of a balloon. So, radical misperception once again. I'm sure you'll be able to wiggle out of this one Jerry though! Whilst we're still on the subject of radical misperception, the myth of the credible witness and the trained observer (trained as Rimmer man rightly says, to observe what they are trained to observe). Here's another couple of examples, not from the UFO field but just as - more in fact - relevant. Please bear with me..... The first concerns one of America's very own. General George Custer. According to the book 'Son Of the Morning Star', whilst waiting to attack an Indian camp Custer and his men saw something: 'slowly and majestically it continued to rise above the crest of the hill, first appearing as a small brilliant flaming globe of bright golden hue. As it ascended still higher it seemed to increase in size, to move more slowly, while its colours rapidly changed from one to the other exhibiting in turn the most beautiful combinations of prismatic tints.' They thought it was an alarm rocket fired by Sioux Indians - in fact it was Venus. As the biographer say -'How they could mistake a planet for a rocket is hard to understand... Nonetheless they did.' Trained Indian fighters, hardened outdoor men and Indian scouts all misperceiving Venus as a rocket? Radical misperception if ever there was such a thing. The last one is possible the best: In 1941, at the height of WW11, senior army and admiralty officers became convinced that the town of Yarmouth in Norfolk was a hot-bed of fifth columnists and German secret agents who, they believed, were signalling to the Germans each night by flares and Verey lights (flares). MI5 became involved and an officer was dispatched to investigate. The investigators configured an experiment to recreate all possible permutations of the lights seen. For this experiment they received the full co-operation of army personnel together with representatives from the regular police, special police, full time police auxiliaries, war reserve police and the auxiliary fire service. All highly trained and motivated observers. On the evening of March 3rd this array of experienced observers, today's 'credible witnesses', were stationed in various places around the Yarmouth harbour and told to report _exactly_ what they saw. Between 19.30 and 19.50 five sets of lights were displayed in various locations. These included white verey lights and tracer ammunition of four types of calibre and colour. The results of this experiment were abysmal. Across the five teams of professionals involved the average percentage of correct reports was a meagre 22.8%. The statistical breakdown makes for interesting reading when considering the testimony of any professional observers or 'credible witnesses'. For example not one of the observers judged the distance of the bofors gun correctly. Most of them believed it to be firing from the harbour at Yarmouth when in fact it was situated eight miles away at Lowestoft! One of the police sergeants who had reported fifth columnists sending off Verey lights was convinced that they were at it again in an attempt to disrupt the experiment. In fact he was witnessing the controlled and expected firing of the bofors gun. The white .303 machine gun tracer, which was fired from Yarmouth harbour, was variously and astonishingly reported as green and red tracer, a yellow very light, blue recognition lights or amber flares. It should be remembered that all the personnel in this experiment had been primed beforehand that lights of various types would be seen. They knew exactly what type of ammunition was being shot, at what time and from what locations yet they still _couldn't_ get it anywhere near correct!. So if high numbers of trained observers, credible witnesses or whatever can't identify the known and the expected under test conditions which forearmed them with all the facts why should we treat individuals or small numbers of witnesses reporting the anomalous as having seen what they say they have? You can argue against it Jerry, but it's futile. The 'myth of the credible observer' is just that. The application of what we know about witness perception and testimony has been used time and time again to solve UFO cases from the simple to the massively complex. I look forward to your reply. Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 09:05:40 -0300 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:46:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:27:46 -0400 >From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:35 -0300 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:21:24 -0700 >>>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> >>>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:41:30 -0800 >>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >>>>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>I, for one, would very much like to know what factual claims >>were made by Corso in the interview, that we now know to be >>true. >The factual claims were not necessarily of the type called >'claims' so much as simply discussing what he was doing, where, >and when, and the gadgets encountered along the way. There are >three hours of tape. Corso does the bulk of the talking. He >speaks about chips, and fiber optics, and some device which ran >on water, and a solid, infinitely plastic material (one which >may be completely deformed and return to its proper shape). You >would have to listen to the tapes to review all the subjects >mentioned. >>Did he claim he was a member of the NSC? >I don't honestly remember. I was highly engrossed in analyzing >the stress patterns, and only incidentally and tangentially >interested in what was being said. The tapes are clear. Again, >listen to them. >>Did he claim that he was head of the FTD branch under Trudeau >>and for which dates? >Yes. This I recall. He made mention of dates, and it was in the >'47 time frame, on in to the 50's, and perhaps beyond... again, >as I recall. Perhaps Ed Gehrman could best answer these >questions of content. >>Did he explain how he knew who the members of the control group >>were? >He mentions several congresscritters by name. >>Did he discuss seeing an alien body on July, 6, 1947, at Ft. >>Riley and how he knew the date and why there were no full time >>guards there and no mention of some way of cooling the body? >He did talk of several alien bodies, which he claimed to have >seen in transit on some date, which he mentions specifically; it >may well have been the date you cite. He said that he was the >duty officer that night and many other nights at Riley, and that >there was indeed security. At that point in the game, '47, I >highly suspect that there were indeed guards about. It was >immediately after WWII, cold war cranking up. He makes mention >that the bodies were awash in some liquid; he did not mention >refrigeration, as I recall, one way or the other. In another >discussion, he makes mention of the nature of the bodies, and >refers to them essentially as genetically engineered cyborgs, a >marriage of biological computer and more-or-less sentient biped, >without alimentary canal, nor ears. He talks of them being an >integral, engineered part of the craft's guidance system. >>Did he claim he was a colonel or a Lt. Colonel? Or was it all >>idle chitchat? >It was most certainly not idle chit-chat, and I don't recall >whether I ever heard the exact rank mentioned. Art Bell and John >Alexander referred to him, where they did, as "Colonel". Again, >it's all on the tapes, and everything said exhibited essentially >the same stress pattern-- along with a lot of things which are >verifiable, either externally or in context. >>Nobody says he lied about everything he ever said. Did he >>provide any facts about just how any area of new technology was >>benefitted by what he did: names, dates, companies? >There are discussions of fiber optics, micro electronics and >chips... let Ed comment on minutia of content. I can state that >at no time did I see a stress pattern which indicated deception. >I routinely saw higher stress (though not of a level nor of a >pattern indicating deception) in Art Bell's voice than in either >Corso's or Alexander's. I would categorize this (Bell's stress) >as the excitement upon confirmation of really astounding facts. >Mike Kemp I much appreciate Mike's input. However I am still very puzzled. There were no congresscritters in Corso's list of members of the Control Group which was exactly the list of MJ-12 members published in Tim Good's book, my books, etc. Corso claimed to be under Trudeau in the Pentagon FTD in 1961-1962 and his record bears this out so I don't understand the reference to 1947 for that. My comment about security at Ft. Riley relates to the fact that apparently the bodies did NOT have their own guard as would nuclear weapons, for example. The drivers don't just park the truck, go for dinner and a hot shower and bed and then come back in the morning. Assuming Corso was the Security officer, It is very difficult to imagine his breaking open a crate since there is no apparent reason for him to have a need to know for its content. For example, General Exon told me that when he was commander at WPAFB he did not have a need to know for everything at the base. I guess we need to know what Corso said. Is there a transcript? For example, I think he may well have believed he was an NSC member, even though the record shows he never was and never attended an NSC meeting. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 14:22:09 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:49:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 01:00:00 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Jenny Just to answer a few of your queries.... With all due respect you are sitting on the fence again. Am I correct when I write that you previously stated that although you posted the UFOIN message, it was not meant as a message from you personally. But are you not a part of the sceptic group UFOIN and did you not admit in a later reply that you agree with the message anyway? Also, you co-authored a sceptical book with members of UFOIN, entitled "The UFOs That Never Were", a title that speaks for itself and claims on its sleeve that the cases "have proved to be honest mistakes, fakes or false identifications." Your chapter on the Rendlesham case is titled "Rendle Shame Forest", which also speaks for itself. You ask if it's possible that the world's greatest UFO mystery requires nothing more to explain it than 'a lighthouse, a few rabbits and some stars and meteors' In the next sentence you write: 'Disturbing as it may seem, the answer has to be 'Yes'. You go on to write how you find it hard not to believe the lights in the sky seen by Halt were probably stars. You even credit Ian Ridpath with the foresight of seeing all this before any ufologist did. Admittedly you offer reasons why it is difficult to come to these conclusions, but the general presentation is in my opinion a debunking effort on the case. Because of my interest in the case I have been contacted by others in this field who take a similar stand on this. Now, I'm not criticising you for your opinions, but I am disappointed that you are now claiming that you are not sure about the lighthouse etc, when in the closing of your chapter you argue 'with confidence that the main focus of the events was a series of misconceptions of everyday things.' >How about sharing with the list (as I have freely shared with >this list without requiring them to buy my book) some of your >arguments that dispose of the lighthouse and that answer the >reasons why some people find it hard to not see this light as >having played a major role in this case? >Saying - my book will do such and such - is good PR. >Unfortunately it doesn't further the debate on this list. So how >about helping in that endeavour - since we are all simply trying >to get to the truth as Ufologists and it appears that you >believe you can help us to achieve that? With 3 months still to go before publication of my book I am at liberty not to discuss the contents. You should know better than to make this suggestion. Of course I will be happy to debate it after publication. With regards to the PR, I must remind you that it was you and James Easton who posted details of my book - I was only correcting a few errors. I am not ready to do any PR on the book at this early stage. Regarding the lighthouse theory, I promised Ian Ridpath that I would prove him wrong. I have a great deal of respect for Ian and I am sure that when he sees the evidence against his theory, that, like a gentleman, he will take the honourable stand and admit that he was wrong. so followers of this concept ought to bear this in mind. Jenny, I think you have jumped in too soon on the lighthouse theory and I think you should take a much closer look at the so-called evidence. However, the book is not about the lighthouse theory, it is about the case itself, the lighthouse theory was examined and investigated because it became an issue. Having stated that, I didn't write this book for ufologists, I wrote it for those who were directly involved. It their case, not ours. >I ask people to judge which best encompasses the word 'bragging'. >My suggestion that I have simply reported in my books what I >have found, shared my ideas on this case with readers and worked >towards a solution. And yours that - without telling us a single >concrete thing about the basis of your book - that you write >what you call 'the truth'? Actually, the book only refers to "the definitive account of the Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery", It was you who brought up the "truth thing" having read it on Amazon, but I cannot deny that I have written what I believe is the true story. >You have been working on your >Rendlesham book for three years - you tell us - and would not >even reveal its title let alone tell us any of the truth you >have apparently exposed! I apologise for my secrecy but all will soon be revealed, thank you for your interest. Greetings Georgina
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Carpenter-Gate - Hart From: Gary Hart geehart@frontiernet.net Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 10:20:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:51:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Hart >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:42:57 -0500 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@nokomis.com> >Subject: Re: Carpenter-Gate - Felder >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Have you been personally contacted by all 20 of these people? >Have they specifically stated to you that they feel "violated" >by the sale of their files? If so, please produce evidence to >that effect. If not, the above is your _opinion_ as to how they >_may_ feel. And again, I refer you to your post in which you >reported that no complaints had been filed against Carpenter >with the Missouri Board. This leads one to believe that these 20 >people don't feel as violated as you apparently would like to >see them feel. Ms. Felder, I have talked to many of the 20 and do know how they feel. They feel violated and this is putting it mildly. Betrayed, crushed, abused, ignored and stepped on are a few other terms that have been used. We together will take this case to the medical board when the preparation is done. Yes, I am sticking to the facts. The facts will be heard. Un-professionalism and unethical conduct have done more to harm ufology than anything else _I_ can think of. It now appears as if several databases of abduction and sightings information are tainted with unethically obtained or outright false information. This may have an effect on the credibility of our field for years to come. The Carpenter case, unfortunately, has not finished expanding and I am as shocked and disappointed as any of the rest of you out there. Let it be known that I'm not going to move against any other cases or people even knowing the above. My sense of duty is reflected mostly in the Carpenter case alone. Our discussion of the facts here must serve the purpose of generating a discussion that will hold researchers accountable for their actions - something that has happened little or not at all, previously. We must all judge and be just if no other process can do this and in this case, if MUFON's Codes of Ethics and guidelines for conduct will not protect us. Gary Hart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - McCoy From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 09:09:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 12:24:41 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - McCoy >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:53:23 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hello, all, John, Jerome. >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Persons with the appropriate professional background to make >>them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best >>sightings, just as one would expect. The Battelle report >>documented that long ago. That's why sightings such as, say, >>Tombaugh's and Hess's are still unaccounted for five decades >>later. Sightings by astronomers, pilots, and the like are those >>most likely to withstand the most comprehensive investigation >>and to remain unexplained. That's a fact, Andy, whether you like >>it or not -- not that there's any possibility of the former.. Clyde Tombaugh - one of my heroes they don't make'em like that any more. >Well no, Jerry, I'm afraid they don't. Allan Hendry has >demonstrated that pilots and law enforcement officers (typical >"reliable witness" types) are no better at distinguishing UFOs >from IFOs than other occupational groups that make no claim to >be "trained witnesses". The proportion of IFOs to all reports >made by pilots and air personnel was 75% (i.e. 75% of all >reports were subsequently identified) which was on the lower end >of the range, it was the same as the proportion for "skilled >trades", in which Hendry placed architects, musicians, >photographers, engineers, and quite possibly librarians. Worst >of all, with 94% of their reports turning out to be IFOs were >law enforcement officers. Yes, but what about the remaining 6%? >Hendry suggests that the reason why the latter proved so >ineffective in distinguishing IFOs from UFOs was that their >training made the more conscious of small details during quiet >night patrols. This raises an important point: yes there are >"trained observers", but they are usually trained to observe >something quite specific. Pilots are trained to observe objects >with the flight characteristics of an aeroplane. they are not >for instance trained to observe meteors, which explains why >quite a few "near miss" UFO encounters with planes turned out to >be meteors may tens of miles away. policemen are trained to >notice _anything_ out of the usual and report and act on it. >Which explains why they are prone to take particular notice of >scintillating stars and tend to go haring off across the >countryside after them. So being a trained observer _doesn't_ >mean you're better at spotting and reporting UFOs than Joe Soap. But, I'd like to say that being an amature astromoner who can tell Spica from Mira or by,simply the color, Jupiter from Saturn, and a,certified weather observer who set up two SAWRS stations by myself, I might add, (SAWRS=supplemental aviation reporting station) and a professional pilot of 23 years experience. Quite frankly sir,I am better than Joe Sixpack (US version of Joe Soap) at descering a UFO from Venus. >>>But to take it a step further _no_ witness who ever claims to >>>have seen a gen-u-ine flying craft which was not of terrestrial >>>origin has _ever_ been proven correct. Despite all the >>>sightings, not on one single occasion. But it is a _fact_ that >>>on _many_ occasions people who claim to have seen such a thing >>>have been proven wrong because of radical misperception. Yep, the shiny, silver, metallic, disk that I and four other people saw was, ah, "swamp gas". as for Terrestrial Orgins, unless you catch the crew outside relieving themselves due to the long trip from Trafalmadore, or having to change a fouled plug in # 18 rear cylinder, you can't prove a thing. (I beleive that somthing like this happened to Zamora in his famous sighting - It very well could have been a little somthing that wandered off range at White Sands.) >>According to you. In fact, I have long suspected that when the >>dust settles, future historians of science will wonder why the >>UFO question was not settled -- in the affirmative -- no later >>than the Nash-Fortenberry sighting (in 1952, for those of you >>with hazy memories). Ok, I note that I have come late to this debate, and I am no ah, expert, or researcher, on UFO phenomona, of course, just an observer if you will, of things in the sky. There is _something_ that cannot be explained by mundane processes. I cannot tell you that what I saw was not of this earth, but certainly the Technology was, I'd like to think it really was "one of ours" and we could sleep at night at the height cold war in the 60's. Note: this occurred in Eastern Oregon in 1966. the first one to spot this thing was my father who had a hunter's eye for movement, also he could tell Orion from the Ursa Major, et. al. Gee, why not report it to the Authorities? Ridicule and denial, of course, I,know of people who lost their jobs because they came forward to tell their stories, of what they saw. Or chose to keep their mouths shut. Smart move..... Due to the fact that I made a career change, am not flying professionally now I can comment on this. However to those brave souls who say: "I saw something strange over the woodshed last night." or, "What was that that just passed no. 3 engine and,the fusleage?" and report it.I applaud them. I know of three former ATC, types who actually saw a bright, shiny disc while working a tower in the eastern washington area - I won't be more specific - It did; "360 dergee turn around the Tower, then changed to a red orange color and departed striaght up." One of the three was an old timer that, went into ATC right out of the Army Air Corps, this was in the mid 70's just before he retired. I don't think it what he decribed was Venus. But none of them reported it, or they would have been toast carreer wise. I personally have experienced much weirdness in my years as a pilot, and observer of things in the sky. My wife and I have seen,a bright, slow-moving shimmering light from the deck of our old place in Port Orford (yes, same Orford) Oregon. I wasn't Venus or even Sirius because I knew where they were in realtion to this thing. What it was I have no Idea, and I also know that it wasn' supposed to be there, setting in the west, faster than the rest of the stars, but to the causual observer, not so fast that you would notice it without watching. It wasn't there the next night by,the way. Now I ask, why report it? I can't -prove- it,that's why. I did report a Meteor back last march by the way, just for the documentationof it. Yes, People do make mistakes in what they see, they can rationalize all they want too, that I beleive is a factor also, to deny what you saw was nothing more than a weather balloon, a U-2 or Venus or the Cape Blanco light house. <snip> >Are you for once going to say what you think may have >caused a _real_ UFO report, or are we to be treated to another >exhibition-quality demonstration of fence-sitting? >-- >John Rimmer >Magonia Magazine >www.magonia.demon.co.uk Being one who acutally "rode line" in a jeep - in western terms a line rider is one who has to be one that keeps the fence in good shape, so that the critters on either side don't get together (say Angus Bull + Holstien cow = Very angy Dairy Farmer.) This is where I am coming from: think both of you have a point. I am of the opinion that nothing will be resolved until we actually get a landing on the Whitehouse Lawn. Of course, it could be they open the hatch, take one look at Bush or Gore and Promptly depart without so much as a word. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 08:54:20 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 17:45:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:35 -0300 >To: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Stan, I'll try to answer these questions as best as I can. >I, for one, would very much like to know what factual claims >were made by Corso in the interview, that we now know to be >true. I have only listened to the interview twice and do not have a transcript but in general he repeated much of the information in his book. >Did he claim he was a member of the NSC? He never claimed, as far as I can tell, that he was a member of the NSC, only a military adviser to the NSC, a working member of the staff. >Did he claim that he was head of the FTD branch under Trudeau >and for which dates? He indicated that he worked under Trudeau at the FTB but I don't recall if he claimed he was the "head". >Did he explain how he knew who the members of the control group >were? No he did not talk about how he knew who the members were. >Did he discuss seeing an alien body on July, 6, 1947, at Ft. >Riley and how he knew the date and why there were no full time >guards there and no mention of some way of cooling the body? Yes he did mention the alien body and he said it was floating in a gel or liquid of some kind. It was being guarded by base personnel and he was the OD. He is very clear about seeing the body. >Did he claim he was a colonel or a Lt. Colonel? Or was it all >idle chitchat? He never mentioned his rank as far as I recall but he was addressed as Col. Corso by both Bell and Alexander. >Nobody says he lied about everything he ever said. Did he >provide any facts about just how any area of new technology was >benefitted by what he did: names, dates, companies? No he did not give any specific information; no more than was contained in his book. He gave the listener the strong impression that he was the person who contacted the companies, and that the transfers did occur. He did not do much elaboration, over and above what he revealed in his book, but one interesting thing he said is that he was mistaken about the shooting of the alien that was described in his book and he did mention that the book contained some mistakes. As I recall, the information on the tapes is the same as the information in 'The Day After Roswell', only very abbreviated, much less detail. As far as I can tell, Col. Corso never lied at all, but he may have been mistaken about some things,as he has admitted.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:44:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 17:51:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - Hart >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Evil is the lack of empathy. This lady's got >lots and lots of empathy. >Jim Mortellaro ==============================> Jim, Here is the note Debra C. sent me to announce the letter posted to the mail list several days ago. Please note the reference to the 140 nutcases. Seems Debra is including the 2/3 of the list persons who don't yet know their files were sold in deeming them all nutcases. This is, in your words, "lots of empathy"? By the way, I don't see that you answered my posted questions to you. Wonder why not... For Mrs. C.: Facts are not slander. Ask any lawyer. There is also a difference between questions of impropriety (behavior) and a character attack. Here again, ask a lawyer, not John for he can't tell the difference. ~Gary Hart Thu Aug 17 10:05:15 2000 Received: from Debra88207@aol.com by imo-r13.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.12.) id 3.5a.989554b (4050) for <geehart@frontiernet.net>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:05:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:05:10 EDT Subject: John Carpenter To: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> The following is a message which I forwarded to MUFON, which includes both their new director, and a man I dearly love and have the greatest respect for, Mr. Walt Andrus. I would suggest that you respond to ME in the future, Mr. Hart. This is affecting my husband's health, and if John's already deteriorating health should suffer any further, I am holding you, Katherine Hubbell, any of the so-called "140" totally responsible. This is not a threat, Mr. Hart. It is a promise which is being forwarded to the attorneys who represent us and have completely dismissed a purported lawsuit against John by some 140, and I lose this term very broadly, "nutcases." Return-path: <Debra88207@aol.com> From: Debra88207@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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 19:36:33 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 14:22:09 +0100 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 01:00:00 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Jenny >Just to answer a few of your queries.... >With all due respect you are sitting on the fence again. Hi, Ah - so if someone says this is definitely the lighthouse. They are wrong. If someone says, this is definitely anything you cont like. Not that we know what you do believe because you wont actually tell us. But still - they are wrong. If someone says - well yes, there are serious issues of evidential fact here and we do have to consider the apparently disturbing role played by the lighthouse, but we need also to consider the problems of that theory - they are wrong. What exactly would be 'right'? To agree telepathically with whatever it is that you think really happened - since you cont seem very keen to tell us even vaguely what that is. >Am I correct when I write that you previously stated that >although you posted the UFOIN message, it was not meant >as a message from you personally. But are you not a part >of the sceptic group UFOIN and did you not admit in a >later reply that you agree with the message anyway? UFOIN has never issued a statement about Rendlesham - so what's all this got to do with the price of fish? That message was on crop circles and what I said about it stands. I'll debate crop circles with you any day. But we are here talking (or trying to talk) about the facts of the Rendlesham Forest case. As for UFOIN being 'a sceptics group' it is no such thing. We cont even ask anybody who wants to participate what they think UFOs are and frankly I cont know the views of some of them. The only criteria is that they are objective and experienced investigators keen to find the truth about cases. They can believe UFOs are pink blancmanges from the planet jello as far as I am concerned. Knowing Andy maybe secretly he does. So drop this pretence that UFOIN are 'sceptics' because that's simply untrue. UFOIN isn't even a group and its team have a wide range of personal opinions and express them without restriction. >Also, you co-authored a sceptical book with members of UFOIN, >entitled "The UFOs That Never Were", a title that speaks for itself >and claims on its sleeve that the cases "have proved to be honest >mistakes, fakes or false identifications." If you have read this book then you will know it is a case book of mostly (but not entirely) solved cases. Indeed I quote from the cover blurb itself: 'Attitudes towards Ufology need not only be black and white, believer or sceptic: there is another way as this ground breaking book makes clear,' So - as you can see - our premise is not an outright sceptical one but a stance that we should discuss openly solved cases or cases that appear less solid than they once were - and see what they teach us for the future. If you want to see that as some sort of horrible debunking that's your privilege but I regard it as common sense. A perception on Ufology worth offering. After all its one of over 30 UFO books I have written. So its hardly as if all I have ever done is shoot down the UFO mystery - even if you read this book as doing that. Or how about the first page of our text that says: 'What needs to be stressed immediately is that this is not a book that attempts to disprove the existence of UFOs. All three of its authors are long-term, dedicated ufologists who on some level do believe there are unsolved cases that may offer new knowledge. In that sense we believe in UFOs and are not pretending that all cases can be wished away. ' We further state early on 'As you will see the term 'solved' can be a relative one. In certain cases we doubt any reasonable minded person will disagree with our verdict. The evidence appears overwhelming. At other times, even the three authors are not wholly of one mind about the status of the incident; although we agreed to include only examples where we feel the balance of probability is that no 'real UFO' was involved....In Ufology you have to balance pros and cons, and weigh probabilities when making a judgement call about a case. This is what we do here, but we are happy to debate the evidence in a friendly, civilised fashion with anyone and fully appreciate the premise that we can be wrong. The only request we make in return is that our critics admit to the same human failing.' Now I think this list can decide for themselves if this position - which reflects the book as it is - not as how you try to tell them that it is - portrays the outrageously debunking book you kid them into believing. >Your chapter on the Rendlesham case is titled "Rendle Shame >Forest", which also speaks for itself. Oh, does it? So how come you fail to read the very first page of that chapter which explains the title with the questioning stance adopted and notes that some people say the case is a classic of Ufology and yet Ian Ridpath says it is an embarrassment to the subject. An obvious conflict - so - I ask - who is right? The 'shame' is clearly implicit here. Because, of course, nobody has been more active in promoting this case over the years than I have. So if I was really saying there is shame to be heaped upon Ufology who would deserve a fair bit of it on that premise? The title is ironic. >You ask if it's possible >that the world's greatest UFO mystery requires nothing more to >explain it than 'a lighthouse, a few rabbits and some stars and >meteors' In the next sentence you write: 'Disturbing as it may >seem, the answer has to be 'Yes'. And indeed yes - it is _possible_ - as I say. But saying something is possible and saying something is a cast iron fact are different things in my dictionary. Are they not in yours? Because you appear to have an unnerving tenancy to read one thing as if it means the other. >You go on to write how you >find it hard not to believe the lights in the sky seen by Halt >were probably stars. I do not in any way say all the lights Halt saw were stars. I say 'it is hard to regard these things in the northern sky that were visible for several hours as anything but stars' - which is much more specific. And I set out why such lights (the ones that stayed in the same part of the sky for hours and faded away as the sun rose after dawn) (a rather big clue most experienced UFO investigators will spot as indicating stellar phenomena) surely have to be considered likely to have an astronomical explanation. But again the book sets out the reasoning behind this argument. Stars (which are very bright against a dark sky) fade when the sky lightens because the ambient level of light swallows them. Any object - like a lit aircraft or UFO - would be far more likely to become more visible as the ambient light improved. I suspect most investigators on this List have investigated cases where long duration sightings of this sort proved to be stars or planets. I know I have followed up quite a few like this. >You even credit Ian Ridpath with the >foresight of seeing all this before any ufologist did. As he did. So this was proper. >Admittedly you offer reasons why it is difficult to come to >these conclusions, but the general presentation is in my opinion >a debunking effort on the case. Well you are entitled to your opinion but I wouldn't trust your judgement on what constitutes 'debunking' since your definition appears to include whatever you cont like / or things written by me. To debunk is widely regarded as a derogatory form of scepticism - implying blindly shooting down a case without recourse to the evidence. That's patently not what I am doing. As nobody can take account of mysterious evidence you wont tell us about. So I based it on the evidence we do know and fairly evaluated it. That may be sceptical (although I would call it objectivity). But if you think otherwise - how and why? >Now, I'm not criticising you for your opinions, but I am >disappointed that you are now claiming that you are not sure >about the lighthouse etc, when in the closing of your chapter >you argue 'with confidence that the main focus of the events was >a series of misconceptions of everyday things.' Precisely 'the main focus' (i.e. not all parts of it as some aspects of the case are still arguable like I keep on saying) and 'a series of...things' - i.e. not simply the lighthouse as you keep alleging that I say in your posts. My chapter in the book takes precisely the line I have adopted on this list. One line from you cannot compensate for pages of discussion of the pros and cons of the solution to this case which the book offers. People really have to read it to judge the arguments objectively and not leap in with preconceived opinions. I certainly did not have such opinions because I was long convinced the lighthouse was not an issue in this case. Now I am much less sure. But I am not absolutely convinced. That's the truth of what I think and I have come to that conclusion by way of the unfolding evidence. And the book sets out precisely why - but without hiding the problems we still have in accepting this as any sort of definitive answer. If you have read the book you have to know that. I'm really not sure what you wanted me to do - write a dishonest book just so you would not be disappointed? I wrote what I found and the chapter contains nothing different from what I have said on this list in recent days. >With 3 months still to go before publication of my book I am at >liberty not to discuss the contents. You should know better than >to make this suggestion. Of course I will be happy to debate it >after publication. I expected as much. But I certainly would not have a problem generally discussing a case with this list even if I was writing a new book . However, I guess I regard myself as a Ufologist who happens to write books and so feel an obligation not to hold things back from colleagues so as to make money. Nobody is asking you to preview your book in depth just to set out why you are so adamant the lighthouse is dead and buried. Since that's the stance you are so vociferously taking. >With regards to the PR, I must remind you >that it was you and James Easton who posted details of my book - >I was only correcting a few errors. I am not ready to do any PR >on the book at this early stage. Nobody's asking you to do PR on the book. We are asking (seemingly forlornly) for you to offer any facts or general swathes of reasoning (in fact _anything_) to counter the perfectly reasonable view some people have expressed about the role of the lighthouse. A viewpoint they have adopted by an honest assessment of the evidence. If you wont tell us one thing to counter this then what was the point in your disputing this issue? I could say - in the year 2003 I will publish a book that will utterly demonstrate that UFOs are giant pancakes. People will say - er, on what grounds? And I could say - wait and read my book. I am not prepared to defend that argument until then. But I wouldn't expect anybody to take me the least bit seriously - and rightly so. >Regarding the lighthouse theory, I promised Ian Ridpath that I >would prove him wrong. I have a great deal of respect for Ian >and I am sure that when he sees the evidence against his theory, >that, like a gentleman, he will take the honourable stand and >admit that he was wrong. I am sure Ian is listening. But I trust he - like me - is not unduly optimistic over this devastating new evidence that will prove wrong so much conflicting testimony. But then who knows. I certainly will look at it with an open mind as I always have with this case. After all even if - for example - you have copies of the photos supposedly taken in the forest, all this will establish is that certain sightings were not caused by the lighthouse. As, of course, we know they were not. Like I said before Gordon Levett did not see the lighthouse at Sudbourne. Nor did several other witnesses. The lighthouse is not the explanation for all this case even in the most optimistic view of the sceptics. I am curious to know how you can categorically demonstrate - as I believe you feel that you can - that the lighthouse was uninvolved in this case. Which has to mean you can explain why the witnesses never mentioned it. Why they lied on their official statements saying it fooled them. Where the lighthouse was when they were looking right at it and seeing instead a UFO. and so on. If nothing else can you not confirm that you are sure you can do all this, because its what your stance requires you to be able to do. >so followers of this concept ought to >bear this in mind. Jenny, I think you have jumped in too soon on >the lighthouse theory and I think you should take a much closer >look at the so-called evidence. You mean the so called evidence you wont talk about? I will go and fetch my scrying bowl. Because the evidence as on offer right now clearly does support the possibility as a very serious contender. And if it doesn't - at least give us some clue as to why not. >>I ask people to judge which best encompasses the word 'bragging'. >>My suggestion that I have simply reported in my books what I >>have found, shared my ideas on this case with readers and worked >>towards a solution. And yours that - without telling us a single >>concrete thing about the basis of your book - that you write >>what you call 'the truth'? >Actually, the book only refers to "the definitive account of the >Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery", It was you who brought up the >"truth thing" having read it on Amazon, but I cannot deny that I >have written what I believe is the true story. And I quote from your last message - Georgina - >With regards to "the first to tell the full story", well, it >certainly is the first time the 'true' story has been told and >when you read the book you will see this for yourself. Call me confused, but cont you here raise the truth thing as being what your book will provide? for 'the first time' and 'the true story' pretty well says what you claim you aren't claiming! Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 14:22:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:14:00 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 09:09:02 -0700 <snip> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Persons with the appropriate professional background to make >>>them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best >>>sightings, just as one would expect. The Battelle report >>>documented that long ago. That's why sightings such as, say, >>>Tombaugh's and Hess's are still unaccounted for five decades >>>later. Sightings by astronomers, pilots, and the like are those >>>most likely to withstand the most comprehensive investigation >>>and to remain unexplained. That's a fact, Andy, whether you like >>>it or not -- not that there's any possibility of the former.. >Clyde Tombaugh - one of my heroes they don't make'em like that >any more. GT, Ah, those were truly the good old days! People like Tombaugh, Lowell and Hubble literally grew up with their eyes glued to an eyepiece. For the most part, they froze their butts off, too. It gets cold atop a desert mountain at night, you know. I doubt if today's latest generation of astronomers would qualify as any more trained an observer than a good amateur in the field. I know I was surprised to learn as long as ten or fifteen years ago, while touring the McDonald Observatory in West Texas, that none of the pros any longer conduct direct observations of the heavens from the far end of a mirror. It's all done by computerization now, and much of it is not even in the visible spectrum. They sit in cozy little rooms in front of computer screens. The radio astronomers can work during the day -- and do -- just like the rest of us. No nighttime expertise there. Like every other science, astronomy and astronomers is/are highly specialized nowadays. So much for the romance of the Space Age. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:44:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:17:12 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 18:21:33 -0700 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:53:23 +0100 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Just some minor points: >1) On the higher 94% IFO rates for policemen, this may actually >work in their favor. Its almost a movie clich for an English >policeman to be scribbling notes into his little notebook at >some crime scene, while the direct witnesses are more likely >losing their heads. ( I suspect movie fans here would be >disappointed if this failed to occur. ) >If a good cop takes note of many details, great and small, this >would inevitably lead to a higher rate of identification, since >most well investigated UFO reports do turn out to be mundane. >I would offer this as an indication that the policeman was >indeed a better witness, not just average or poorer. A good >command of the details must necessarily imply a better witness! >2) As for airline pilots and crew, I cannot offer such a good >argument, just my personal opinion based on pilots I have met, a >rather no-nonsense lot, and what I have heard of them in >general. >When it comes to in-flight sightings, I would take the testimony >of any airline pilot over some passenger on the very same >plane... perhaps at a two to one ratio. Throw in the copilot, >others in the crew, and I would call that pretty darned good >credibility. I'm not arguing that airline pilots of policemen in Britain or in America (who are the ones Hendry was actually talking about) are not doing a good job of observing. I'm just saying that they type of pbservation they are trained to do in not necessarily the type of observation that is needed for UFO reports. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Request for Information - And Help From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:15:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help Dear List Members and EBK, In the past three plus years I have tried to unfurl the mystery around memories lasting more than 55 of my 57 years. Doing so has been much easier than I imagined and at the same time, much more difficult. It was easy because the writing down of much of what I recalled appeared to bring on memories which turned out to be as detailed and unforgettable as those which I retained all these years. And these memories were very significant, which is to say they were often an important link in the chain of events which by their re-cognition, made the rest mean more than had these memories not been retrieved. It was more difficult because, along the road of discovery there was the depressions and increased pain and suffering. Less, perhaps than I imagine regressions would have produced, but more than I ever expected. And last, because along the way, I met a very small but statistically significant number of folks who turned out to be mistaken about themselves, and caused even more pain than had I not met them. Which is to say that in this business of abduction and UFO research, there are a few liars, a few mean spirited and a few very nasty people that we must stay away from at all costs. There is so much more that I have not a clue as to the source or relevance to the abduction or witnessing phenomena. Many memories are there and appear to be related, but I am not able to get the connection. I shall from time to time, ask some of you abductees (those who are still speaking with me) and researchers (those who are still speaking with me) to look into for me. (sighs) I suppose the number has been significantly reduced of late. However the quality remaining is pretty high class stuff, I am proud to admit. Some of the events in my life appear to have no simple explanation of which I am aware. Some are just bizarre in extremis. Many have been covered in research material, books and papers but the connection to the abduction experience is not to my satisfaction. Several examples: Surrounding lights simply wink out when the abductee walks or drives by. Usually whilst in a motor vehicle. And independent of the driver or passengers who may or may not be there other than me. And with witnesses to the phenom. Sometimes in proximity to an event but often not. And occurring many to many times to simply be a statistical coincidence. Most interesting of all, is the apparent fact that 99% of these lights are electro-optically controlled, not swithced on by a contact device, but switched on by light (or the lack of it). Almost always "hearing" a meteor. Digital devices (timing circuits) cannot function around me. Out of the dozen or so TV's which I have owned since vacuum tubes went to Russia to stay, only one kept time and not accurately. Most were shipped to the manufacturer who opined that nothing at all was wrong. Most automobiles today operate on microcomputers, custome chips which keep the car going, lights, engine, even the windshield wipers and the HVAC systems. Not mine. Not the Aurora or the VR-6 VW or that wonderful 1993 Mustang 5L. That one still gives trouble after ten years and only 12,000 miles. The Taurus can't keep itself in automatic driver's side roll down electric window chips. I could go on. Stars which move within three to five degrees of arc, about magnitude 4+, and move erratically, zigzagging, starting and stopping. Witnesses. All of these events witnessed. And by non believers who have given attributes which could not possibly restrain even Fill Class from hysterical fits of laughing. Questions are: Anyone else out there with similar events and at least a dollop of mundane explanation proven out to be true? Anyone out there done any research on these various phenomena? Last, I know of only one person (bless her) who is looking into the Post Traumatic Abduction Syndrome as being real to many abductees. The physical pain many of us suffer are terrible. Even mood altering drugs don't help :~). Is anyone else looking into this? We need help in attempting to explain these various events which are quite real. We need to find the cause(s). I know I do. And I ain't got the Mott's to do it. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:49:23 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:20:05 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:12:59 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:49:24 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>It seems to me that the explanation you and your friends are >>proposing is itself a radical one which -- as you alone are >>honest enough to acknowledge -- begs many questions. Really, if >>I were trying to dispose of Rendlesham (though in fact I have no >>stake whatever in the outcome), I would charge the witnesses >>with lying and be done with it. Far easier to do that, which at >>least is consistent with our experience of ourselves, our fellow >>human beings, and our respective failings, than to propose >>fanciful, unfalsifiable theories about mistaken perceptions >>which could not occur in ordinary consciousness. The skeptics >>are seeking to substitute one extraordinary hypothesis for >>another, and I, for one, remain skeptical. And properly so. >>Jerry Clark >Seems to me another form of "pelicanization" of ufology. Read >Prosaic Explanation, the Failure of UFO Skepticism at: >brumac.8k.com Bruce, have you ever been to Rendlesham? Have you investigated this case first hand? Have you spoken to all the principlal witnesses? I only ask because I want to know. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 20 Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:21:29 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:26:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out - >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:44:25 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: Mrs. Carpenter/Mortellaro Speak Out >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: The Current Mrs. Carpenter Speaks Out >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Evil is the lack of empathy. This lady's got >>lots and lots of empathy. >>Jim Mortellaro >==============================> >Jim, >Here is the note Debra C. sent me to announce the letter posted >to the mail list several days ago. Please note the reference to >the 140 nutcases. Seems Debra is including the 2/3 of the list >persons who don't yet know their files were sold in deeming >them all nutcases. This is, in your words, "lots of empathy"? Dear Gary, Listers and EBK, I have recently written to John Carpenter, my own attorneys and to EBK, saying that I have decided to turn over any and all materials which I have in my possession which relate to this case, directly to J. Carpenter and to MUFON. I shall no longer share with UpDates, that which I had or will have, in terms of knowledge and information. There are good reasons for this. The first among these is that anything I do or say will not support Carpenter or your side of this, as it will be denied, ranted and/or flamed. And by gosh, that is exactly what _I_ was doing on this list. It's the thing I hate the most and it's the thing I was doing myself. I can see how easy it is to get lost in anger and emotion on issues such as this, Gary. I have made my apologies to those I feel should get them. I now apologize to you for coming out with statements which were not also supported by facts and proof. That was churlish and ill conceived and I am sorry. Those who need the type of information I have uncovered will get it. Both sides. However _thus far_ the information is for eyes only, Carpenter and MUFON. >By the way, I don't see that you answered my posted questions >to you. Wonder why not... >For Mrs. C.: Facts are not slander. Ask any lawyer. There is >also a difference between questions of impropriety (behavior) >and a character attack. Here again, ask a lawyer, not John for >he can't tell the difference. I know nothing of the kind. But I promise if I learn that such is true, I shall admit it. People who have bothered to read my posts, at least the ones' not having to do with Grippled Aliens invading Canal Street or the like, understand that I have no problems with admitting to being a jerk, or at the least, being wrong. "Sometimes a man must be alone, and this is no place to hide." Any information, Gary, which I have and which applies to you, you will receive _off_ list. This shall be so unless I believe the List should share it. But frankly, so far, there has been little comment by people whom I supposed would come out and say something. I am not going to volunteer that which cost me time and money to obtain. Because the truth of it is that in revealing this on List I am losing reputation. Not for squealing but for the abuse which we all take, who decide to take a side on any issue of importance. With all respect, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 X-PPAC Update - August 20, 2000 From: Stephen G. Bassett <ExPPAC@aol.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 04:39:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:46:38 -0400 Subject: X-PPAC Update - August 20, 2000 X-PPAC Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee _______________ X-PPAC Update - August 20, 2000 Bay Area UFO Expo - August 26, 27 The founder of X-PPAC, Stephen Bassett, will speak at the Bay Area UFO Expo on August 26 in San Jose. [www.bayareaufoexpo.com] This year's event has the potential to be the largest convention of its type ever held in the U.S. (aside from the 1997 UFO Exposition held in Roswell, New Mexico. The power of questions In a receiving line on July 28, MUFON State Section Director Charles A. Huffer asked a question of candidate George W. Bush relating to the UFO question. It took place on camera. Within hours it was tearing through the Internet. There was some confusion, as to be expected. In a note sent to Paradigm Research Group, Charles A. Huffer clarified the encounter excerpted here: Huffer: Half the public believes that they are real. Would you finally tell us what the hell is going on? Bush: Sure, I will. Huffer: (Gesturing toward Cheney) This man knows. He was Secretary of Defense. Bush: And was a great one. Later Huffer encountered Bush again in the hall. Bush recognized Huffer and, as recalled approximately by Huffer, unsolicited said: Bush: It will be the first thing he (pointing to Cheney) will do. He'll get right on it. Huffer: Will, will you really? Bush: Yes Sir. One question slipped into a receiving line creates a minor furor. On January 26, X-PPAC kicked off "Campaign 2000 - Get Out the Questions." [www.x-ppac.org/Get_out_the_questions.html] Crafted questions to be downloaded an asked at campaign forums of national candidates. Since that time, there have been questions, but more are needed - particularly of the presidential candidates. The experience of Charles Huffer makes it clear just how powerful a question can be. There's a first amendment, they have to campaign, we get to ask them anything we want - what could be simpler. A half dozen more questions asked of Bush and Gore on camera could flip media switches nationwide. There is still time. Questions are also located at other websites, including [www.caus.org and www.enterprisemission.com]. Media Schedule (Bassett) UFO Magazine: In the upcoming Oct/Nov issue will begin a political column titled "UFOs Over Washington: The Politics of Disclosure." AlienZoo: Weekly column every Wednesday on the "Politics of UFOs" Bay Area UFO Expo: 5 pm PST, Saturday, August 26. Netcast at [www.UFOCommunity.com] Nightsearch w/ Janet Russell: 10 pm EST, Wednesday, November 8. Broadcast on KRVL, 94.3 FM, Tucson. Netcast at: [www.nightsearch.net/indexmain.html] Destination Space: Politics of UFOs Internet chat at 9 pm EST on the first Sunday of the month at [www.destinationspace.net] Larry Bryant MUFON and CAUS member, Larry Bryant, will appear in the Circuit Court of Alexandria at 520 King Street at 10 am or soonest on August 23 in regards to case no: CH000691 filed against Virginia Governor James Gilmore, III on behalf of Larry Bryant, Gretchen Condon and Evelyn Goodwin. The case seeks a writ of mandamus in regards to the abduction issue as it affects citizens of the state of Virginia. Notably, there has been considerable media attention to this recent round of legal actions by Larry. This is of note as Alexandria, VA sits across the Potomac River from the nation's capitol. X-PPAC updates From this point forward X-PPAC Updates will be going out with greater frequency as a number of various initiatives begin to take shape. _______________________________________________ Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee URL: www.x-ppac.org E-mail: exppac@aol.com Phone: 301-564-1820 Fax: 301-564-4066 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 ***************************************************************** Spread the word about X-PPAC & the politics of disclosure. Contribute online at: www.x-ppac.org or mail to: 4938 Hampden Lane,161 Bethesda, MD 20814 ***************************************************************** "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish, if you are willing to give away the credit. *****************************************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:43:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:48:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 08:54:20 -0800 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:14:35 -0300 >>To: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Stan, >I'll try to answer these questions as best as I can. Ed, List, Pardon my ignorance, but don't we need an individual baseline specifically calibrated to Col. Corso's voice "stress" (or lack thereof) before we conclusively compare it to a general or universal baseline in any effort to electronically post-determine whether he's telling the truth or not? Without that, how do we know he wasn't just an excellent raconteur, which is not necessarily the same thing as a bald-faced liar? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think ordinary polygraph exams are calibrated this way. That is, the examinee is asked a question to which he has to "lie," which serves as a baseline or register for his or her particular anxiety/stress level, compared against obvious confirmations of fact, such as the person's name and birth date. Without an individualized calibration, this voice stress analysis stuff seems about on a scientific par with Reagan's voodoo economics. He wasn't lying per se -- he just didn't know any better. Not that I would ever accuse Mr. Corso of exaggeration, of course. But what next to bolster this blatant baloney? Reverse speech analysis? Fact of the matter is, we've got his demonstratively bogus book. And nothing could be more damaging or damning. Don't you just love coincidences? Corso just happens to be on duty in Kansas in July, 1947, when the alien bodies pass through his area -- never mind that virtually every other "eyewitness" account has always maintained that the bodies were _flown_, not trucked, out of Roswell. And some 20 years later, Corso just happens to be in position to have his 1947 "experience" confirmed. Right. I've only got one question: Do you have any large bridges in your back yard? If not, I've got a couple that I think I might be able to interest you in. The larger of the two is based on the same honeycomb technology employed in the original Roswell crashed flying saucer -- although I'll leave it up to you to determine which one. Keep in mind, though, that the bridge _could_ collapse at any moment. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:34:11 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:50:46 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:55:11 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Roy wrote: >Are you telling us, that as far as you are concerned Rendlesham >is a closed case? Roy, We can certainly reach some factual conclusions. After discovery of those fundamental, original witness statements, we can say for sure that the following were perceived to be 'unusual' and the inaugural foundation of our Rendlesham forest 'UFO' case. Taken from those testimonies: Airman First Class John Burroughs - On the night of 25-26 Dec at around 0300 while on patrol down at east gate myself and my partner saw lights coming from the woods due east of the gate. The lights were red and blue the red one above the blue one and they were flashing on and off. [End] Airman Edward N. Cabansag - On 26 Dec 80, SSgt Penniston and I were on Security #6 at Woodbridge Base. I was the member. We were patrolling Delta NAPA when we received a call over the radio. It stated that Police #4 had seen some strange lights out past the East Gate and we were to respond. SSgt Penniston and I left Delta NAPA, heading for the East Gate code two. When we got there, SSgt Steffans and A1C Burroughs were on patrol. They told us they had seen some funny lights out in the woods. We notified CSC and we asked permission to investigate further. They gave us the go-ahead. We left our weapons with SSgt Steffans who remained at the gate. Thus the three of us went out to investigate. We stopped the Security Police vehicle about 100 meters from the gate. Due to the terrain we had to go on by foot. We kept in constant contact with CSC. While we walked, each one of us could see the lights. Blue, red, white and yellow. The beacon light turned out to be the yellow light. [End] Staff-Sergeant Jim Penniston - Received dispatch from CSC to rendezvous with Police 4 A1C Burroughs and Police 5 SSgt Steffans at east gate Woodbridge. Upon arriving at east gate directly to the east about 1.5 miles in a large wooded area. A large yellow glowing light was emitting above the trees (refer diagram). In the center of the lighted area directly in the center ground level, there was a red light blinking on and off 5 to 10 second intervals. And a blue light that was for the most part steady. [End] This confirms that initial concerns were primarily what was responsible for those red and blue lights. As I have highlighted in previous articles, these lights must have been unrelated to Orford Ness lighthouse. The lighthouse beacon was not visible from 'east gate' and whatever the source of those red and blue lights, it was seemingly located much closer, appearing to be in the forest, at the end of that long, straight, east gate road. We know, from the participants testimonies, how they then ventured into the forest in search of the lights' origin. We also now understand that it's documented in their statements and significantly confirmed in two other accounts of proceedings, Chandler and Buran's - who were monitoring events - that Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston could never locate the source. Like that proverbial pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, it's recorded how those lights were always further away than first thought, perhaps understandable due to the dense forest terrain. Having lost sight of their objective, it was then that the lighthouse beacon, now visible through the trees, was noticed and pursued in search of an explanation. As evidenced: Airman First Class John Burroughs - We got up to a fence that separated the trees from the open field and you could see the lights down by a farmers house. We climbed over the fence and started heading towards the red and blue lights and they just disappeared. Once we reached the farmer's house we could see a beacon going around so we went towards it. We followed it for about 2 miles before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse. [End] Airman Edward N. Cabansag - As we entered the forest, the blue and red lights were not visible anymore. Only the beacon light was still blinking. We figured the lights were coming from past the forest, since nothing was visible as we passed through the woody forest. We could see a glowing near the beacon light, but as we got closer we found it to be a lit-up farmhouse. After we had passed through the forest, we thought it had to be an aircraft accident. So did CSC as well. But we ran and walked a good 2 miles past our vehicle, until we got to a vantage point where we could determine that what we were chasing was only a beacon light off in the distance. Our route through the forest and field was a direct one, straight towards the light. [End] Master-Sergeant J. D. Chandler - Each time Penniston gave me the indication that he was about to reach the area where the lights were, he would give an extended estimated location. He eventually arrived at a "beacon light", however, he stated that this was not the light or lights he had originally observed. He was instructed to return. [End] All of the original testimonies are consistent and confirm that the source of those red and blue lights was never determined. According to J. Antonio Huneeus, in an article published by 'FATE' magazine in September, 1993, he met Burroughs at a UFO conference in Phoenix. Huneeus writes:: We asked Burroughs to describe the UFO with more detail and he responded that it looked like "a bank of lights, different coloured lights that threw off an image of like a craft. I never saw anything metallic or anything hard". [End] We therefore have to equate all of this documented evidence that plainly, only 'unfamiliar lights' were observed, with any subsequent claims, notably Penniston's increasingly elaborate tales. As for Penniston's later story of how the UFO 'took off' and he ordered the stunned patrol back to base, we might conclude this is a preferable ending to admitting the lights were in fact simply lost from sight and they all then chased a lighthouse beacon for two miles. Before we leave the first night's events, there were two other lights which featured - the white light and the 'glowing light'. The white light was only described by Burroughs in his statement: We went down east gate road and took a right at the stop sign and drove down about 10 to 20 yards to where there is a road that goes into the forest. At the road I could see a white light shining onto the trees and could still see the red and blue lights. We decided we better go call it in so we went back up towards east gate. I was watching the lights and the white light started coming down the road that led into the forest. We got to the gate and called it in. The whole time I could see the lights and the white light was almost at the edge of the road and the blue and red lights were still out in the woods. [End] It's not clear if that white light was related to the source of the red and blue lights and I wonder if this could have been headlights from a vehicle, perhaps on the nearby farm. However, in the sketch accompanying his statement, Burroughs indicates that the white light did emanate from the same object as the red and blue lights. The 'glowing' light is, I believe, of immense significant and understanding its origin helps to make sense of key elements in the story. Penniston's statement begins: Received dispatch from CSC to rendezvous with Police 4 A1C Burroughs and Police 5 SSgt Steffans at east gate Woodbridge. Upon arriving at east gate directly to the east about 1.5 miles in a large wooded area. A large yellow glowing light was emitting above the trees (refer diagram). In the center of the lighted area directly in the center ground level, there was a red light blinking on and off 5 to 10 second intervals. And a blue light that was for the most part steady. [End] We know where that yellow, glowing light came from - it was merely light from the farmhouse, as Cabansag confirmed: As we entered the forest, the blue and red lights were not visible anymore. Only the beacon light was still blinking. We figured the lights were coming from past the forest, since nothing was visible as we passed through the woody forest. We could see a glowing near the beacon light, but as we got closer we found it to be a lit-up farmhouse. [End] Penniston clarifies that the red and blue lights were first seen "in the center of the lighted area directly in the center ground level", which places them somewhere in front of the farmhouse, as viewed from east gate. There seems good reason to conclude the lights never moved from there, as it's the same location where Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston later found the lights, before losing sight of them again (or maybe someone just switched them off). Also of importance is that, contrary to Penniston's more recent accounts of the lights being part of a craft which 'took off', there is a testimony from another member of the 81st Security Police Squadron, who was part of a patrol sent to check on Burroughs and company's whereabouts. He confirms that the lights were still visible from 'east gate' long after Burroughs and the others had gone in search of the source. We might expect there was presumably something unusual with regard to the farmhouse lights at this time, otherwise, surely the 'yellow glow' would have been noticed before. I thought that perhaps the house lights had been visible much later than usual because the occupants were still having a Christmas party. That doesn't seem sustainable though, for as we shall see, the 'glowing farmhouse' played a significant role in events which resulted in Col. Halt and others becoming embroiled in the ensuing UFO hysteria. In conclusion of our immensely better understanding of what truly happened during the first night's UFO incident, it seems a fair question to ask, 'what UFO?'. In fact, it's proven from the documented evidence that the only mystery was some unidentified flashing lights, not dissimilar to an outdoor Christmas tree, apparently somewhere near a farmhouse, in the early hours of 26th December. The most detailed explanation of how events then unfolded, is contained in the May, 1997 interviews with Col. Halt, conducted by Salley Rayl: RAYL: Although both Halt and the base commander, Ted Conrad, had decided to follow-up with Penniston and Burroughs, it was Christmas time and they hadn't yet gotten around to it. So, when the on-duty police officer made his announcement at the belated Christmas dinner, it was decided that Halt would gather a team of men and investigate. RAYL: At the point when the on-duty police officer approached you and Colonel Ted Conrad to tell you the UFO was back, what was your response? HALT: Well, it was pretty much disbelief. It was readily apparent that he was quite shaken. He was very serious, conscientious, he was a quite mature individual, and we believed him. We believe he thought something had occurred. RAYL: Okay. And you decided to take a team of men and go and investigate. What was your objective as you headed out to the woods? HALT: Well, really, to put the whole thing to rest because it had been, how shall I say, the center of a lot of activity and controversy and the police squadron, and they seemed to be more focused on UFO activity than their primary duty. RAYL: And this was because... HALT: This was because of the incident that had occurred several nights before when the three individuals had approached a supposed craft in the forest. RAYL: Okay. Now, you arrived at the woods, at the edge of the woods, anyway. What was the first indication that something strange was going on? HALT: Well, they were having problems with the light-alls, the light-alls for the motor generators. Small, fluorescent-type lights with the small four-cycle engine. They wouldn't work properly and the radios were acting up and people were scurrying about trying to get them working and having great difficulty. RAYL: And what was the general situation out there? HALT: There were probably 25 to 30 security policemen there. They were kind of stirring about trying to get the light-alls going and all excited and pointing into the forest and the lieutenant that had taken us or picked me up at the Officers' Mess handed me a Starlight scope and said, "Look into the forest," and pointed to an area and [I] looked in and saw a glowing area. Nothing one could discern exactly, but just a glowing area... And, of course RAYL: Had you ever seen anything like that before? HALT: No. I'd used the Starlight scope quite a few times, and it was obviously some kind of energy or some type of light. I don't really know what it was to this day. [END] Evidently, we do know what it was and so does Halt. He seems to have forgotten that, similar to how his story is always about the 'strange flashing red light which exploded into five white lights', when in fact, his tape recording at the time indicates this never happened and proves the red light was seen again later "clear off to the coast". The brightly-lit farmhouse does of course feature later in Halt's recollections, as he told Salley: HALT: We saw a glowing red object, best I can describe it. It was, it looked almost like a red eye with a black pupil and it was sort of winking and dripping what appeared to be the equivalent of molten metal. [Halt was using the 'Starscope' at this time - James] [...] And, as we approached the fenceline to the field, it literally exploded, only silently, and it broke into multi-white objects. Just prior to that, we had also noticed that the farmer's house appeared to be glowing, as though there were a fire inside. All the windows were bright red and sort of flickering and I was quite concerned for the occupants of the house. And we stood there and watched for quite awhile and the object, as it exploded and broke into the multi-objects, disappeared. So, we went out into the field and tried to find any evidence, such as any burnt spots or anything of that nature. Couldn't find anything. We crossed the farmer's field. I thought about knocking on the door, but I thought, well, here I am in uniform in a foreign country with a group of people with this...probably won't go over too well. [End] As proven from Halt's own recording that night, what actually happened was that, in the same location where Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston had first noticed the lighthouse beacon [although it required a two mile trek before they identified what it was], Halt and company also noticed a pulsating light, apparently next to the farmhouse. They pursued it, lost sight of it and then observed five, stationary white lights in the distance, before again locating the 'flashing red light', which it could now be seen was "clear off to the coast". As previously highlighted, Halt has confirmed this light was visible next to the farmhouse: "Halt was asked about the assertion he had been deceived by the Orford Ness lighthouse and replied: 'First, the lighthouse was visible the whole time. It was readily apparent, and it was 30 to 40 degrees off to our right. If you were standing in the forest where we stood, at the supposed landing site or whatever you want to call it, you could see the farmer's house directly in front of us. The lighthouse was 30 to 35 degrees off to the right, and the object was close to the farmer's house and moving from there to the left, through the trees'. Here, as never before, Halt provides specific details of the perspective he believed to be accurate. When he states, 'If you were standing in the forest where we stood, at the supposed landing site or whatever you want to call it, you could see the farmer's house directly in front of us', that's correct and the Orford Ness lighthouse is in a direct line of sight, east, towards the coast. However, when he claims, 'The lighthouse was 30 to 35 degrees off to the right' that seems to be consequentially incorrect; the _Shipwash lightship_ was 'off to the right', the lighthouse was straight ahead, where Halt observed the 'unidentified light' to be. His comment that 'the object was close to the farmer's house', again places the light source in the line of sight to Orford Ness lighthouse, whereas he believed the lighthouse to be much further south". [End] As Ed Cabansag also noted in his account: "We could see a glowing near the beacon light, but as we got closer we found it to be a lit-up farmhouse". The most significant incident from Halt's recording of events during the night of the 27th and early hours of the 28th December, are the 'beams' which he believed were being emitted by one of the three star-like objects that remained in the sky for several hours, before fading in the twilight. Although it isn't mentioned on Halt's microcassette recording, or in any later accounts, we do know that he was using binoculars to observe these star-like lights. In his subsequent memo to the MoD, Halt refers to the use of "an 8-12 power lens". How frequently he used the binoculars and whether the 'beams' were observed only with this visual aid, would be useful to know. Of course, during Halt's own participation, because he has still to interview Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston, no-one is yet aware that Burroughs and company had been deceived by a pulsating light, in exactly the same location and found it to be a lighthouse beacon. Everyone is focused on 'UFOs', exactly as Halt notes was already happening to the 'excited' security police en masse. It was Halt's memo which seemed to portray an extraordinary set of UFO related incidents. Yet, when we analyse it now, with the advantage of appreciating what truthfully occurred, it's a document which is replete with errors and factually incorrect claims. Even the dates of both incidents are wrongly given. Without uncovering the existence of those five, pivotal, original witness affidavits, we would never have understood the truth and Penniston or anyone else could make up whatever fantastic story they wanted. I hope this helps to clarify some of the key issues, although the apparent dearth of substance behind the UK's 'most important UFO case' will continue to be a huge disappointment for many who once thought otherwise, myself included. By posting this summary of the real facts on UFO UpDates, it will become part of the online archives and the URL for this and my previous reply, might prove useful in future. A closed case? Was it ever really much of a UFO case in the first place. As things stand, Britain's 'Roswell' seems to be a story of some UFO excitement which resulted in a lighthouse beacon and radiant farmhouse lights becoming 'unusual' phenomena, star-like objects which faded in the twilight, evidence devastating to the UFO hype which was never publicised, significant factual errors in the recollection of events and which made them sound more 'unworldly' than they ever were, 'sensational' claims of an alien spaceship landing that are demonstrably fictitious and perhaps more than anything, an insufficiently critical appraisal of events, both at the time and afterwards. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:32:22 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:54:26 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles Hi, An awful lot is being said on this list about the Rendlesham case that frankly is not leading anywhere. Can I please suggest that rather than adopt polarised positions - it can't be this - it must be that - this is debunking - that is scepticism - and so on - that we actually address the case and its agreed facts and see where that takes us? As this is a huge case, lets focus in on just one part of it for now. The first night (early hours of 26 December l980). Three airmen walking on a logging track and into a dark forest - virtually straight at the Orford Ness lighthouse, visible (as I know because I saw it in similar conditions) pretty well where they are describing a UFO as being ahead of them. The UFO is for much of the time not wildly unlike what the lighthouse beam sweeping in front might look like. The direction, frequency of pulsing, even colouration (I saw the light slightly yellowed through mist on one occasion) are not inconsistent. What is true is that the size and brilliance of the lighthouse beam was never as spectacular as these witnesses reported when I saw it. What is also true is that the testimony of two of these men (the third has not spoken out - unless he has to Georgina) refers to close encounter features at close proximity - such as a curtain of electrical energy sweeping through the forest causing their hair to stand on end and their skins to tingle - not to mention 'Oz Factor' symptoms of time distortion. At this point they are seeing a misty, opaque form that is vaguely triangular or conical. This is a brief summary of that part of the case, as I understand it. Obviously incomplete but it allows us to pose the key questions. The arguments on offer for what happened here are: 1: That the UFO was the lighthouse grossly mistaken and all the close encounter features reported were merely psychological - i.e. induced by fear. 2: The UFO was the lighthouse plus some other factor (eg mist creating a mirage effect) and / or other unknown factors that might have provoked the physiological sensations or a genuine energy field that could have been encountered. 3: The UFO was not the lighthouse at all and was thus some form of real UFO. Each of these are possibilities. Lets hear your arguments as to why one works and the other two don't. My view is that it is hard to see how the lighthouse on its own could be so grossly misperceived as this requires significant adaptation of the witness testimony and a disregard for the close encounter effects other than to assume these could be induced by fear. Since these physiological sensations - to me - infer an EM field and match other cases its at least likely that a real energy field was present as I see no reason to distrust the witness testimony completely in that regard. I do accept the possibility of the gross mis-perception argument because I have seen it in practice in many real cases. So it cannot be impossible. But I don't think it is proven sufficiently to be accepted without debate. On the other hand, the third idea, whilst again not impossible, of course, fits the witness testimony - if we assume it is literally true (a dangerous assumption as all UFO investigation teaches). But its most serious problem is the fact that the lighthouse was there, basically fits the broad outline of what was seen, the witnesses themselves never refer to its presence right next to the UFO at the same time when they should have done so if they saw both. So - whilst I do accept the possibility that this lighthouse may not be a factor - its hard to look at the data and conclude the lighthouse did not play some significant role in this case at this point. At least to argue that it didn�t requires you to demonstrate why the lighthouse could not have been the trigger for the UFO seen and if it wasn't what happened to the lighthouse at the time when the witnesses should have been seeing it as well. That's why I have looked at possible ways in which the lighthouse could have triggered a stranger encounter and not been recognisable to what are clearly intelligent witnesses who may have seen it before. Because if there was such a third factor (such as mist magnifying and distorting the stimulus) it explains how a strange encounter resulted and why the lighthouse itself was not seen (that is it was seen but looked so odd it was not recognised as the lighthouse). These seem to be the two key things we have to do with this part of the case. Rendlesham comprises several other major parts as well (notably all that occurred on the second night when Halt was out there). But lets home in on this element of the case and offer some cogent debate on these broad facts as they match - or in your view do not match - any of these three theories (or indeed any other theory that you may have). Then we may stop going round in circles and move ahead in this discussion. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:57:16 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:56:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Bruni >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 19:36:33 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Jenny Just to respond to some of your post >UFOIN has never issued a statement about Rendlesham - so what's >all this got to do with the price of fish? That message was on >crop circles and what I said about it stands. I was referring to the crop circle message, remember this particular post originated in that thread. >If you have read this book then you will know it is a case book >of mostly (but not entirely) solved cases. Indeed I quote from >the cover blurb itself: That was my original reason for questioning you regarding this case and it being featured in a book that claims to have solved said cases. >Well you are entitled to your opinion but I wouldn't trust your >judgement on what constitutes 'debunking' since your definition >appears to include whatever you cont like / or things written by >me. >To debunk is widely regarded as a derogatory form of scepticism >- implying blindly shooting down a case without recourse to the >evidence. That's patently not what I am doing. >But if you think otherwise - how and why? Jenny, it's nothing personal here - it is just interesting how you change the rules to suit your mood. In an earlier book (photo section) in "From Out of the Blue", you state: 'the Orford Ness lighthouse has been used by debunkers to "explain" the sightings...' So now that you are favouring this theory, it's no longer to be regarded as a debunking tool and the "lighthouse" believers are not now debunkers. sigh! > I could say - in the year 2003 I will publish a book that will >utterly demonstrate that UFOs are giant pancakes. People will >say - er, on what grounds? And I could say - wait and read my >book. I am not prepared to defend that argument until then. >But I wouldn't expect anybody to take me the least bit seriously >- and rightly so. Rightly so, but I'm only asking for three months - not three years and we're not referring to giant pancakes here - just Dr Who type lighthouses:-) >And I quote from your last message - Georgina - >>With regards to "the first to tell the full story", well, it >>certainly is the first time the 'true' story has been told and >>when you read the book you will see this for yourself. I stand corrected Jenny, it was I who mentioned it first. In closing, I would like to wish you all the best in your debates. I'm off for a little break. Greetings Georgina
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 UFO Sightings OZ Files 21.08.2000 From: Diane Harrison - Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:15:34 +1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:10:10 -0400 Subject: UFO Sightings OZ Files 21.08.2000 UFO Sightings OZ Files 21.08.2000 FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00839 05.08.2000 NSW Date: 05.08.2000 Day: Saturday Time Seen: Saturday pm Location: Wahroonga Reportee: Ted R Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 02 9 Report: Whilst in his local park, Ted noticed a circle of dead grass. He asked some locals who fly model aircraft about the circle and they said it had been there some time. They also mentioned with a laugh that a UFO had landed there. Ted ran his compass over the area and at first noticed some unusual readings but on a further investigation noticed no such irregularity. This has been passed onto Brian Dickenson for further investigation. Ted Roach is the author of 'The Physics Of Flying Saucers' Regards Doug Moffett <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00854 15.08.2000 NSW Date: 15.08.2000 Day: Tuesday Time Seen: Tuesday 11.38pm approx Location: Campsie Reportee: Evelyn Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 02 9 Report: Evelyn saw an electric blue ball with a green tinge and tail travelling South over Earlwood and Brighten. Duration was within 5 seconds. Seemed to crash in the above mentioned area. Would appear to be a meteor with the optical illusion of an object disappearing over the horizon at vast speed. Regards Doug Moffett <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00855 & 00856 15.08.2000 NSW Date: 15.08.2000 Day: Tuesday Time Seen: Tuesday 11.48pm approx Location: Kurnell Reportee: Leah Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 0402 Report: Leah and her boyfriend saw a large blue flaming object that illuminated the horizon. The object had a yellow glow after it ans was travelling sou/east as they viewed the object travelling from Kurnell to Cronulla. Duration approx 2 seconds. Seems to be large meteor with optical illusion of near crashing in relation to speed over horizon. <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN Regards Doug Moffett 1800 Callin Code: 00857 15.08.2000 NSW Date: 15.08.2000 Day: Tuesday Time Seen: Tuesday 11.57pm approx Location: Hunters Hill Reportee: Not Given Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 0411 Report: Witness saw greeny blue glow 20 degrees off perpendicular to horizon heading south at approx 11.30pm. Appeared to crash over Hunters Hill area. Seems again to be optical illusion caused by large meteor disappearing at vast speed over the horizon. <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN Regards Doug Moffett 1800 Callin Code: 00858 16.08.2000 NSW Date: 16.08.2000 Day: Wednesday Time Seen: ? Location: Hunters Hill Reportee: Peter Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 0403 Report: Tried to contact witness 18th, 19th and 20th .. mobile switched off. Witness is friend of 00857 and saw object at the same time. Again appears to be meteor. <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN Regards Doug Moffett 1800 Callin Code: 00851 13.08.2000 NSW Date: 13.08.2000 Day: Sunday Time Seen: 6.55 pm Location: Miller Reportee: Suzie and John G Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 029 Report: John walked outside to have a smoke when he saw a round yellowy/orange glow high up with no tail travelling about the speed of a plane. It was an overcast night with no stars and the object appeared about 20 times the size of a plane and was heading south. They obtained approx 60 seconds of video footage before the object disappeared. There was a white ring inside the outer glow and the duration of the sighting was approx 2 minutes. They rang Mascot, the federal police and channel 9 who told them it was Mia space lab. There was a black shadow trailing as it headed south west with no flashing lights, there was also a black shadow trailing. Regards Doug Moffett <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Doug Moffett UFOR for AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00861 16.08.2000 NSW Date: 16.08.2000 Day: Wednesday Time Seen: Dec 99 Location: Cronullar Reportee: Daniel L Report given to nearest rep: Doug Moffett Tel: 02 Report: On approx 17th Dec 99 daniel and two friends were on the beach near shark island Cronulla area at about 3 or 4am when a rectangular fog rolled in from the ocean. It was 200 mtrs wide and about 100 mtrs high. It changed to an egg shape and appeared see thru, the witness described it as see thru mercury. It then took off at a 45 degree angle away to the south. The duration of the sighting was approx 1 minute. Prior to this they had noticed bright lights circling and hovering like bright stars. They seemed to move telepathically with their wishes. They appeared about 300 mtrs off shore. At one stage they looked like a tea cup with a light strip. They appeared to be mining something as the red and green light hovered over the water. These movements were observed for about 2 hours and altogether 5 or 6 objects were seen. The others in the group were reluctant to accept what they had seen but they asked others on the beach with mixed reactions. Regards Doug Moffett <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP DIane Harrison AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00859-00860 16.08.00 QLD Date: 16.08.2000 Day: Wednesday Time Reported: 8.26 & 8.49pm Location: QLD Reportee: Elle Report given to nearest rep: Diane Harrison Mobile: 07 32 Report: Shape: Star like Size: Size Venus or plane landing lights Objects: 6 Colour: orange to red Sound: None Speed: slow Duration: 2 minutes Direction: Acacia Ridge Brisbane Witnesses: 2...mother and son Elle said she live near the Archiefield Airport and she quite familiar with planes. This is what happened... I saw the first one at 8.20pm the first one had a tail then it split into two and then both traveled together in a straight line but very slowly so it couldn't be a meteorite but there was what looked like a sparkle in the sky some what like tinsel. Then I was amazed when out of no where there was 6 more objects. These objects just didn't act like planes at all. They changed formation from a straight line horizontally to what appeared to be like stacking above each other.. some what like a truning pirouette in slow motion. I watched these things and I have never seen anything like it before. I want you to know this Diane I don't believe in UFOs but for the life of me I didn't know what I was looking at or what it was. (Q) Do you think it could have been anything from the Brisbane Expo (A) No because last year the only thing I saw was the F111 doing a dump and burn.. and this was nothing like that. Then an unusual thing happened they all went star like and just got swallowed up and disappeared. Still under investigation Regards Diane <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00864 16.08.00 QLD Date: 17.08.2000 Day: Thursday Time Reported: 7.00pm Location: QLD Reportee: Leanne Report given to nearest rep: Diane Harrison Mobile: 07 32 Report: Shape: Star like Size: Half a one cent peice Objects:1 Colour: Red Blue Green Blue Sound: None Speed: slow then fast Duration: 2 minutes Direction: Petrie Looking North..French Rd ...Brisbane QLD Witnesses: 2...Wife & Husband Leann said: I looked outside just for a moment when I noticed this object in the sky I called my husband to have a look and he thought it could have been a sattelite. The lights were flashing some what like a plane... but I see planes all the time so I sure it wasn't one. I know this because it disappeared for a moment then it reappeared in the west. This thing must have moved so fast to get to the West side of Brisbane. My husband and I have never seen anything like this before wow! maybe its a UFO. (She laughed) Still under investigation Regards Diane <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> Independent UFO report Via e-mail Date: 11.08.2000 Day: Friday Time Reported: 10.00pm Location: QLD Reportee: Floyd Report given to nearest rep: Robert Frola Mobile: Report: Shape:? Size: massive Objects:1 Colour: Shadow Sound: None Speed: slow then fast Duration: 2 minutes Direction: Gold Coast in Elanora QLD Witnesses:1 Report: Floyd said: I live on the Gold Coast in Elanora I saw something bizarre for the first time Friday the 11th at 10pm. It was a beutiful bright night with the moon shining outside. It was around10 pm, I went at the back of the house taking my towel off the clothes line,when suddenly a big shadow passed next to where I was standing on my left. I thought it was a big bat so I turned back and looked up in the sky. I sawa massive piece of black shadow or something transparent black shape... very big flying or floating in the sky. It was on the right end side of the moon. Then it suddenly disappeared, so I looked around again for it... then suddenly it reappeared on the left of the moon this time going back towards the sea from where I was.... I was a bit confused of what I saw... so Istood there for a minute and waited for it to reappear but it was too cold ,so I went in. Everybody at work does'nt believe in my story...anyway I saw what I saw and all I can say is that there was something out there that night. Regards Diane <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> Independent UFO report Via e-mail Date: 28.07.2000 Day: Friday Time Reported: 10.00pm Location: NSW Reportee: Gerard M Report given to nearest rep: Robert Frola Mobile: Report: Shape: Triangular shape Size: ? Objects: 3 Colour: ? Sound: None Speed: slow then fast Duration: 10 seconds Direction: 5kms on the north side of Gilgandra NSW Witnesses:2 Report: Gilgandra area in N.S.W. My girlfriend and myself were returning from a trip to Dubbo, whenapprox 5kms on the north side of Gilgandra we saw three bright lights passin front of us. As it was some distance away it looked like a plane was landing, My girlfriend said "look theres a plane" As we looked at it I noticed it didnt have a beaken light as normal aircraft do have.We slowed right down and noticed it had a triangular shape. I stopped the car and hoped out and watched it, it then seemed to stop and hover in the distance, staying in one spot. I run back to the car and told my girlfriend to have a look, then I walked back away from the car to look at it again. Then I noticed it was slowly coming in our direction it seemed to be getting close, fear getting the better of us we drove off. While driving away and one eye still fixed on where the lights were it seemed that it increased in speed and follow us on the lefth and side of the car it was approx 200m away. I begain to go as fast as my car would go within about 10 seconds we could no longer see the lights. As soon as we got home we told everybody none really seems to believes us I contacted the police they seemed to laugh. Found your address on the net PLEASE could you e-mail me with any info you have or to ask any questions you may have. Thanks Gerard. <><><><><><><<<>>><><><><><><><><><><> If any one as any more to add to these sightings please let us know. Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch Director ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) E-Mail: tkbnetw@powerup.com.au E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw ADMINISTRATION: THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) PO Box 805 Springwood Qld 4127 Australia ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number 1800 77 22 88 Freecall ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Disclaimer: The Keith Basterfield List Owners are not responsible for the content or misuse of this list. However, personal insults, flaming will not be tolerated. ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 The Chronicle - NSW, OZ: UFOs Unlikely But Possible From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:10:28 +1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:14:12 -0400 Subject: The Chronicle - NSW, OZ: UFOs Unlikely But Possible 'The Chronicle' Newspaper New South Wales, Australia August 15th 2000 UFOs unlikely but "possible" By Tagherd Chandab The Scientific probability of a spaced ship hovering over the Macarthur region is unlikely, say University of Western Sydney Campbeltown astrophysicist Dr. Ragbir Bhathal. But Dr. Bhathal does not exclude the possibility that there us something out there beyond the human race. "There are billions of stars in the universe and earth is just one," he said. "So to say there is nothing out there is ignorant,". Dr. Bhathal and several scientist from the universitys Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence team have spent the past two years examining the phenomenon through the speed of light. "Scientifically we should be able to repeat the experiment twice to come to any conclusion," he said. "Our search is for signals rather space crafts. The university funded study aims to find out whether there is life beyond earth. Dr. Bhathal said the team had not made any discoveries. "Most experiments take years to conclude and in some cases could take centuries," he said. Dr Bhathal, who is also the director of Campbelltown Rotary Observatory, could not explain Mr Movak'e experience but said in most cases space ships sighting had not been repeated in the same place twice, therefore could not be proven scientifically. He said he had personally not seen anything extraordinary to explain the phenomenon. "Most scientists don't believe in the space ship phenomena because the speed of light is against it." Thank you Phillip Anisworth for this Newspaper clipping UFOSWS... Affilate of AUFORN PHILLIP AINSWORTH (President) of UFO Society Western Sydney E-mail ufosociety@hotmail.com Contact number 1800 77 22 88 or Mobile 0410696174. Group Public Meeting will be at the Campbelltown Library 30th August 2000 Start time 7.00pm Fee $5.00 Tea & Coffee included. Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch Director ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) E-Mail: tkbnetw@powerup.com.au E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw ADMINISTRATION: THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK (A Non-Profit Organization) PO Box 805 Springwood Qld 4127 Australia ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number 1800 77 22 88 Freecall ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<> Disclaimer: The Keith Basterfield List Owners are not responsible for the content or misuse of this list. However, personal insults, flaming will not be tolerated. ~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 22:17:08 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:16:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT >Subject: Request for Information - And Help >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >Some of the events in my life appear to have no simple >explanation of which I am aware. Some are just bizarre in >extremis. Many have been covered in research material, books and >papers but the connection to the abduction experience is not to >my satisfaction. >Several examples: >Surrounding lights simply wink out when the abductee walks or >drives by. Usually whilst in a motor vehicle. And independent of >the driver or passengers who may or may not be there other than >me. And with witnesses to the phenom. Sometimes in proximity to >an event but often not. And occurring many to many times to >simply be a statistical coincidence. Most interesting of all, is >the apparent fact that 99% of these lights are electro-optically >controlled, not swithced on by a contact device, but switched on >by light (or the lack of it). Jim, List: It's not unkown for streetlights controlled by photo cells to shut off when a car approaches. Possibly due to atmospheric conditions which cause glare from the car's headlights, or one or both headlights might be adjusted a little high. >Stars which move within three to five degrees of arc, about >magnitude 4+, and move erratically, zigzagging, starting and >stopping. Witnesses. All of these events witnessed. And by non >believers who have given attributes which could not possibly >restrain even Fill Class from hysterical fits of laughing. >Questions are: >Anyone else out there with similar events and at least a dollop >of mundane explanation proven out to be true? Anyone out there >done any research on these various phenomena? Jim, this sounds like autokinetic motion of the eye muscles. The eye is continually moving, the brain usually just filters it out. I believe this is probably the cause for the "falling leaf effect" often reported, more so in the early days of UFO sightings. Moving aircraft or satellites will also appear to stop, reverse motion, or zig-zag around. I also believe that this is the explanation for many so-called 90-degree turns. The classic experiment, done I think in the 1920s or 30s, was to have a small light in a totally darkened room. Viewers will see motion. I use a reostat-controlled light in a darkened planetarium which is used to simulate a nova or super-nova. Within seconds viewers see it "swinging" back and forth as if it's on a parachute. This effect is particularly noticeable which the object is high overhead and isolated, or bright nearer the horizon so that atmospheric extinction hides the dimmer stars. One can usually notice this within seconds. Anyone on this list should try it tonight in the sky is clear. Choose a bright star, as you mention, high up or isolated from others. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 03:41:11 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:18:22 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale J R wrote: >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:44:30 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>I'm not arguing that airline pilots of policemen in Britain or >>in America (who are the ones Hendry was actually talking about) >>are not doing a good job of observing. I'm just saying that they >>type of pbservation they are trained to do in not necessarily >>the type of observation that is needed for UFO reports. > -- > >John Rimmer Hi, Who then is receiving UFO observation training? Roy.. www.thelosthaven.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: Request for Information - And Help - From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:51:11 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:20:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help - >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT >Subject: Request for Information - And Help >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Dear List Members and EBK, <snip> >Surrounding lights simply wink out when the abductee walks or >drives by. Usually whilst in a motor vehicle. And independent of >the driver or passengers who may or may not be there other than >me. And with witnesses to the phenom. Sometimes in proximity to >an event but often not. And occurring many to many times to >simply be a statistical coincidence. Most interesting of all, is >the apparent fact that 99% of these lights are electro-optically >controlled, not swithced on by a contact device, but switched on >by light (or the lack of it). >Almost always "hearing" a meteor. >Digital devices (timing circuits) cannot function around me. Out >of the dozen or so TV's which I have owned since vacuum tubes >went to Russia to stay, only one kept time and not accurately. >Most were shipped to the manufacturer who opined that nothing at >all was wrong. >Most automobiles today operate on microcomputers, custome chips >which keep the car going, lights, engine, even the windshield >wipers and the HVAC systems. Not mine. Not the Aurora or the >VR-6 VW or that wonderful 1993 Mustang 5L. That one still gives >trouble after ten years and only 12,000 miles. The Taurus can't >keep itself in automatic driver's side roll down electric window >chips. I could go on. Jim, Regarding the electromagnetic hijinks above: have you ever considered scanning your yourself with one of those meters that detects electromagnetic emissions? One example I bookmarked some time back follows: http://www.maui.net/~emf/ Of course it does cost some bucks - oh well. Anyway, it might be interesting and informative to see if it thinks you're an EMF emission source of some sort. One approach might be to have a friend take such a meter and gradually approach you with it from an initial distance well out of range - whatever that is (a block away maybe?). Then have him watch what it detects, if anything as he walks closer. By the time he's the same distance from you as those winking streetlights, perhaps the meter will tell you something. If not, send it back for a refund ;-) By the way, I don't represent the above folks; in fact I don't know them at all except through a testimonial from a ghost hunters group at http://ghostweb.com/yancem1.html Anyway, my 2 cents from out in the weeds, -Brian C.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 01:07:05 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:38:29 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Mortellaro >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 14:22:39 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 09:09:02 -0700 ><snip> >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Persons with the appropriate professional background to make >>>>them good witnesses figure disproportionately in the best >>>>sightings, just as one would expect. The Battelle report >>>>documented that long ago. That's why sightings such as, say, >>>>Tombaugh's and Hess's are still unaccounted for five decades >>>>later. Sightings by astronomers, pilots, and the like are those >>>>most likely to withstand the most comprehensive investigation >>>>and to remain unexplained. That's a fact, Andy, whether you like >>>>it or not -- not that there's any possibility of the former.. >>Clyde Tombaugh - one of my heroes they don't make'em like that >>any more. >GT, >Ah, those were truly the good old days! People like Tombaugh, >Lowell and Hubble literally grew up with their eyes glued to an >eyepiece. For the most part, they froze their butts off, too. It >gets cold atop a desert mountain at night, you know. >I doubt if today's latest generation of astronomers would >qualify as any more trained an observer than a good amateur in >the field. I know I was surprised to learn as long as ten or >fifteen years ago, while touring the McDonald Observatory in >West Texas, that none of the pros any longer conduct direct >observations of the heavens from the far end of a mirror. It's >all done by computerization now, and much of it is not even in >the visible spectrum. They sit in cozy little rooms in front of >computer screens. The radio astronomers can work during the day >-- and do -- just like the rest of us. No nighttime expertise >there. Like every other science, astronomy and astronomers >is/are highly specialized nowadays. >So much for the romance of the Space Age. >Dennis Stacy Gentleman and EBK, The amount and quality of information gleaned from those cozy little rooms are far and away so far ahead of the romance of the space age it ain't funny. Everything has changed, and not for the better in the sense of touchy feely science and communications. In this modern age, the "hands on" piece of the puzzle may be missing, but not the wonder of it. It's still there, it's just moved aside a bit. I recall looking thru my Edmund Scientific three incher in all the seasons and being able to see for myself, the beauty of this galaxy, and even the beauty of some others. I also remember getting up at ungodly hours in an attempt to contact some poor European on 80 meters using the Morse code and very low power on a piece of wire that shouldn't have worked. Today you can buy a telescope which does all the work for you. Tell it what you wish to see and it goes there. Instant gratification. Never mind the getting from here to there. Which was most of the fun, for what one is able to observe in the getting there was an even greater wonder sometimes. And ham radios are no longer home brew. They are all digital, sophisticated to the extent that unless you are a first class design engineer, there is no way you can build it. There was a time when you could. And proudly announce to the guy or gal you were speaking with (using a straight key instead of a completely automatic gizmo with a brain) that your equipment is home brew. The same is true of science. It ain't what it used to be. The machines we use do all the work we couldn't even imagine doing ourselves. But show me an astronomer in his spare time who does not look thru his or her own equipment and wonder at the images in his eyepiece, and I will show you a man without a soul. We may have taken away the romance, but no one may take away what is really there. And what is really there must be observed with that same wonder and imagination that existed back when. It's what saves many of us from ourselves. And hams who do not have the old fashioned vacuum tube radios and actually use them, and I will show you another without a soul. The only difference these days is that the number of soulless men seems to be on the rise. That's OK. As long as the number of souls is not decreasing, all the soulless dudes will do is miss out on God's creation. Even capturing a signal from the ether which should not be heard, is a wonder worth experiencing. I still get a thrill from it. If and when I no longer get that thrill, then you have my permission to take me out. Just do it quickly. I hate suffering. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean From: Victor J.Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:04:03 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:55:35 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:00:08 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >To: updates@sympatico.ca >With regards to the FT reports in East Anglia, of course I am >aware of them. What I said was that I had not personally >investigated these reports so could not comment from that >perspective. Thats all. Jenny, With respect, your reply diverts attention from the 'crux' of my original message to you, which was to challenge your assertion that the Bacup - Todmorden area (Lancs) "was the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK (possibly in Europe)" You also now say that your *are* aware of "the almost nightly shuttle of FTs between certain 'sensitive sites' between 1989 - 1997". So what was the point of mentioning the reports you saw as BUFORA D of I. of "aircraft travelling to Europe... or climbing out of Stanstead...(Airport)? You also wrote: >So I think its fair to argue that there is ample reason to >support this as being a highly active window area. Its hard to >imagine there could be more close encounters in any other UK >window. So it really wasnt an idea that I just made up. There is a gulf of difference between a "highly active window area" and "the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK (possibly in Europe)" No-one has suggested (certainly not me) that this was an idea that you "just made up". Regards, Victor J. Kean Project FT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:51:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:57:57 -0400 Subject: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness Listfolk, In a recent contribution to the list, Dennis Stacy argues that somehow I have misread David Hufford's book The Terror That Comes in the Night. He then goes on to misrepresent the implications of Hufford's work for other areas of anomaly inquiry. Hufford, as you would not know from reading Stacy, is keenly sensitive to those implications. As he has repeatedly demonstrated, Stacy is unable to read Hufford in any way that does not serve his -- Stacy's -- obsessive disdain for Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs; to him, apparently, Hufford exists primarily as a club with which to beat these two heretics. He also would have us believe that Hufford (who wrote some very kind words on the back cover of my UFO Encyclopedia, as I noted recently but have to remind Stacy here) has little interest in UFO-related matters.Not true, of course. The first and only time I ever met him in person, at a 1978 folklore conference in Omaha, we discussed UFOs, and he was very funny on the subject of the then-new CSICOP, which had organized to put to death these and other heresies. Hufford also participated in the abduction conference at MIT in 1992, where he mentioned a case encountered by a psychiatrist friend. Of it, Hufford states frankly, "I know of no non-abduction explanation for these events." He then goes on to offer a far more informed, thoughtful, and rhetorically restrained critique of abduction investigation and theory than self-described skeptics in or outside ufology have ever offered. Hufford does not dispute that genuine puzzles are at the heart of the phenomenon, but he thinks -- and I agree -- "Much abduction theory, at present, is way out in front of its data." That applies, of course, as much to skeptics as to proponents. In that context consider Hufford's remarks regarding NDEs below. For those who came into the argument well into the conversation, I am contributing here an essay/review I wrote on the book. The piece appeared in a 1983 issue of Fate, shortly after Hufford's book was published . After it appeared, Hufford wrote to say that in his experience few had so well understood what he was saying as I. Read the following and decide for yourself if Dennis's claims regarding Hufford make sense: The victim wakes up unable to move. As he lies there helpless, he hears footsteps and sees a horrifying form. An invisible force presses on his chest and the terrified victim thinks he is going to die. At last he is able to shake his paralysis and the eerie attack ends. Chances are you have never heard of an incident like this -- unless it has happened to you. And if it has happened to you, you are not alone. There is reason to believe that one American in every six has had an experience of this kind. But victims seldom report such "supernatural assaults" because they fear that they will not be believed or that they are losing their minds. The experience is so little discussed in our culture that there is not even a name for it. But in other cultures the same experience is the subject of rich folk tradition. Newfoundlanders, for example, call it the "Old Hag," "The Hags," or "Hagging." The word "Hag" referred (at least when it was first used in connection with these experiences) to "witch" -- witches have traditionally been conceived of as ugly old women -- and a victim of hagging was thought to be hag- or witch-ridden. In fact the most common expression for the experience in English is "riding." Interestingly enough the original name is one with which we are all familiar: nightmare. Nightmare, which to us means simply "bad dream," once had a far more specific definition; it referred to an incubus or succubus which came in the night to put a crushing weight on a victim's chest. The Old Hag is the subject of a major new book, The Terror That Comes in the Night by David J. Hufford (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982). Dr. Hufford, an associate professor of behavorial science at the Pennsylvania State College School of Medicine, uses the phenomenon to address a question that is central to the continuing controversy over the validity of paranormal claims: Do persons reporting firsthand encounters with "supernatural" forces know what they are talking about? As Fate readers are well aware, reports of paranormal experiences are not rare. In fact, according to various polls taken on the subject, most people believe they have had such experiences. But the scientists, scholars, and opinion-makers who tell the rest of us what to believe reject such testimony out of hand, "explaining" it as the result of perceptual errors, faulty memories, lies, psychotic episodes, and hallucinations shaped by ideas in the claimants' cultural environment. After an in-depth examination of Old Hag accounts both in cultures in which such beliefs are widely known and in others (ours, for example) in which they are all but unknown, Hufford finds descriptions of the core experience, by those who say they have had it, to be strikingly consistent wherever they occur. Such events are not culturally determined; "recognizable Old Hag attacks of great complexity can and do occur in the absence of explicit models," Hufford writes. He then considers psychologists' attempts to account for the phenomenon and finds them hopelessly muddled. Of one famous psychoanalytic study, Hufford says that "one can hardly distinguish the experiences themselves from the interpretations. The lack of scientific precision attributed to popular thought is found here in academic disguise." The consistent unwillingness of psychologists and other professionals to listen to those persons who have had these experiences has led them to make wild, unfounded speculations without empirical foundation. "The subject of supernatural belief somehow leads to a lot of forgetting about what constitutes serious scholarship," Hufford remarks. "It was just such a rejection of untutored observation that delayed for so long the 'scientific' discovery of giant squid, gorillas, meteors and any number of other wild and wonderful (but apparently unlikely) facts of this world," he says. "In those cases, post hoc scientific rationalization was used to explain how people came to believe in such things. Seasoned fishermen were said to mistake floating trees with large root systems for huge animals attacking their boats; farmers were said to have overlooked iron-bearing rocks in the midst of their fields until they were pointed out by lightning; and in this case [the Old Hag experience] 'children and savages' were said to have difficulty knowing when they were awake and when they were asleep" -- even though the victims, people of all ages, cultures, and educational levels, insist they were not "dreaming," that they were fully conscious when they heard and saw weird things. Hufford argues it is high time we take seriously "an experience with stable contents which is widespread, dramatic, realistic and bizarre" which has been reported repeatedly "by large numbers of our fellow humans." Of course the Old Hag is not the only experience that can be described in this way. Hufford does not hesitate to consider the implications of his Old Hag research for other claims involving strange phenomena. He writes, "I think that the present study has amply demonstrated that at least some apparently fantastic beliefs are in fact empirically grounded." Unfortunately most scholars have seemed more interested in explaining troublesome claims "out of existence" than in investigating them. The further they remove themselves from the data (the accounts of those who have had the experiences), the more exotic, facile and irrelevant their theories become. Hufford bluntly calls this practice "careless thinking retroactively applied with little regard for evidence." An empirically based, "experience-centered" approach such as the one Hufford uses would show that events like the Old Hag are believed in because they really happened; they are not simply imagined by people who are so stupid, crazy or credulous that they cannot tell the difference between a popular superstition and a personal experience. Inquirers would learn not to confuse "folk explanation" (for example the notion that witches are responsible for Old Hag attacks) with "folk observation" (which, as Hufford demonstrates, can be quite accurate, consistent, and scientifically valuable). Referring to the controversy over near-death experiences, he says, "The writings pro and con ... exemplify the effect of a common metaphysical red herring.... Almost all editorializing and much of the research have focused on the question of whether these experiences constitute evidence of life after death. Those who oppose such a belief rush to provide alternate explanations that rarely fit the data currently available. Those who advance the experiences as evidence for the belief in life after death tend to dissipate energy that might be better spent in actual research than on counterarguments about life after death. As a result, very few have focused on a thoroughly empirical study of the experience itself to discover its distribution and frequency, its relationship to other experiences ... and its phenomenology. These are eminently researchable questions, and they do not require any particular metaphysical position." Hufford emphasizes that he is arguing neither for nor against the existence of paranormal phenomena. He is, however, advancing an argument with revolutionary implications: that rational persons are accurately reporting experiences that at least seem to be paranormal and that those who have attempted to explain away such accounts have not made their case or even understood what they are trying to explain. In consequence scholars have failed to come to grips with a major part of human experience. Hufford quotes sociologist Andrew Greeley, who remarks in astonishment, "Almost a fifth of the American population reports frequent paranormal experiences, a finding that dazzles our social science colleagues as it does us. How could such an extraordinary phenomenon be overlooked for so long? Better yet, why has it been overlooked for so long?" Can the Old Hag experience be explained in nonparanormal terms? Drawing on the findings of sleep research, Hufford concludes that the "state in which this experience occurs is probably best described as sleep paralysis with a particular kind of hypnagogic hallucination." In other words, science can explain how someone could wake from sleep, be unable to move and have a frightening experience. But it cannot explain the strange fact that the contents of the experience are consistent no matter to whom or in what cultural environment they occur. This mystery cannot be solved, Hufford says, "on the basis of current knowledge." Fascinating, original, and convincing, The Terror That Comes in the Night is one of the most significant books on the paranormal to appear in years. It is destined, I am convinced, to become a classic. Jerome Clark, "Books, News & Reviews: Terror in the Night." Fate 36,4 (April 1983): 97-98, 100-01. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:00:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:02:51 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Andy, >Thanks again for your illuminating response to, and denial of, >factual information. Glad to oblige, and let me add the obvious to our readership: "Factual information" is synonymous, of course, with whatever Andy chooses to believe. >>>that could be done from UK cases alone with a little time) you >>>would still fail to accept that we must extend the theory to the >>>possibility that _all_ UFO sightings are radical misperceptions >>>of one sort or another. You may consider this incredible, but in science you need to make a case, and you haven't made one. What you have demonstrated is your capacity for wishful thinking. It is a huge -- and pseudo- scientific -- leap of illogic to claim that because radical misperception occurs on occasion that it must occur frequently. The only evidence you are able to offer is this masterpiece of scientific reasoning (paraphrasing, of course): (1) I and my skeptical friends believe we have demonstrated a handful of cases of radical misperception. (2) UFOs don't exist, and only silly Americans think otherwise. (3) Therefore, all cases otherwise unexplainable must be due to radical misperception. >>You're damn right I'd fail to accept the thoroughly unverified >>-- and unfalsifiable -- belief that "all UFO sightings are >>radical misperceptions of one sort or another." UFO study has >>long been crippled by wishful thinking, and wishful thinking is >>all I see here. Words like yours ought to raise all sorts of red >>flags to any outside observer, who should also wonder what >>evidence you require to back up your allegation that any >>sighting otherwise inexplicable is due to "radical >>misperception." Is "radical misperception" really common in UFO >>reporting -- or is it the last refuge of the debunker when all >>else has failed? Radical misperception is itself an >>extraordinary claim which needs to be as carefully verified as >>its opposite. >So Jerry, despite all the evidence in, say Hendry's book, >despite all the evidence gathered by British ufologists about >radical misperception you are still doubting that it exists? I never said radical misperception does not exist. I did say that it is rarer than your unverified, unproven sweeping assertions to the contrary -- illuminating, if nothing else, what David Hufford calls the "disbelief tradition" -- would have unwary readers believe. In response, all I'm getting from you are hand-waving and a couple of dubious anecdotes Speaking of Hendry, whom I knew, both as colleague and as close friend during and after his CUFOS years, I'd appreciate your not lecturing me on what he thought. Hendry specifically disdained the embrace of skeptics and maintained all along that the best UFO sightings were and are genuinely puzzling. That's why, for example, he was on the pro side of the Smithsonian debate in September 1980. That's why he was the most forceful and fiery advocate, clashing repeatedly with Klass, whom he did not hold in high regard. Allan believed, reasonably, that misperceptions are most likely to occur when the phenomenon being sighted is a nocturnal light -- in other words, a usually distant, nebulous stimulus. Daylight observations, especially close encounters of structured objects, are the ones most difficult to explain, as logic and experience would tell all of us. He was so disdainful of the traditional "skeptical" position that he refused to list works by Klass and Menzel in the bibliography of his own book. Allan also investigated and ably documented some of the most puzzling and evidential UFO cases of all time, including the Marshall County, Minnesota, CE2 and the Ocala, Florida, radar/visual. His views of the UFO phenomenon were much closer to mine than to yours, Andy. You might read the entry on him in my UFO Encyclopedia, which clears away much of the mythology surrounding Hendry and his views. >Even your old chum Jenny - although she is not as hard core as I >am about it - believes that radical misperception lies behind >numerous classic and non-classic UFO sightings. Belief, alas, is the enemy. Let's see the evidence. A scattered anecdote or two is not evidence. I do agree, however, that Jenny Randles is a chum of mine. >Do you therefore just forget about the UFO cases which have been >resolved in this way? Do they not inform as yet unresolved >cases? If not then why not? Or do you choose just to ignore them >and move on to champion the next big 'unexplained' case until >that too falls? And so on and so forth in the ufological wheel >of case death and rebirth. Let's have some specifics here. Simply because a case has been declared "solved" does not mean it is, as any student of the long, dismal history of UFO debunking knows. As the saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. >>>Have you any predications as to when this might be Jerry. The >>>UFO literature of the last 50 odd years has been saying this. >>>I'd be interested to hear your opinion of when the dust might >>>settle and how near the dust is to settling at this moment in >>>time. >>And the UFO literature of the last 50 odd years has been right. >>Prediction: sometime in the coming century, after biology has >>taken its course and a new generation of scientists, >>unencumbered by the bigotry of the generation that came before >>it, looks at the UFO question with fresh eyes. A second >>prediction: scientists looking -- unsuccessfully -- for ETI via >>radio telescopes and the like will finally be forced to look for >>evidence in UFO sightings. >So, we've had to endure 50 years of persistent failure in the >UFO prediction department and you nicely move the goal posts to >'sometime in this century'? Even Arthur Shuttlewood was a tad >more precise. Unfortunately few of us will make it past the half >way stage (if we're lucky) but I'll log your prediction >accordingly. The above words are just plain dumb, telling us more, I fear, about Andy Roberts than about the tortured relationship of UFOs with science. Andy, sadly, is reduced to asking me for a psychic prediction, and I fear my failure to provide one will only break his heart. For a far more thoughtful and informed consideration than Andy's of why science has had such difficulty coming to grips with the UFO phenomenon, and of ufology's ultimate prospects, see Stuart Appelle's "Ufology and Academia: The UFO Phenomenon as a Scholarly Discipline" in the recent collectionion UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge (University Press of Kansas, 2000). Appelle addresses the related questions of mainstream academia's neglect and of independent academics' contributions (Bullard, Swords, McDonald, Hynek, Rodeghier, et al.). In the end, Appelle (a psychologist in the SUNY system) is optimistic. Despite "the obstacles in its path" ufology may well triumph, he thinks. "Perhaps the most meaningful reason for optimism," he says, "is the persistent activity of the Invisible College. Its contributions have created an interdisciplinary field of scholarship in the absence of formal recognition. In time, as these scholars continue to develop its database, test its theories, and perfect its methodologies, ufology may indeed become accepted as a recognized field of knowledge, a field respected by academics for addressing issues acknowledged to be interesting, important, and mysterious." >>You've got the moral of the story turned on its head, my friend. >>Apparently, this is a case you don't know much about. Mantell -- >>and plenty of other witnesses in the air and on the ground -- >>described a Skyhook pretty much exactly accurately. No radical >>misperceptions whatever, I'm sorry to tell you. It was not >>radical misperception that misled observers, it was their >>ignorance of the Skyhook project. The Mantell case underscores >>the point, known to all serious investigators, that most IFO >>cases can be solved on the basis of witness descriptions alone >>-- which means, of course, that most of the time witnesses are >>right, even when their interpretations may be in error. >Why are people 'your friend' when you are having difficulty >discussing things with them Jerry, old bean? >I beg to differ about the Mantell case - he radically >misperceived a man made object and died for the stupidity of it. >None of his or anyone else's descriptions on that fateful >January day described a balloon. What they did describe was - >and you should know because it's in your (excellent) books a >'parachute', an 'ice-cream cone', something of 'tremendous size' >for a few. Not to mention the fact that Mantell attributed great >speed to the object - something I believe Skyhook balloons were >not generally known for. This is absolutely false in just about every particular, and it precisely underscores the reason I have a hard time taking you seriously on this matter. In fact, Mantell did not radically misperceive the Skyhook, and there is no evidence that he or anyone else who saw it did. Their problem was that they had never heard of or seen a Skyhook. Being in a charitable mood today (I just received word that I've sold a new book), I will grant that your hazy memory is probably confusing subsequent legends about Mantell that grew up in the years following the case (and that were published uncritically in the UFO literature), and you're putting those silly stories into the witnesses' mouths. Having been charitable, I now go on to be less so and suggest that you're being awfully careless here. >In retrospect - when it was _known_ what the object was it was >easy to say, 'well, yeah, like Mantell was describing a >balloon'. But at the time he was misperceiving a mundane object >with descriptions which are not immediately those of a balloon. >So, radical misperception once again. False. You simply don't know what you're talking about, and you seem oddly determined to prove it over and over again. Maybe your theory is that if you say something long enough, by some process of rhetorical alchemy it will become true. Won't happen, sad to say. >I'm sure you'll be able to wiggle out of this one Jerry though! I don't have to wiggle. You've left enough space for me to drive a freight train through. >Whilst we're still on the subject of radical misperception, the >myth of the credible witness and the trained observer (trained >as Rimmer man rightly says, to observe what they are trained to >observe). Here's another couple of examples, not from the UFO >field but just as - more in fact - relevant. Please bear with >me..... >The first concerns one of America's very own. General George >Custer. According to the book 'Son Of the Morning Star', whilst >waiting to attack an Indian camp Custer and his men saw >something: >'slowly and majestically it continued to rise above the crest of >the hill, first appearing as a small brilliant flaming globe of >bright golden hue. As it ascended still higher it seemed to >increase in size, to move more slowly, while its colours rapidly >changed from one to the other exhibiting in turn the most >beautiful combinations of prismatic tints.' >They thought it was an alarm rocket fired by Sioux Indians - >in fact it was Venus. Uh. Yeah. Your point? It's news to you that people see Venus and mistake it for something else? It's news to you that atmospheric conditions and optical effects can make astronomical objects appear to change color? I can understand why it may be news to Evan Connell (whose book, which I read and enjoyed years ago, has been roundly criticized by historians for many inaccuracies, for whatever that's worth); but that it's news to you shocks me. On second thought, though, it may explain a few things. >As the biographer say -'How they could mistake a planet for a >rocket is hard to understand... Nonetheless they did.' Sounds like Venus to me, fairly well described. We know all kinds of witnesses have misperceived Venus, unradically, for a UFO. Now, if Custer and his men had mistaken it not for a rocket but for a winged elephant, then I'd be impressed. THAT would be a radical misperception. Speaking of which: Using witness testimony, oceanographer Richard Ellis makes a compelling case that at least some sea-serpent sightings arise from encounters with giant squids. No radical misperceptions whatever -- to the contrary, precise, useful testimony which in the end elucidated the true nature of what the observers saw. See the discussion in the third chapter of his Monsters of the Sea (Knopf, 1994). >Trained Indian fighters, hardened outdoor men and Indian scouts >all misperceiving Venus as a rocket? Radical misperception if >ever there was such a thing. Wow -- and we all know how well trained Indian fighters, outdoor men, and Indian scouts were for astronomical observations. The scientific journals are overflowing with their learned sightings and theories. Anyway, I guess we now know for sure what I have suspected all along: "radical misperception" is whatever Andy Roberts says it is. >You can argue against it Jerry, but it's futile. The 'myth of >the credible observer' is just that. The application of what we >know about witness perception and testimony has been used time >and time again to solve UFO cases from the simple to the >massively complex. Of course, Andy's use of the verb "solve" will give more cautious, skeptical readers pause. A long one. As I have said before and say it again, testimony can be startlingly accurate sometimes and off the mark other times. Anybody who has lived a life on this earth knows that, and it does not apply simply to UFO reporting. Anything that can be said about eyewitness testimony should be appended with an asterisk and qualifying words. Absolutely nothing justifies Andy's sweeping claims and wishful thinking in this regard. Making huge claims on small evidence is just about the perfect definition of pseudoscience. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 13:33:49 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:05:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:34:59 -0400 >From: Mike Kemp <minutemn@internetpro.net> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >No, there is not an infallible method of truth/lie detection. >The good news is that my results and conclusions can be >replicated by any of you. I have gone out of my way to provide a >link to download the free software, and will provide clips from >the tapes for analysis, if you don't otherwise have access to >them. Thanks, Mike, for a serious and reasonable answer to my post. Maybe I missed the links, or didn't save them. Would you provide them once more, either on the List or in a private e-mail? Thanks, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 16:16:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:20:00 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 23:08:40 +0100 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:17:49 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:57:29 +0100 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:40:59 -0500 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> John, >>Yes, they are more likely to be reliable. If, say, pilots >>weren't trained to see things and make judgments, there would be >>far more plane crashes than there are. That doesn't say there >>aren't plane crashes. Likewise, pilots are better UFO witnesses >>on the whole. >I give a fuller response to this point in my other posting on >Andy Roberts's side of this thread, suffice to say that "trained >observers" are not always trained to observe the kind of things >which get reported as UFOs. I'll again quote from Allen Hendry's >"UFO Handbook": It's Allan, by the way, not Allen. Allen's last name was Hynek. >'I was once told by a member of the FAA control at the Detroit >Metropolitan Airport, "Do you know how many times we have >cleared Venus to land?" Another FAA controller has been teased >for years as "Mr UFO" because of the press coverage of his UFO >sighting. the "UFO" turned out to be an advertising plane.' No surprise here. Nocturnal lights are the primary cause of IFO reports. Nobody disputes that NLs as a class comprise the least probative UFO evidence. Pilot reports of structured objects seen in daylight, however, are a whole other question. Richard Haines has gone much farther than Allan Hendry ever did to investigate such reports and document them. Hendry is not the expert here. >>Okay, here's your chance. Explain to us how your approach >>differs from the standard debunking approach of Klass, Ridpath, >>Menzel, Sheaffer, and the like, and why you think they're wrong. >>I'm not saying this to be snotty. I'm genuinely curious. I once >>thought I know, but reading Magonia and your various >>contributions to the list over the year, I confess I no longer >>know the difference. >I'm a little surprised that you should lump those four sceptics >together and label them all as debunkers. I'll forbear comment >on the three Americans [Klass, Menzel, Sheaffer]. Nah, don't "forbear comment on the three Americans," unless you wish to duck the question. Which I suspect you do, and probably because you and the psychosocial types no longer distinguish yourself from them. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:13:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:18:14 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:49:23 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:12:59 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>>which could not occur in ordinary consciousness. The skeptics >>>are seeking to substitute one extraordinary hypothesis for >>>another, and I, for one, remain skeptical. And properly so.. >>>Jerry Clark >>Seems to me another form of "pelicanization" of ufology. Read >>Prosaic Explanation, the Failure of UFO Skepticism at: >>brumac.8k.com >Bruce, have you ever been to Rendlesham? Have you investigated >this case first hand? Have you spoken to all the principlal >witnesses? >I only ask because I want to know. Gee..... inquiring minds want to know! Answer: no. And my _impression_ of this argument still is my impression of the argument. I did not intend to imply either that the case has been solved or not solved. Naturally I will be as interested as anyone else to find out which "side" makes the better argument.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' From: Ron Cecchin <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:52:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:39:16 -0400 Subject: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' This weekend I picked up and read Ms. Randle's 'World's Best True UFO Stories' (apparently a children's book, but I couldn't help myself... ) and came across the story regarding the 1987 incident on Ilkley Moor. After doing a moderately lengthy net.search today, I seem to be unable to find a copy of the infamous picture that "Philip" took of his little visitor. (I did find a link that says the photo is being reinvestigated?) Can someone please post a URL of the photo? (there must be one!) Thanx.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Mystery 'Missiles' Over Baluchistan (Pakistan) From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 04:22:37 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:40:23 -0400 Subject: Mystery 'Missiles' Over Baluchistan (Pakistan) Source: Business Recorder, http://www.brecorder.com/story/S00DD/SDH21/SDH21220.htm Stig *** The mystery 'missiles' EDITORIAL (August 21) : The reported sighting of missiles over Balochistan last Tuesday remains a mystery as the government has failed to come up with a satisfactory explanation as to what were the flame emitting objects that scores of people say they saw flying in a row. The incident could have been dismissed as a case of optical illusion or a fantastical account, like so many reported UFO sightings in various parts of the world. But the problem is that they were seen by scores of people, flying over such a vast area as Quetta, Chaman, Qila Abdullah, Qila Saifullah, Loralai and Barkahan. The reported direction of all the 'missiles' was also the same: from the west to the east. Hence, it is hard to argue that so many people could have only imagined seeing the same objects flying in the same general direction. Something must have been there. What was it? In the absence of a convincing official explanation, conjectures abound. Most people in Balochistan thought the flying objects were missiles headed towards Afghanistan as part of the US get-Osama-bin-Laden campaign. The reason for this conclusion was their past experience when some of the missiles meant to hit bin-Laden's secret hideout in Afghanistan had landed in Balochistan. However, no missile landings have been reported from Afghanistan this time, pointing to the fact that the mission of the mysterious objects did not lie outside Pakistan. It could be taken for secret test firing of a new weapons system except for the fact that in view of the 24-hour satellite surveillance by the US defence authorities, no such secret test-firings are possible. Some local tribesmen could have fired the flying objects to settle their tribal disputes, or maybe, they were directed at the centres of government control. Unfortunate as it is, such disputes are common in Balochistan. Presently, one of the prominent tribal chiefs, Sardar Khair Bukhsh Marri, is in prison on a murder charge - which in itself is an extraordinary happening. Blood feuds and bids for greater political power, over the years, have gone on to cause much violence and loss of many lives while also posing serious challenges to the governmental authority in the province. Hence, it would not be surprising if the flying objects are indeed found to have been fired by some tribal antagonists. Outsiders may find it hard to believe that people other than Pakistan's defence personnel could possess such sophisticated weapons as missiles, but that should surprise no one in this country. Those interested and having the resources to buy such weapons, are known to have acquired missiles leftover from the CIA's war against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. In the past, such weapons have also been used by outlaws in some other parts of the country. However, nothing can be said with certainty unless and until the government comes out with a clearly stated account of what has happened in Balochistan. Whatever was seen in the province's skies must have landed somewhere, which is for the government to find. The provincial authorities are said to have mounted a big search for the remnants of the 'flying objects', employing all available resources, though, so far, without any success. The search must not be given up until the mystery is solved. The government must be able to explain what it was that the people saw in at least five districts of the province. It can allow the mystery to persist only at the risk of being accused of being inefficient or overly secretive. * Copyright 2000 Business Recorder (www.brecorder.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Filer's Files #33 -- 2000 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:53:37 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:46:05 -0400 Subject: Filer's Files #33 -- 2000 Filer's Files #33 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern August 21, 2000, Majorstar@aol.com, Sponsored by Electronic Arts Web Site at: http://www.filersfiles.com.-Chuck Warren Webmaster. ARE ALIENS CAUSING GOVERNMENTS PROBLEMS? These files provide warning of numerous problems in our world that might be created by our visitors. These visitors may even attempting to help. Investigator John Thompson writes, regardless of what one may believe about the UFO phenomenon, we have a serious problem that confronts humankind. We had better find out what this phenomenon is and how it is affecting humankind. It is my opinion that the nature of the UFO phenomenon is eloquently stated by Dr. Jacques Vallee in his book "Messengers of Deception" when he said: "Human beings are under the control of a strange force that bends them in absurd ways, forcing them to play a role in a bizarre game of deception." ( p. 20) He also states, "The UFO phenomenon represents a manifestation of reality that transcends our current understanding of physics. The UFOs are physical manifestations that cannot be understood apart from their psychic and symbolic reality. What we see in effect here is not an alien invasion. It is a control system which acts on humans and uses humans." - Dr. Jacques Vallee, "Messengers of Deception," p. 209. Talking of the control system that aliens use to control us Vallee says, "The system I am speaking of, a system with mastery of space and time dimensions, may well be able to locate itself in outer space. Nonetheless, its manifestations cannot be spacecraft in the ordinary nuts-and-bolts sense. The UFOs are physical manifestations that simply cannot be understood apart from their psychic and symbolic reality. What we see here is not an alien invasion. It is a spiritual system that acts on humans and uses humans." "Dimensions," Contemporary Books, Chicago-New York, 1988 p 284-285.) About his investigations in Brazil involving fatal contact Jacques Vallee said, "Many of them involve secondary physical and medical effects, including twelve cases of fatal injuries in which the victim typically survived less than twenty-four hours." (p. 20). "But my immediate conclusion is this: whatever else they may be, UFOs represents technology capable of harmful actions. This observation should send us back into the field with better esources and a renewed sense of urgency." "Confrontations", Ballantine Books, NY, 1990, p. 23). Thanks to John Thompson. I don't know if our visitors had anything to do with recent events, but our information indicates they move through our oceans and atmosphere at tremendous speeds so on occasion accidents may occur. The Kursk, a Russian sub has been badly damaged and lying on the floor of the Barents Sea since August 12, 2000. Unfortunately, the equipment capable of rescuing the 118 sailors arrived too late. Norwegian divers were able to open an outside hatch on August 21. A few hours later, they were able to open the airlock's inner hatch, but found the sub full of water and assume all crew members are dead. Russia has asked Norway to help recover bodies from the wreck. The Russian government claims the sub rammed into an unknown submerged object. The identity of this object may never be known and the claim may be hiding mechanical failure in the sub. There is criticism of the Russian government for not responding quicker. Naval personnel who operate sonar in the underwater domain often report high speed comparatively large objects. Ivan T. Sanderson wrote, "Many submarines have just plain vanished, and not only in wartime. Two of them disappeared at the same time in the Mediterranean Sea only a few weeks before the Scorpion--one Israeli, the other French. Also, we have lost other nuclear-powered subs such as the Thresher." "Invisible Residents." We can assume these craft have the capability of operating under the ocean or in the atmosphere with equal ease. Underwater bases provide an ideal locations for operating unseen. Throughout the Cold War years there were numerous chases of mystery subs. Many chases occurred in Scandinavian where it was thought the craft were Soviet. Naval forces would corner he mystery sub in a fjord, but inexplicably the underwater craft would vanish. Several months ago fires started raging in the US Western states. Many of the 100 fires remain out of control burning millions of acres. Some 20,000 fire fighters are on the scene but 1500 homes are in danger of being destroyed in Montana alone. Many are questioning the limited government response to the fires and ask why more fire fighters from all over the US and more military are not rushing to the fires. News media shows men working with shovels instead of bulldozers and heavy equipment. Thousands of people are complaining that there is spraying of toxins from the sky by large aircraft. I was not particularly interested in these claims until several MUFON investigators saw low flying aircraft spraying and making contrails. Then suddenly the aircraft disappeared. The mystery continues but interestingly the Air Force Times published an article claiming that maintenance crews have medical problems that may be caused by JP8 jet fuel. Ethylene dibromide is a key component of JP8. The 1991 Chemical Hazards of the Workplace warns that repeated exposure to low levels of ethylene dibromide results in "general weakness, vomiting, diarrhea, chest pains, coughing and shortness of breath, upper respiratory tract irritation" and respiratory failure caused by swelling of the lymph glands. "Deterioration of the heart, liver and kidneys, and hemorrhages in the respiratory tract," can also result from prolonged contact with JP8. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's hazardous materials list: "Ethylene dibromide is a carcinogen and must be handled with extreme caution." This pesticide is extremely toxic, Exposure can irritate the lungs, may cause bronchitis, development of cough, and shortness of breath and damage the liver, kidneys and the reproductive system." Crew chiefs " seem to have more colds, more bronchitis, more chronic coughs than the people not exposed to jet fuel." EDB is 6.5-times heavier than air. It is possible the contrails of aircraft burning P8 are causing the complaints? Now we have to gain evidence on why the aircraft disappear. RHODE ISLAND AIRCRAFT NEAR MISS WITH UFO PROVIDENCE - Peter Davenport played me the tape of a pilot's UFO encounter. I felt the pilot's testimony was forth right and concerned. The pilot saw an egg shaped object pass in close proximity to his aircraft on June 22, 2000, about at 8:30 PM, while flying on an IFR flight plan at 8000 feet msl. He states, "Due to thunderstorms in the interior of Massachusetts, I was unable to fly northbound to my destination, and I was tracking the RI/CT coastline to the west trying to get around the weather ." The Sun had already set below the horizon, but the western sky was still very bright orange and ground detail was still easily identifiable. At first, I saw what I thought was a bird directly in my flight path, it appeared to be writhing in effort to avoid my plane (this is not an uncommon sight). Very quickly, I determined that the bird (object) was not on a collision course, but it would pass very close to my position. As it drew closer I could see that it was not a bird, but rather an egg shaped object standing on end. The top and bottom of the "egg" was not rounded but spiked with three points each. Against the bright sky it was just a black silhouette and possessed no lights. It appeared to be moving in an eastbound direction and passed very close to and above he right wing of my aircraft. The first officer was looking for a fix on a navigational chart and did not observe the object. However, I immediately contacted ATC and inquired about any radar targets on his equipment in my vicinity. The initial response was no, but shortly thereafter he reported a primary target (no transponder or verifiable altitude info) behind me in trail about a mile. ATC then informed me that object appeared to be stationary and then began to drift slowly to the east. I had no further contact with the object. Shortly, before I was handed off to another co FAA ATC voice or radar controller. "On a separate frequency, I heard the object called as stationary traffic to an airliner." ((NUFORC Note: We have talked to the witness on several occasions, and we find him to be exceptionally credible. In addition, we have received from the FAA Boston Center both audio and radar tapes for the time period indicated. The Quality Assurance Office at Boston Center, which processed NUFORC's FOIA request indicates that the audio tape confirms that a pilot reported an anomalous object to the Center handling his flight. We will post more information, once the tapes are processed. Thanks to Peter Davenport http://www.ufocenter.com/ NEW JERSEY METALLIC BALLS SIGHTED HILLSBOROUGH -- On August 8, 2000, I saw a round metallic object that had indentations. It was moving slowly across the sky at 5:30 PM. The object appeared to move under its own power. It was moving too fast and traveling in to deliberate fashion to have been a balloon. It was much shinier than a Mylar balloon, and also appeared much larger. There were both children and adults present at the sighting. We watched the object until it was obscured by the trees. NEWARK AIRPORT -- NUFORC reports that on August 17, 2000, at 10:24 AM two witnesses observed a fast moving silver ball shaped UFO. The witness reports, "I work for a moving company and was driving on the New Jersey Turnpike with a co-worker. As we passed Newark Airport, we watched the planes land and take off. I saw the sun glint off a plane that was traveling north toward us. It glinted again so I looked closer. It was round in front, but it didn't look right. As we got closer I asked myself, 'What the !@$%#! is that? It was just a big round silver ball about two miles away. It just kept traveling toward us and passed us on the left moving faster than any plane we have ever seen going to Newark Airport. It was silver and round about the size of a helicopter but without windows or lights, nothing on it at all. It moved in a perfect straight line as it traveled - no wobble- no up or down no side to side or spinning motions. It just went straight. There was no noise no smoke nothing. To us it looked to be made of a solid metal and glistened bright in the sun. We were listening to CBS 101.1 FM a strong station, but started picking up static. The object turned to go north following the Turnpike in a straight line at 2000 feet high. The sky was very clear. The UFO moved north six miles toward us in a straight line following the Turnpike. The event lasted about 30 seconds but we don't think it was a balloon since they can't travel so fast and in straight lines. Thanks to: Peter B. Davenport, Director National UFO Reporting Center (director@ufocenter.com) NEW YORK MYSTERY C-5 FROM STEWART AFB NEWBURGH -- Bruce Cornet, Ph.D. writes that on October 4, 1992, he went to Stewart International Airport to photograph aircraft with navigation lights on at dusk. He witnessed and photographed a C-5 military transport aircraft disappear and then reappear as it landed at the airport. He photographed this extraordinary event just outside the perimeter of Stewart at the end of the main runway. Immediately after taking five pictures of the C-5 landing, red lights began to flash and a military police jeep sped down the runway access road to identify who had photographed the aircraft. After MPs saw Cornet, they returned to their base at the other end of the airfield. Soon thereafter a New York State trooper pulled up and stopped his car by Cornet's vehicle. He walked up the hill to where Cornet was standing, and asked him for his ID. He asked Cornet why he was taking pictures. He then told Cornet that taking pictures of aircraft at the airport was prohibited. He did not specify military aircraft. Stewart airport is a joint civilian and military facility. Puzzled by this statement (Cornet had been to Stewart airport numerous times to photograph civilian and military aircraft without anyone objecting), he asked the trooper where he could go to get permission. The trooper told him to go to airport administration and security. Cornet drove over to the airport and asked an official in administration if he could take photographs of aircraft. He was told, "Yes," and that he could park alongside the perimeter fence and take as many pictures as he wanted. That series of events raised a number of questions in Cornet's mind, especially since he had observed and photographed the same C-5 circling above the area where he and two other witnesses had seen an AOP descend and disappear two days earlier. At Stewart after several aircraft landed, he heard the distant sound of a C-5 as it approached the airport. Because the Sun was low on the horizon to the right of the picture, he had to reduce the f-stop or aperture, which slowed the shutter speed down to about an eighth or a quarter of a second. Then he saw something large approaching from the south. As the C-5 came into range of his camera, he snapped a picture. But as soon as he had taken the picture, he could not see the C-5 anywhere. The photograph shows an enlargement. Only a blurred portion of the left wing and one navigation light can be seen. The entire fuselage, tail, and right wing are not visible in the photograph Cornet's initial reaction when he saw the photograph was that he didn't have the aircraft inside the range of the camera. But he remembered seeing the aircraft disappear. Moments later the C-5 reappeared, but now much closer to the runway. Cornet rotated his camera and took another picture, this time capturing the C-5 well within the picture frame. When he examined this photograph, he was puzzled. The image did not show normal motion blur. In addition, the C-5 appeared as if it were a shadow. It was coal black in color. Based on the movement of navigation lights, it is clear that this photograph was taken as a slow speed. Blurring should have occurred only in back as the C-5 moved. But there is no blurring. Instead, a silhouette of the aircraft's shape is replicated in discrete steps, each becoming darker as it gets closer to the center of the image. In other words, the image of the aircraft is expanding in length and breadth in pulses, while absorbing any light that reaches the airframe. This is what one would expect for a contracting energy field around an object, if that energy field was capable of bending light or causing light to wrap around the airframe. Take a look at the negative and the sequence of images taken. In image #3 there is no aircraft. In image #4 the C-5 appears on the right side, but it is mostly invisible. In image #5 the C-5 is visible, but it does not appear normal. In image #6 the C-5 is clearly visible, but it still has blur both in front and in back. It is also lighter in color. Details of its engine pods and stabilizers can be made out now, whereas before they could not. In each of these images the amount of apparent blur decreases, as the color becomes lighter. In the last image showing the C-5 on the runway, the multicolored camouflage paint on the airframe can be seen clearly. Soon after the C-5 landed and came to a stop, a military jeep containing MPs sped down the access road seen on the left, and stopped opposite Cornet, who was on the other side of a wire fence. As the C-5 landed, it slowed in speed rapidly, accounting for some of the decrease in motion blur. However, the fact that step-like blurring occurs both in front and in back of the fuselage, along with significant light absorption, implies that something else was happening. The fact that only a portion of the airframe is visible which should not have been the case (same camera, same shutter speed, same f-stop), implies that something else was happening. The fact that soon after the C-5 landed MPs attempted to identify who had taken pictures implies that something else was happening. A New York State trooper was called in to investigate and get Cornet's ID, and that he was told to tell Cornet that taking pictures of aircraft was prohibited, implies that something else was happening. What's the big deal taking pictures of C-5s, which can be seen parked on the tarmac? The fact that an airport official told Cornet later that same night that there was no ban on taking pictures of aircraft at the airport implies that something else was happening. Thanks to Bruce Cornet. The extraordinary photos are at: http://www.monmouth.com/~bcornet/two_versions.htm TEXAS CONTRAILS WITH UFOs FORT WORTH -- My name is Doug McGinnis. I have been photographing contrails beginning in July of 1999, in the (Westpoint) /Saginaw area and I have both seen and photographed sphere type, star type and an oval type objects. I would like to inform you of this most recent sighting. On August 3, 2000, at work in Saginaw at 6:15 PM, I noticed a contrail elongating within a cloud in the eastern sky, then saw a silver 747 type jet emerge going straight up in a westward direction emitting a staggered line contrail. I walked into our home for no more that two minutes, when I returned the jet had vanished! I than observed a small white ball in the sky hovering near where the jet had been. I pointed it out to another coworker who also witnessed the sphere. It moved very slow to the west, where after about 5 minutes it disappeared. A week later on August 11, while at work in Saginaw (Bana Box Inc.), and two co-workers and I noticed a white ball in the same place in the sky at around 6:00 PM It just hovered there with just a little westward movement! The sky was relatively clear and I don't think it was "just a balloon". It was the same height as before, maybe around 5000 feet. Thanks to Doug McGinnis and Debra Livingston. Living=Tracer Enterprises http://tracers.8m.com living@airmail.net CON-TALES NOT CONTRAILS Amy Hebert writes, "I began studying contrails and "chemtrail" claims in October, 1999. I also began video taping and photographing the contrails overhead at the same time. In addition to collecting photographic evidence, I conducted a correlative study and studied other information but have not found verifiable evidence to substantiate the claims that contrails (or "chemtrails" as they are automatically labeled by believers) cause illnesses in human populations. In reference to claims of photographic evidence of UFO's in contrails, I reviewed the images as posted on the internet and found almost all resembled the same images of birds, bugs, lens flare, debris and conventional aircraft I had captured with my own cameras. I wrote a letter to MUFON about the claims of a Mr. Avery who says he has captured images of UFO's in chemtrails and referred them to a web site where I had posted images of birds, bugs, lens flare, debris and conventional aircraft similar to Mr. Avery's images for comparison. A Mr. Jeff Sainio, MUFON staff photoanalyst, wrote me back saying he had analyzed some of the images presented to him by Mr. Avery and found Mr. Avery's images of "UFO's" to actually be insects. As for " disappearing aircraft" I have observed this optical illusion many times and video taped it. That high up, anything can seem to "disappear" due to the haze. We must use common sense and analyze phenomena with careful, scientific study to avoid reaching premature and baseless conclusions. OKLAHOMA LOW FLYING AIRCRAFT MAKE NO SOUNDS MUSKOGEE -- I read your article about aircraft disappearing after leaving chemtrails. I wanted to let you know about two separate incidents that occurred approximately a month ago. The first incident occurred when I left my office and saw what appeared to be a C-130 prop driven transport plane. It was flying north on following Highway 69 right through Muskogee. The plane was bigger than my fist and appeared to be less than one hundred yards away. I noticed the plane did not make any noise and when it reached Highway 62 it turned west. After turning west, I noticed a brown substance being sprayed from the tail section of the aircraft. It was very low in the sky and I was wondering if it was having problems and was trying to find a place to land. The second occurrence happened while driving down the Broken Arrow Expressway between Broken Arrow and Tulsa. I looked up and saw what appeared to be a stealth black aircraft. It was also flying at low altitude and was as large as my fist and appeared to be less than one hundred yards away. I kept trying to hear the aircraft but never did hear anything. Other drivers were also looking at it because we do not see such aircraft around this part of the country. Thanks to Mike. IDAHO FIREBALL RIGGINS -- While camping along the Salmon River at 10:10 PM in north central Idaho, I saw a fire ball moving slowly from south to north for a couple of seconds, then was gone over the horizon on July 21, 2000. The fireball was yellow-orange, but appeared to have a blue halo around the core. The fireball moved parallel to the Big Dipper and its length was consistent with its length. The fireball moved very slowly compared to a shooting star and had a very long and very bright tail. It is hard to judge its distance, but I heard no sound nor anything that would indicate impact. Since the event was of such short duration, its hard to describe further. Thanks to NUFORC OREGON UFO HOVERS OVER VEHICLE ASHLAND -- Myself and a female friend on July 30, 2000, looked out of the car window to observe a large saucer hovering about 100 feet off the right side of the car at 11:38 PM. It then took off after what seemed like an eternity. I don't know how long it had been since my watch stopped along with the car. I estimate it was only 30 seconds although it seemed much longer. Thanks to NUFORC (director@ufocenter.com) ARIZONA 12 YEAR OLD SEES UFOs Jon McIntyre writes, "Dear Major George, my name is Jonathan I'm 12 years old, I'm very interested in UFOs. The first time I saw on was in the year 1999, when I was in fifth grade. My brother s aw it first around noon. The UFO was shiny like tin foil and went behind the trees. We didn't get to see it again. When I was in sixth grade I was spending the night at my friend's house with my other friend. We were sleeping on a tarp and we saw two lights heading straight for each other. I think the little one crashed then the big one started to disappear and reappear. Thanks to: SMACKDOWN_MAN@webtv.net CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION UFO LOS ANGELES - Media person Damian Barna called to say he observed a low flying UFO on Wednesday, August 16, 2000, around 6:00 PM. The witness was at work at the Democratic Convention Center and noticed a low flying C-130 type green aircraft circling the area. He assumed it was there for some kind of antiterrorist aerial protection for key government officials. Looking to the West he noticed a fast moving luminous contrail being formed moving east in the clear blue sky coming towards him. At arm's length the luminous jet trail was two inches long and a quarter inch high about 8 inches above the horizon. When the luminous object and the C-130 aircraft came in close proximity to each other the luminous object disappeared. Damian felt the object deliberately put on a show to be seen by those around the convention and the aircraft. Thanks to Damian Barna. CANADA, ONTARIO CROP CIRCLES ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP -- The Ottawa Citizen ran an article August 12, 2000, reporting a preliminary diagram of a cluster of three circles found two days earlier in a farmers field. Based on aerial photos in the newspaper and from investigator June Mewhort the farmer reports no tracks or pathways; the circles look quite good in the aerial. |They are clean, crisp swirls with sharp edges. Thanks to Paul Anderson, CPR-Canada Circles Phenomenon at cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com, http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews PAKISTAN UFO's QUETTA--The Nation Newspaper dated August 17, 2000, reports that the unidentified flying objects seen in the air Tuesday night in six different administrative districts of Balochistan remain unresolved. The government conducted a massive search for the culprits throughout day on Wednesday in two districts of Loralai and Barkhan. The witnesses say they saw seven flying objects, omitting lights and flames which were flying in echelon formation towards southeast coming from northwest. The provincial Home Secretary, Major Shehryar Khan Mahsod said, "Four helicopters were sent to the possible sites of landing of these objects in vein and that no one knew for sure what exactly flew in the air." Knowledgeable sources claim that these objects were even seen in Zabul province of neighboring Afghanistan while they traveled all along the seven districts, and then disappeared When contacted by The Nation, the Political Agent at Loralai, Shoib Mir Memon, told this scribe that it was strange that three flying objects were seen at the same time with the difference of few seconds of minutes in all districts right from Chaghi near the border of Afghanistan, to Loralai near the Punjab border and to another end. It is speculated they might be meteors because they disappeared. Thanks to Gerry at gerry@farshore.force9.co.uk (gerry) NO AGREEMENT ON CAUSE OF EGYPT AIR 990 CRASH The following is from AIRWise News - Aug 14, 2000. The head of the Egyptian pilots' federation yesterday accused U.S. investigators of withholding key evidence in the crash of EgyptAir Flight 990 off the U.S. coast last October, according to Reuters. Walid Murad called for the release of radar images and the evidence of two pilots who said they saw missiles in the area where the plane went down, killing all 217 people on board. He told reporters that U.S. investigators said they were denying access to the radar images because they contained military secrets. "This is a weak excuse," he said. "This American stance is evidence of concealing facts, and we demand the release of these radar images and to hear the testimony of the two pilots, one German and one Jordanian, that they saw missiles where the Egyptian plane crashed," he said. Egypt Air Flight 990, headed for Cairo from New York, suddenly plunged into the Atlantic Ocean on October 31, 1999. Information from the flight data and cockpit voice recorders led to assertions by some U.S. investigators that relief copilot Gamil al-Batouti deliberately caused the crash. Egyptian officials have rejected that line of inquiry and worked on a theory that the plane's elevator panels on the tail, which control whether the nose points up or down, may have jammed. Murad said the Egyptian pilot's federation demanded the recovery of the remaining parts of the aircraft and the completion of an investigation to determine whether there were echnical problems in the tail section. By concealing and leaking information, Murad said, the U.S. investigation risked losing credibility. "The National Transportation Safety Board did release 1,665 pages of data of its investigation into the crash of Egyptair Flight 990," August 11, 2000, "but drew no conclusion about the cause, a move that allows the political dispute between the United States and Egypt to continue." http://news.airwise.com/stories/2000/08/966256308.html BLUE BOOK PHOTOS OF THE LUBBOCK TEXAS LIGHTS, 1951 Tim Cooper writes, According to Edward Ruppelt's account preserved in his book "THE REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS" published in 1956, there were sightings in August, September and October of 1951. At approximately 9:00 P.M. on August 25, 1951, an employee of the Sandia Corporation's AEC subsidiary division, and his wife observed a large, triangle-shaped craft pass slowly and silently over Albuquerque, New Mexico, at a very low altitude. The object was described as a V-shaped wing with six-to-eight soft, glowing, bluish lights on the wing's leading edges. See, http://home.earthlink.net/~rcollins634/reports/lubbock_lights51. htm BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT All real estate agents are not the same? Some real estate agents or sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced. Others are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities. When you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest investments! Remember, the majority of people do not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems. Picking the right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find out, " What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs. To get a free copy of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com. We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and US. PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO shots available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham Bethune.. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055 MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention I recommended you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2000 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the files on their Web Sites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item appeared. Send your letters to Majorstar@aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:58:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:47:33 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Morning Andy, all listers following this thread. I have tried to avoid commenting on thread for a number of reasons. 1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is a number of times. Her explanation of new facts doesn't wash with me because it seams more like her explanation changes according to the crowd that she is hanging out with, but hey that is my opinion only. 2) It is possible for any UK researcher to actually go down to Rendlesham forest and see for themselves just how much hokum this light house theory is. Hey people, why don't you get off your back side and go and have a look. 3) Enough crap has been written about this case to confuse even the most die hard researcher. I think one of the best pieces written about this case was by James Easton and he called it "Resolving Rendlesham". I didn't agree with his results but you could see that he has put some real hard work into the case. And finally the piece de la resistance <sp?> 4) Halt's story has not changed. An army officer, one who has lived on the base for a period of time, has seen the light house before still maintains that it was not the light house. Surely he must be _some_ credible witness? However, my intention was not to have a rant here but ask something of Andy. >>>that could be done from UK cases alone with a little time) you >>>would still fail to accept that we must extend the theory to the >>>possibility that _all_ UFO sightings are radical misperceptions >>>of one sort or another. Andy, do you still maintain that with sufficient research _all_ UFO cases can be resolved, and that there are no flying saucers from Zeta Reticuli? -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.22.00 From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 06:48:10 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:52:14 -0400 Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.22.00 TMP NEWS The E-News Service of The Millennium Project http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews http://persweb.direct.ca/psa August 22, 2000 _____________________________ WEEKLY BRIEFING A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports 8.22.00 ION-POWERED SPACECRAFT SETS FLIGHT RECORD A futuristic engine on an experimental spacecraft has racked up more operating time in space than any previous propulsion system, NASA said... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/18/deep.space.1/index.html RADIO ASTRONOMERS CAPTURE PREVIEW OF SUN'S APOCALYPSE Scientists this week released a preview of the demise of our own solar system: a time-lapse movie showing a star, similar to our sun, ejecting gas during a late stage of its life... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/17/dying.star/index.html IBM DEVELOPS WORLD'S MOST ADVANCED QUANTUM COMPUTER IBM said Tuesday it had developed the world's most advanced quantum computer, a device based on the mysterious quantum physics properties of atoms that allow them to work together as a computer's processor and memory... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/computing/08/15/quantum.reut/index.html PROJECT VOYAGER: FIRMAGE SHEDS ET AURA FOR SCIENCE SITE Controversial Silicon Valley wizard Joe Firmage and Ann Druyan of The Planetary Society, widow of the late Carl Sagan, continue work on new joint science-based media project... http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2556219.html STATEMENT FROM COLIN ANDREWS REGARDING CROP CIRCLE ANNOUNCEMENT IN UK Well known crop circle researcher Colin Andrews releases his latest findings in the UK, stating that 80% of formations are probable hoaxes and the rest may be caused by the Earth's own magnetic field. The announcement has caused mixed reactions and much debate among researchers, media and the public worldwide... http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/colinstatement.html NEW RECONSTRUCTION AND ANALYSIS OF 'MARS FACE' A new reconstruction of the infamous "Face on Mars' is compared to Mark Carlotto's previous predictions for the new (best-ever) view which would have been obtained by NASA during the lastest imaging opportunity last May, had they just bothered to click the camera... http://www.geocities.com/macbot/facephotos.html FLOWING WATER AT NORTH POLE ALARMS SCIENTISTS According to scientists who visited the north pole this month, there is free- standing ocean water at the north pole for the first time in 50 million years, where the ice cap has thinned an estimated 40% in the last 50 years. Can anyone say global warming?... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2000/08/item20000820121824_1.htm FBI TO RELEASE CARNIVORE DOCUMENTS The FBI will begin releasing 3,000 pages of documents describing its "Carnivore" e-mail surveillance system, the Justice Department said Wednesday, but the schedule for the disclosure immediately drew criticism from a civil liberties group... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/computing/08/17/justice.carnivore/index.html _____________________________ TMP News is the e-news service of The Millennium Project, a future studies research organization, providing a Weekly Briefing of the latest news and reports relating to the most phenomenal, enigmatic and controversial issues of our time in science and technology, as well as periodic information and updates on TMP-related news and events. TMP News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by TMP, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the TMP News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews See the TMP web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa _____________________________ � The Millennium Project, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Nancy Talbott on Dreamland Sunday 8-27-00 From: Beverly Trout <btufo@netins.net> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:16:22 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:53:33 -0400 Subject: Nancy Talbott on Dreamland Sunday 8-27-00 Nancy Talbott of BLT Research will be talking with Whitley Strieber about crop formations Sunday night, Aug. 27, on Dreamland - which, IMO, will add some sense to current debate sparked by pronouncements from certain researchers. Bev Trout
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 22 Coloradans Believe Truth Is Out There, Poll Shows From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 03:37:07 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 23:00:20 -0400 Subject: Coloradans Believe Truth Is Out There, Poll Shows Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News, http://insidedenver.com/news/0821poll4.shtml Stig *** Coloradans believe truth is out there, poll shows More cite paranormal, occult, space aliens as fact than in 1992 By Bill Scanlon Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer ---------------------------------------------------------------- Are aliens from other planets living among us? One in eight Coloradans believe they are. Almost half of Coloradans believe in ghosts; a quarter believe that our souls are reincarnated after we die; more than a third believe it's possible for one person to read the mind of another. When it comes to the occult, the extraterrestrial and the paranormal, Coloradans believe, believe and believe � more so than they did eight years ago. A Colorado News Poll asked 607 Coloradans last month about their beliefs. The survey conducted for the Denver Rocky Mountain News and News4 by Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy Inc. has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent. More than half of those surveyed believe there are advanced forms of life on other planets. Almost three-fourths believe heaven exists; but less than half believe hell exists and that people who sin go to hell and suffer eternal damnation. Forty-eight percent believe mankind evolved from lower forms of life; 43 percent do not. Two-thirds of college-educated Coloradans believe humans evolved, but just one-third of those without college degrees believe that. Younger Coloradans and the less educated are the most likely to believe in the occult, extraterrestrials and mystical powers. For example, 10 percent of college-educated Coloradans believe space aliens live among us, but 14 percent of non-college educated residents do. And while 15 percent of those under 35 suspect their neighbors might be from another solar system, just 8 percent of those 50 and older do. The fact that there is no scientific proof of those beliefs doesn't seem to matter, said Robert Baker, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Kentucky. Modern Americans aren't so different than primitive humans who thought that when lightning struck it was God throwing thunderbolts, Baker said. "So many things about the world and nature are absolutely mysterious to them," he said. The desire to find supernatural explanations for natural events is still with us, and will be until more people get good basic scientific educations, Baker said. Their beliefs in ghosts or aliens, pyramids or crystals give them psychological closure on matters they can't explain. "They're not left dangling in the wind." Baker, a skeptic and member of the Scientific Committee for Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, blames newspapers, books, television and movies. "Never in the history of mankind has an extraterrestrial vehicle landed on Earth," said Baker. But that doesn't stop the media from playing up the least likely explanation � that it's a flying saucer � rather than the most likely � that it's a natural phenomenon or an Air Force plane. And then there are the people from other planets, lionized in The X-Files, Star Trek and Star Wars. "Every day that goes by, scientists are more sure that highly evolved creatures don't exist" on other planets, Baker said. Yet, the famous extraterrestrials of the movies look similar to humans. "To expect life like ours anywhere near us is chasing a will-o'-the-wisp." If there were intelligent life on other planets, it would be as likely to look like jellyfish or amoebas as Princess Leia, he said. "But I doubt if people would rush to the theaters to see a film based on giant amoebas moving slowly across the Earth." Coloradans aren't alone. In a poll of 1,015 Americans in October, 48 percent of Americans said ghosts may exist, and more than a quarter suspect modern-day witches may have mystical powers. Almost half the Coloradans surveyed last month believe that ghosts haunt certain places. Belief in ghosts is as old as humankind, and there undoubtedly will be ghosts spotted on spaceships, Baker said. "People believe in ghosts because of our desire to be immortal," Baker said. "We all want to live forever. If ghosts really exist, that's proof that some spirit form of the human body does continue to exist. And that's much to be desired." People like to believe that the universe isn't random, that there is a universal sense of justice, Baker said. Hence, the popularity of movies such as Ghost, Sixth Sense and What Lies Beneath, in which the dead come back to right wrongs. Fewer people will believe in the paranormal when more people get a good scientific education, learning how nature works and about winds, the ocean, birds, bees and evolution, Baker said. "The more we understand the natural world, the more we realize there is definitely a reason behind all this," Baker said. Michael Preston, an English professor at the University of Colorado, points to a strong desire today to believe in a greater power. It can be seen in presidential candidates invoking God; in pilgrims making their way to the UFO capital of Roswell, N.M.; in young people buying crystals and pyramids; or in worshipers filling fundamentalist Christian churches. "It's comforting to think there is some higher power, something that can be counted on," Preston said. "For some people, they can abdicate certain responsibility by counting on these things." Recent surveys say 91 percent of Americans believe in God. Believers say God isn't something that can be seen, measured, weighed or captured in a test tube. Rather, God exists outside the laws of physics. Grace Marie, 44, of Fort Collins, believes in the power of witches, but isn't sure she would ascribe supernatural powers to them. "When a witch has a good intention, you might say that magic is created just through what you put out to the universe that you'd like to have come back for you." Marie, who has studied shamanism for 25 years, also believes that some people can see the future or communicate with the dead. "Some people can contact spirits from the other world," she said. "It's just a matter of tuning into the energy and asking for guidance and assistance." She has never seen extraterrestrials, but, "There are thousands of people out there who claim to have contact with them, so I really don't want to discount it." She believes in heaven, and hell, too, "but not in the traditional sense of fire and damnation, Satan and the devil. Hell could be living in poverty in a Third World country � that's hell on earth." August 21, 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------- � Copyright, Denver Publishing Co.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 01:52:31 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:35:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 22:17:08 EDT >Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT >>Subject: Request for Information - And Help >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >Jim, List: >It's not unkown for streetlights controlled by photo cells to >shut off when a car approaches. Possibly due to atmospheric >conditions which cause glare from the car's headlights, or one >or both headlights might be adjusted a little high. Not that high. And never out of adjustment. Then there are the other cars around me. Over the period of time between 1963 when I owned my first car, until this moment, I have owned numerous motor vehicles. All have exhibited the same phenom from maladjusted lights? Unlikely Bob. IN taxi cabs whilst waiting for a light to go green. In trains whilst waiting for the train to pull out of the station. In subways. In aircraft whilst taxiing to and from the gate where the pilot announces, "Well, there's a first, folks... the lights over thetarmac just winked out!" >>Stars which move within three to five degrees of arc, about >>magnitude 4+, and move erratically, zigzagging, starting and >>stopping. Witnesses. All of these events witnessed. And by non >>believers who have given attributes which could not possibly >>restrain even Fill Class from hysterical fits of laughing. <snip> >Jim, this sounds like autokinetic motion of the eye muscles. The >eye is continually moving, the brain usually just filters it >out. I believe this is probably the cause for the "falling leaf >effect" often reported, more so in the early days of UFO >sightings. Moving aircraft or satellites will also appear to >stop, reverse motion, or zig-zag around. I also believe that >this is the explanation for many so-called 90-degree turns. Maybe. But would this phenom preclude just that one star performing these acrobatics? In other words, would not the stars in the vicinity also act the same way? Why just the one? And why do witnesses also see the same thing as I see? Are their eyes also suffering from autokinetic muscle movement? >The classic experiment, done I think in the 1920s or 30s, was to >have a small light in a totally darkened room. Viewers will see >motion. I use a reostat-controlled light in a darkened >planetarium which is used to simulate a nova or super-nova. >Within seconds viewers see it "swinging" back and forth as if >it's on a parachute. >This effect is particularly noticeable which the object is high >overhead and isolated, or bright nearer the horizon so that >atmospheric extinction hides the dimmer stars. One can usually >notice this within seconds. Anyone on this list should try it >tonight in the sky is clear. Choose a bright star, as you >mention, high up or isolated from others. Been looking through telescopes for nearly 45 years. Never seen anything like this. Only one star in a field of stars is moving erratically. Thank you Robert. But the theory does not compute in this case. I believe that something strange is happening. That it is happening I also believe. Actually happening. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 01:58:57 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:49:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Mortellaro >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:51:11 -0500 (CDT) >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net> >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT >>Subject: Request for Information - And Help >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Dear List Members and EBK, ><snip> >>Surrounding lights simply wink out when the abductee walks or >>drives by. Usually whilst in a motor vehicle. And independent of >>the driver or passengers who may or may not be there other than >>me. And with witnesses to the phenom. Sometimes in proximity to >>an event but often not. And occurring many to many times to >>simply be a statistical coincidence. Most interesting of all, is >>the apparent fact that 99% of these lights are electro-optically >>controlled, not swithced on by a contact device, but switched on >>by light (or the lack of it). >>Almost always "hearing" a meteor. >>Digital devices (timing circuits) cannot function around me. Out >>of the dozen or so TV's which I have owned since vacuum tubes >>went to Russia to stay, only one kept time and not accurately. >>Most were shipped to the manufacturer who opined that nothing at >>all was wrong. >>Most automobiles today operate on microcomputers, custome chips >>which keep the car going, lights, engine, even the windshield >>wipers and the HVAC systems. Not mine. Not the Aurora or the >>VR-6 VW or that wonderful 1993 Mustang 5L. That one still gives >>trouble after ten years and only 12,000 miles. The Taurus can't >>keep itself in automatic driver's side roll down electric window >>chips. I could go on. >Regarding the electromagnetic hijinks above: have you ever >considered scanning your yourself with one of those meters that >detects electromagnetic emissions? One example I bookmarked some >time back follows: >http://www.maui.net/~emf/ Since I've been a ham operator since 1957, I have accumulated a goodly number of little toys which measure radiation of EM waves. When I worked for Grumman in 1966 thru 1969, I became friends with the RFI engineers. Conducted and radiated EM interference was an issue on the spacecraft I was assigned to then and of course, still is. I have small but powerful equipment which can measure even minute amounts of RF energy and tell me the frequency as well. Plus I have been scanned by x-ray equipment for implants. We've been unable to find anything in or on me. Good thinking though. >Of course it does cost some bucks - oh well. Anyway, it might be >interesting and informative to see if it thinks you're an EMF >emission source of some sort. One approach might be to have a >friend take such a meter and gradually approach you with it from >an initial distance well out of range - whatever that is (a >block away maybe?). Then have him watch what it detects, if >anything as he walks closer. By the time he's the same distance >from you as those winking streetlights, perhaps the meter will >tell you something. >If not, send it back for a refund ;-) >By the way, I don't represent the above folks; in fact I don't >know them at all except through a testimonial from a ghost >hunters group at http://ghostweb.com/yancem1.html >Anyway, my 2 cents from out in the weeds, >-Brian C. A good two cents it was, worth more than two cents. Even makes a lot of sense. But there were no discoveries. In a way, I wish we could find something out of the ordinary. At least then, there would be something on which to pin this phenom. Best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:48:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:02:33 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:58:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' Sean wrote: >Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is a >number of times. Sean, The Autumn 1997 issue of 'The Unopened Files' magazine, featured a 10-page article I had written on the case, highlighting the considerable new evidence just revealed by Penniston. It's fair to say this article took a positive view of the 'facts' then available. However, I was suckered and disconcerting to realise, would probably still be a staunch supporter of the 'UFO' evidence if those five original testimonies hadn't been uncovered. Penniston, in common with Burroughs and Halt in their detailed, public accounts, forgot to mention the abortive lighthouse chase that first night. It was far from the only anomaly between the stories previously told and what could suddenly now be evidenced. An analysis of those anomalies can be seen in 'Resolving Rendlesham', at: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/rend3.htm Jenny, like myself and others, has been compelled to reconsider the overall perspective in the light, no pun intended, of the true facts which have, only recently, become available. >I think one of the best pieces written about this case was by >James Easton and he called it "Resolving Rendlesham". I didn't >agree with his results but you could see that he has put some >real hard work into the case. I'm pleased to hear you found this helpful. Noted therein are those who helped make sense of the new evidence and that collaboration was a major factor in achieving anything. >It is possible for any UK researcher to actually go down to >Rendlesham forest and see for themselves just how much hokum >this light house theory is. If by 'the lighthouse theory', you mean the question of whether Orford Ness lighthouse was mistaken for a 'UFO', it's already established that it was. However, was that 'strange flashing red [or yellow] light' subsequently described by Halt, in what can be demonstrated as almost exactly the same location, also the lighthouse beacon? When Halt confirms on tape that what seems to be the same light, with an identical, recorded 110-120 degrees compass heading, is next seen, he states, "This looks like it's clear off to the coast. It's right on the horizon. Moves about a bit and flashes from time to time. Still steady or red in color". Surely, this light 'clear off to the coast' and in the compass direction of Orford Ness lighthouse has to be the lighthouse beacon which so deceived Burroughs and the others. If we accept that's the default conclusion, if not if fact proven, then we should note that Halt describes it as a _RED_ light and that's the end of any argument about whether the lighthouse beacon could sometimes appear to be red/yellow. Otherwise, what exactly is being proposed [by anyone] as an explanation for this red light on the coast and what does it have to do with UFOs? It's unfortunately not possible to visit the location and experience the same environment as existed in late December, 1980. Aside from the forest being almost completely destroyed in that 1987 freak hurricane, the lighthouse's output has changed. At the time of our UFO excitement, the main light was a 3KW 100V filament lamp; it's now a 1KW 240V Mercury Vapour Discharge lamp. If I recall correctly, Peter Brookesmith was also advised by Trinity House that for several years the beacon has been shielded from sweeping so far inland, due to local complaints. Incidentally, thanks for reminding me about 'Resolving Rendlesham'. It's been a while since I last read it and I had almost forgotten something hugely significant which it highlighted: Another indication that neither Burroughs, Cabansag nor even Penniston ever witnessed a 'nut's n' bolts' object comes from the archives of 'ParaNet', a computer 'bulletin board' and messaging system. On 12 Aug 91, Jim Speiser, a respected researcher and frequent ParaNet contributor wrote of the then forthcoming 'Unsolved Mysteries' coverage: "Another witness, John Burroughs, will also be featured. Burroughs lay low for many years after the sighting, but came forward to me back in 1989. He has since spoken to several researchers, and together we are spearheading an effort to re-focus public attention to the case". "Burroughs has agreed to be interviewed for an exclusive ParaNet release". On 20 September, 1991, Speiser published on ParaNet the transcript of a brief series of questions which Burroughs had answered. Amongst these was the following dialogue regarding the 'Unsolved Mysteries' broadcast: [John Powell]: "Regarding one of the last clips shown, which depicted one or two airmen prone as a very nearby and clearly craft-like object rose from a landing position and took off, do you know if there were any ground traces of this?" [Burroughs]: "First of all, we did not see a structured 'craft' as was depicted. All we saw were lights that seemed to imply a structure of some kind. Later inspection showed three round depressions at that spot, forming an equilateral triangle. The British Police explained these as 'rabbit holes'".[End] Whether rabbit excavations or not, the important point is that Burroughs claims _nobody_ saw a "structured 'craft'". And even Burroughs in all his public appearances, plus lengthy discussions with researchers about the case, has never, to my knowledge, ever, revealed the two mile pursuit of a lighthouse beacon. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:38:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:08:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Randles >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:57:16 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 19:36:33 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>To debunk is widely regarded as a derogatory form of scepticism >>- implying blindly shooting down a case without recourse to the >>evidence. That's patently not what I am doing. >>But if you think otherwise - how and why? >Jenny, it's nothing personal here - it is just interesting how >you change the rules to suit your mood. In an earlier book >(photo section) in "From Out of the Blue", you state: 'the >Orford Ness lighthouse has been used by debunkers to "explain" >the sightings...' So now that you are favouring this theory, >it's no longer to be regarded as a debunking tool and the >"lighthouse" believers are not now debunkers. sigh! Hi, No mystery here. And I am changing no rules as you put it. When I wrote that book (ten years ago) we knew a great deal less about the case than we do now. The lighthouse theory (which is all it has ever been) (even now) required at that stage several things. But mostly it required near total suspension of the witness testimony and disregard of their clearly stated views that they had seen the lighthouse and it was not the UFO. Having myself been out there, seen the lighthouse, listened to the witnesses discuss it and considered this view carefully I argued in 'From out of the Blue' that the lighthouse theory is plausible when you yourself see the lighthouse under those conditions. The ones that persuaded Ian Ridpath in l983, for example. Your views may only change (and mine did) when judging that alongside what the witnesses tell you. From out of the blue clearly says precisely this. I don't think Ian then (perhaps not even now) had spoken to these witnesses (save Halt, whom I believe he has chatted with informally). So his theory was mostly based on (seemingly now well founded) inspiration. The lighthouse theory is clearly a sceptical (I prefer to call it rational) interpretation of this case. It becomes debunking if you use it on the premise often applied by debunkers that 'it can't be a UFO therefore it must be a lighthouse' and effectively junk all the contrary evidence to accept it. I was not prepared to do that. Some were. To me that's the difference between rational scepticism and debunking here. So what has changed? An awful lot. I haven't simply leapt onto the lighthouse for fun - or effect - or the need for variety in something to say. The quality of evidence has markedly improved in the past three years as James Easton well points out. This overcomes both of the problems I set out above to such a degree that what was formerly considered debunking can now rightly be considered a perfectly rational stance on this case. It may still not be correct - of course - but it is patently objective and the onus now clearly is to demonstrate the fallibility of this theory that began as guesswork by a forester (Vince Thurkettle) and was picked up by Ian Ridpath and developed. Because it has now entered the realms of the best explanation for all available facts IMO. It doesn't sit easily with some data. No theory does. But it matches more than the others so far as I can see and that's the true test. Now it has real hard evidence to back it up. So it is certainly far more than guesswork and can no longer reasonably be called debunking. James Easton summarises the key points and in the book Georgina appears to so detest (The UFOs that Never Were) I spend about 23,000 words discussing in great detail all the key stages of this case - adding further witness testimony that illuminates much of this. If you found James's arguments interesting - read this book - and you will see even more rational discussion about why this theory cannot now just be wished away. It really is - in total - quite a numbing argument. I am not surprised many are turning from it in horror. But - sadly - we all have to be prepared to follow where the evidence trail leads. Its the first ground rule of every UFO investigator. Basically it comes down to two things - though. The two things that transform debunking guesswork into reasonable hypothesis. The main witnesses admit that they were fooled by the lighthouse on the night in question so clearly failed to recognise what it was for part of the night. They did subsequently discover its identity (and that's important and isn't being overlooked by me as readers of my IUR article will know). So I don't think we can buy the straight - they saw the lighthouse and didn't know what it was - idea (because their own testimony proves that they did eventually know). But it clearly shows the ambiguity of this light source, its potential to create misperception and makes the theory viable if there was some other reason why the lighthouse could have looked temporarily very strange that night. And there was - a prismatic mirage effect - which fits very well. Secondly, Halt's unfamiliarity with the lighthouse was glaringly displayed by his clear belief that the lighthouse was located where the lightship was - meaning that what he thought was the UFO was in reality the lighthouse. That's beyond a doubt what he seems to be saying in the Sally Rayl interview. If there are other ways to interpret this statement I'd love to hear them because I consider Halt a decent guy and a responsible witness and I am not at all desperate to prove he saw the lighthouse. But what do you in a case when the witnesses own words say what they do? You can pretend that isn't true because you like the witness and you want this case to be a UFO. Or you can decide the uncomfortable reasoning these words seem to dictate. Its up to you. But if you are honest I think you'll admit to yourself what you really have to do here. So - Georgina - there's a world of difference in these ten years. All Ufologists should be willing to reassess a case when new evidence appears. That's all I have done because this theory has turned from guesswork to very logical argument over the past few years. Anyone still doubting - please do the courtesy of reading my arguments in 'The UFOs that Never Were' and judge for yourself - as they are based on many witness interviews, mountains of evidence and 20 years experience of this case with a first hand perspective on the area. It is a long long way from guesswork or debunking. I promise - as soon as I am contractually free to do so - I will post this onto the net so you can all read it there for nothing. If - of course - Georgina comes up with reason to change perception on this case with her new evidence then fair enough. I wont hesitate. But its going to be a tall order and she doesn't seem willing to even hint as to how or why the lighthouse theory will be completely eliminated. I don't expect her to give away the secrets of her book. But surely she could progress this argument a little by saying something - if only in general - such as - we have proved the lighthouse was inoperable on the night in question. Now that would scupper the theory. Whereas - airman X who has spoken to me for the first time says he saw the UFO next to the lighthouse. That would be interesting but clearly could not be said to totally eliminate the lighthouse because it doesn't effect the testimony of the primary witnesses (Halt, Burroughs and Penniston). So its really just an idea of the kind of evidence Georgina believes she has which I would have thought she could surely tell us. Without it - at this stage and given the evidence as it stands - I cannot in all conscience just believe her own conviction. But I am willing to give her new evidence a very fair hearing because I am not in any way desperate to prove this case is dead and buried. I guess time will tell. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:21:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:13:38 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:00:03 -0500 >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Andy, >I never said radical misperception does not exist. I did say >that it is rarer than your unverified, unproven sweeping >assertions to the contrary -- >>I beg to differ about the Mantel case - he radically >>misperceived a man made object and died for the stupidity of it. >>None of his or anyone else's descriptions on that fateful >>January day described a balloon. What they did describe was - >>and you should know because it's in your (excellent) books a >>'parachute', an 'ice-cream cone', something of 'tremendous size' >>for a few. Not to mention the fact that Mantel attributed great >>speed to the object - something I believe Skyhook balloons were >>not generally known for. >This is absolutely false in just about every particular, and it >precisely underscores the reason I have a hard time taking you >seriously on this matter. In fact, Mantel did not radically >misperceive the Skyhook, and there is no evidence that he or >anyone else who saw it did. Their problem was that they had >never heard of or seen a Skyhook. Being in a charitable mood >today (I just received word that I've sold a new book), I will >grant that your hazy memory is probably confusing subsequent >legends about Mantel that grew up in the years following the >case (and that were published uncritically in the UFO >literature), and you're putting those silly stories into the >witnesses' mouths. Having been charitable, I now go on to be >less so and suggest that you're being awfully careless here. Hi, Sorry Andy but I have to support Jerry on this one. I assessed the Mantel case in 'Something in the Air' (UFO Danger in the Air - in the US) and you'll see from that chapter on the case that we can identify the source as a balloon was precisely because of the consistent manner in which the witnesses described it (not just Mantel - all those on the ground too). They described tear drop and ice cream cone and parachute canopy shapes that are not radically out of line with the actual shape of a balloon. It was moving with the wind at a speed consistent with it being wind borne. Mantel's description as to speed at close proximity is an interesting illusion that may well lie at the heart of a few other pilot error cases where balloons are concerned. Its caused - I suspect - by the speed of the plane being misread as partly due to the aircraft and partly to the object because pilots are habitually used to seeing objects in the sky that are moving (such as other aircraft) and not objects that essentially are not (such as balloons). So they transpose some of their speed to the balloon. Indeed the witness testimony of this object is so good that it allows retrospective resolution of the case years later. The case records show that the ground crew at Godman suspected a balloon from their own observations but could find no trace of one that should be up there. Later Wright Patterson - when analysing the case - hit the same problem. Because the balloon was a secret project. Mantel was brave and foolish. He did probably get carried away with his misinterpretation because of the climate of UFO belief (not the last to do that by any means). But to the end he merely described a large silvery mass well above him (as the balloon still was) and I don't see any evidence that he offered significantly distorted descriptions. Indeed one of the wing men who climbed up with Mantel, but sensibly broke off as they were climbing too high, well described the balloon as tear drop shaped and fluid - which having seen film of a skyhook balloon is pretty much how I would have described it too. This case is hugely instructive for many reasons. The way the military handled it helped foster the cover up (there is evidence they suspected it might be a true unknown because the Skyhook project was kept from them and they were really bemused). (Allen Hynek was part of the analysis team - and with whom I discussed the case - is worth reading on this because he was put under enormous pressure to debunk the case because the USAF were truly scared of having to admit one of their own was downed by a UFO that some of them did for a time genuinely suspect) The legends that have grown around this case have transformed it as must happen in many other incidents (Rendlesham certainly not excepted). And the witnesses on the ground were unfamiliar with high altitude balloons which in l948 were a far less common sight than now. So we can see why this case was stranger then than if it happened in say l998 when I suspect Ufologists would know the answer in five minutes. There is little doubt Mantel thought it was a UFO and responded to the then media inspired 'strangeness' that this implied. I also think a few other classic mid air cases probably result from a pilot misinterpreting a balloon of this sort (even in daylight). But I doubt that we can reasonably term this as a radical misinterpretation as what the witnesses say they saw here was pretty well what was really there. So if anything this is a mis-evaluation of the rather well described physical parameters at the time and after the fact. And that I suspect is another matter. Its also worth noting that whilst I do agree with Andy that radical misperception occur - I have investigated some - they we don't know enough about how widespread this phenomenon is (by meaningful research for example) to make too much out of that. It is dangerous to assume a generality from a number of extreme examples. It is worth recalling the one study I have done of IFO perception (something that needs testing further to properly evaluate what I agree is an important question). In that research (reported at length in one of my earlier books) (UFO Reality, l983) I collated 100 witness statements about the sighting on 31 December 1978 of the re-entry of the booster rocket from the Cosmos 1068 launch. This created a spectacular sighting over the UK and because people were on their way to New Years Eve parties there were many witnesses. This random sample was highly instructive. What it showed was that there was deeply worrying levels of misreporting. We knew exactly what had been seen (we even had film of it). But estimates of duration, size, speed, height - even time of day - were wrong. One of the least accurate reports was by police officers supposedly using their station clock! It was common for witnesses to assume the disconnected trail of debris was in fact connected and that these glowing blobs were lights or windows on an unseen cigar shaped hull. So we got many reports of very low level crashing aircraft, blazing rockets and cylindrical craft from what was simply a trail of burning debris miles high in the atmosphere. In that sense it was a radical misperception. But these witnesses actually described the object following rules of perception that we can understand. Indeed this work has proved invaluable to me because the close comparison of the results of this research project left me sure that the Manchester Airport Jan l995 case (one of the best known UK cases in recent years) was explicable in the same way. And from this deduction I could seek (and find) evidence of a bolide that might have triggered the pilots sighting in the same manner. The experience of one radical misperception allowed a reasoned theory to be offered about another. However, I am doubtful whether it is fair to really term the Cosmos case a radical misperception. Yes, witnesses got basic facts wrong. Yes, they often saw the object as a low level craft with windows - which it certainly wasn't. So in those respects my study vindicates what Andy is saying. But - heres the rub - not one witness offered a seriously distorted description of what was seen - sufficiently so that we could not have worked back from it to solve the case from their account. There were no domed disc spaceships reported. There were no aliens seen in association. Indeed the trappings of the close encounter UFO phenomenon were absent. So, yes, this study supports Andy up to a point (and - as I say - needs reproducing - and serves as a good example of why IFO cases are not for debunkers alone but for Ufologists to take seriously too) (the very point Andy, Dave and I make in 'The UFOs that Never Were') But it argues against the conclusion that the extraordinary things we see within Ufology - the car stops, close encounter features etc - indeed the things that to me constitute the 'real' UFO mystery - can automatically be extrapolated from a few examples of radical misperception of a known stimulus. Unfortunately the evidence that we have from the minimal studies (like this one) that we have done so far do not support the validity of that argument. Its why - in Rendlesham - as I have made clear - whilst the facts about the congruence of the lighthouse and the UFO are damning - you cannot leap from these alone to an acceptance that the lighthouse generated a radical misperception complete with alleged physiological / Oz Factor effects. That's why I keep stressing that the close encounter phase when Burroughs, Penniston and Cabansag reputedly experienced significant 'altered reality' experiences in close proximity to what they saw cannot just be written off as part of the radical misperception. In fact these issues are the crux of the whole case. I cannot deny the role of the lighthouse. How can anyone? I cannot deny that witnesses might perceive it in extraordinary ways (especially if there are other factors at work that night). How can any investigator who has researched a case that turned out to be a radical misperception? But what we also have to do here is understand the close encounter phase of this case - and I don't pretend that I can - because I think that to assume this was all down to psychological factors, or deception, or false memory - is easy and yet crosses the line between responsible, objective scepticism and guesswork inspired wish it all way thinking. It may prove right. But we cannot say that right now. Past experience - eg of the Cosmos research - shows that it is a dangerous assumption to argue this and that it proves correct it will be right through lucky guesswork and not through deductive reasoning. Ufology needs to be about deductive reasoning. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:15:20 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:58:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Morning Andy, all listers following this thread. >I have tried to avoid commenting on thread for a number of >reasons. >1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >a number of times. Her explanation of new facts doesn't wash >with me because it seams more like her explanation changes >according to the crowd that she is hanging out with, but hey >that is my opinion only. Hi, Hope you don't go in for deduction as a living, Sean, cause you are not much good at it I'm afraid. I've explained precisely why my views on this case have developed as the evidence has developed. If you want to make inane judgements on that all I can say is that you wont cut it as a UFO investigator because any Ufologist not willing to follow where the evidence takes them is a liability not an asset. As I would have thought this list can see I don't support the hardline views of this case - that its all cut and dried. But my comments on it are based on years of witness interviews and first hand research. They have nothing to do with the 'crowd I am hanging out with' - as the Ufologists I regularly interact with and think of as close colleagues and friends hasn't changed much in those 20 years. Although there have been some welcome new additions, of course. So do me the favour of forming an opinion that at least makes sense. >Rendlesham forest and see for themselves just how much hokum >this light house theory is. Hey people, why don't you get off >your back side and go and have a look. Why don't you set out some hard facts as to why it is 'hokum' instead of issuing armchair pronouncements. That would be a little more productive. I'd really like to see your hard reasoning that disputes the evidence presented on this list because so far the skeptics have been offering all the facts and the ones who disagree have done nothing except call it hokum. Sadly you have to do better than that. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:08 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:17:06 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:04:03 -0400 >From: Victor J.Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:00:08 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>With regards to the FT reports in East Anglia, of course I am >>aware of them. What I said was that I had not personally >>investigated these reports so could not comment from that >>perspective. Thats all. >Jenny, >With respect, your reply diverts attention from the 'crux' of my >original message to you, which was to challenge your assertion >that the Bacup - Todmorden area (Lancs) "was the busiest area >for UFO activity in the entire UK (possibly in Europe)" Hi, I truly dont see how, Victor? The response initially was to a request for details of cases in this area (which I did - BTW - supply after extensive checks) (there were quite a few cases as I suspected). All it was written as was an indication of why I needed dates narrowing down as there would be quite a number of cases on record. There was. The area still generates activity. And two books are I gather being written about it as we speak. So others seem to think its active as well. Whatever may or may not be being seen over Essex I cannot comment on because I havent investigated them. I have heard reports. But I dont have reason to judge this area more active as a long term window area (as the Pennines clearly is) as opposed to generating some modern nightly shuttle. >You also now say that your *are* aware of "the almost nightly >shuttle of FTs between certain 'sensitive sites' between 1989 - >1997". So what was the point of mentioning the reports you saw >as BUFORA D of I. of "aircraft travelling to Europe... or >climbing out of Stanstead...(Airport)? Because I havent investigated your cases but BUFORA did investigate cases from the same area some years ago and concluded the above about those. I obviously cannot say that your cases are aircraft - but we found that changes in modern aviation practice resulted in this increase in lights that were generating frequent local UFO sightings. So this may - or may not - be relevant to your own cases. >You also wrote: >>So I think its fair to argue that there is ample reason to >>support this as being a highly active window area. Its hard to >>imagine there could be more close encounters in any other UK >>window. So it really wasnt an idea that I just made up. >There is a gulf of difference between a "highly active window >area" and "the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire UK >(possibly in Europe)" No-one has suggested (certainly not me) >that this was an idea that you "just made up". Well, unless there is a league table of window areas I am unaware of my criteria are the sheer number of cases (especially close encounters - not just LITS - although there are plenty of these too) within a confined area. All dating back many, many years and putting the Pennines on a level with regions like those in Australia generating the Min Min lights or Texas where the Marfa lights are a tourist attraction. Although in the Pennines there seems an even highrer incidence of 'alien contact' activity. I havent seen evidence of anywhere else in the UK that matches and - whilst my knowledge of Europe is less complete and there are interesting locales such as the area north of Marseilles in France that could qualify - my assessment of the Pennines is one based on direct observation and experience. Thats all. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:40:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:18:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:52:14 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchin <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >This weekend I picked up and read Ms. Randle's 'World's Best >True UFO Stories' (apparently a children's book, but I >couldn't help myself... ) and came across the story regarding >the 1987 incident on Ilkley Moor. >After doing a moderately lengthy net.search today, I seem to be >unable to find a copy of the infamous picture that "Philip" took >of his little visitor. >(I did find a link that says the photo is being reinvestigated?) >Can someone please post a URL of the photo? (there must be one!) >Thanx. Hi, I don't have copyright clearance to do this. Or the technical capabilities. But Peter Hough (my close friend and colleague) (not on the net) owns copyright and has generally been happy to make this extraordinary photo available. So if anyone has a way to post it (a good quality first generation colour image shows it best) I am sure he will oblige. There is a full page colour reproduction in my book 'UFOs and how to see them' - published in the UK by Collins & Brown and in the US by Sterling. In the meantime I am happy to answer any questions on this remarkable case - certainly one of the most intriguing I have ever been involved in and possibly the only known case where an abductee reputedly photographed his abductor. And no I'm not going to debunk it out of existence because in this case all efforts to do so have failed - merely cast up a few nagging doubts but nothing more. It is an incredible story. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 ElectroMagnetic Attack? From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:20:40 -0400 Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack? Hi, Just a quick line of interest, I recently heard a radio program (BBC Radio 4) which was based on computer hacking and cyber-war across countries. During this program they talked to one chap from the U.S. who went on to mention, that the U.S. as had been using Electromagnetic attacks which were tested on Automobiles from 500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. The russians have also been using this, according to this program' but on different use's, like pointing into buildings and disabling the internal computer systems inside it. Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? Roy.. For your UFO downloads - www.thelosthaven.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Harrison From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:20:48 +1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:24:03 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Harrison >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:18:09 -0400 >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:36:56 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>This is actually the busiest area for UFO activity in the entire >>UK (possibly in Europe) and the region you suggest generated >>literally dozens of sightings during these four years - possibly >>even more. >Hi Jenny, >No way is the area to which you refer "the busiest area for UFO >activity in the entire UK......." >You are ignoring the South-East of the UK where the almost >nightly shuttle of FTs between certain 'sensitive sites' has >been independently reported from 1989 - 1997. Unless, of >course, you have actually identified the FT as being 'non-UFO'. >Regards, >Victor J.Kean >Project FT Dear Victor Thank you very much for your reply to my request I really do appreciate the time you took to writing to me. I just hope I'm able to find what I'm looking for. This a personal issue and has to do with myself researching ones-self is worse than researching someone else... this is because I'm more hard on me than if it was someone else. I want to get all my facts right... times... dates and so on... I think you understand what I'm saying. There are so many people out there ready to pull every word you say to pieces. Again, thank you Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 INEXPLICATA #7 (Fall 2000) On-Line From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 08:51:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:26:03 -0400 Subject: INEXPLICATA #7 (Fall 2000) On-Line Dear Friends, The Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU) is pleased to announce that Inexplicata #7 (Fall 2000) is already on line for your reading pleasure.... This issue includes features on the harmful effects of UFOs by Javier Garcia Blanco, an examination of saucer looniness by Manuel Carballal, a significant CE-3 in Puerto Rico reported by Lucy Guzman de Pla, a comprehensive article on the Chupacabras crisis in Chile by Raul Nuez, an article on CE-2's by Scott Corrales and a review of Bruno Cardeosa's book on Spain's UFO declassification process. So...enjoy! And remember that we always welcome your feedback. Scott Corrales Director, Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU) www.inexplicata.com lornis1@yahoo.com "Obi-Wan Kenobi? Now that's a name I haven't heard for a long time..." --Obi-Wan Kenobi to Luke Skywalker, SW:ANH (1977)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:31:08 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >From: Jerome Clark <> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:00:03 -0500 Hi Jerry, Thanks again for your reply. It seems that in your desperate attempts to pour scorn on any form of ufological scepticism which gets results you have begun contradicting yourself and have forgotten why you are bothering to reply. Before I answer your latest words, I'll just reiterate my case - which by the way hasn't been dinted by your groundless protestations: The original point I made was that the Rendlesham forest 'lights'/'UFOs' were most probably caused by lighthouse/ lightship/stars because of what we know about the nature of radical misperception (hereafter RM) in witnesses. I then went on to give several examples of the resolution of UFO cases into IFO with RM as the stimuli and suggested that possibly_all_unresolved UFO cases may have RM at their root. This assertion was based on the fact that as 'classic' cases fall to RM many ufologists immediately 'forget' the lessons it has taught them and go on to the next 'big' case. You flustered a defence, against what I'm not sure, other than your hatred of solved cases, resulting in your latest replies.....the bones of which were: >You may consider this incredible, but in science you need >to make a case, and you haven't made one. I'm not sure I understand what, in your terms, 'a case' is. If demonstrating complex cases of RM isn't one or referring to writers and ufologists who have also come to similar conclusions then I am at a loss to answer your point. >(1) I and my sceptical friends believe we have >demonstrated a handful of cases of radical misperception. This is just silly talk Jerry. Please consider the following. _95% of UFO cases are resolved. As they are always resolved into IFOs consider the mechanism by which they were perceived as UFOs in the first place. It is due to misperception, radical or otherwise. So 95% for a start isn't a handful of cases', is it? _Cases which lie outside that 95% and which have defied resolution for a number of years, ie 'classic' cases are also resolved occasionally in this way. There are several in the UK alone. So these, added to the 95% already attributed to misperception again hardly constitute a 'handful'. >(2) UFOs don't exist, and only silly Americans think >otherwise. To paraphrase you Jerry, I think this phrase is "telling us more, I fear, about Jerry Clark than about the tortured relationship of UFOs to science". What do you mean by 'UFO' and why are these 'UFOs' not resolvable? Please answer because I'm curious. >(3) Therefore, all cases otherwise unexplainable must be >due to radical misperception. Possibly! But as I've repeated many times this theory is only based on what we already know about the way UFO cases are resolved into IFOs. >I never said radical misperception does not exist. I did say >that it is rarer than your unverified, unproven sweeping >assertions to the contrary A glimmer of light! See above. Of Hendry you wrote: >Allan believed, reasonably, that misperceptions are most >likely to occur when the phenomenon being sighted is a >nocturnal light - in other words, a usually distant, >nebulous stimulus. Like the Rendlesham case then eh? >His views of the UFO phenomenon were much closer to >mine than to yours, Andy. You might read the entry on him >in my UFO Encyclopedia, which clears away much of the >mythology surrounding Hendry and his views. I wasn't trying to reinterpret Hendry for you Jerry as I'm sure you understand him, and Hufford, better than anyone alive. But he did point out that radical misperception is a factor in many, many UFO cases and that 'trained' observers are as much beglamoured as untrained ones. >Belief, alas, is the enemy. Let's see the evidence. A >scattered anecdote or two is not evidence. But, as I have demonstrated Jerry, and as the history of UFO to IFO resolution demonstrates this theory is not based on 'scattered anecdote', but overwhelming evidence. Please explain why you think differently. >I do agree, however, that Jenny >Randles is a chum of mine. Thank God we agree on something! >Let's have some specifics here. Simply because a case has >been declared "solved" does not mean it is, as any student >of the long, dismal history of UFO debunking knows. As >the saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. You seem to like to include the word 'debunker' whenever anyone suggests solving cases Jerry. As John Rimmer has said the UK sceptics are not debunkers. Far from it in fact. Are you suggesting that there is no such thing as a 'solved' case, or is it only 'solved' when Jerry Clark says so? Incidentally Jerry, are you an actual investigator or just a writer about UFOs these days, because it seems you have lost touch with the grass roots of the subject and how cases are solved. Which is what we are in it for anyway, surely? Regarding 'predictions' about the future of ufology you wrote: >The above words are just plain dumb, telling us more, I >fear, about Andy Roberts than about the tortured >relationship of UFOs with science. Andy, sadly, is reduced >to asking me for a psychic prediction, and I fear my failure >to provide one will only break his heart. I didn't ask you for a 'psychic prediction' Jerry. I think it was you who first raised the spectre of what would happen to ufology with this quote: >Prediction: sometime in the coming century, after biology >has taken its course and a new generation of scientists, >unencumbered by the bigotry of the generation that came >before it, looks at the UFO question with fresh eyes. A >second prediction: scientists looking -- unsuccessfully -- >for ETI via radio telescopes and the like will finally be >forced to look for evidence in UFO sightings. On that basis I asked you to be perhaps a little more precise. Obviously you can confidently say 'next century' for reasons best known to yourself yet any further questioning is not allowed. My apologies. Of the Mantell case (which you raised) I wrote: >I beg to differ about the Mantell case - he radically >misperceived a man made object and died for the stupidity >of it. None of his or anyone else's descriptions on that >fateful January day described a balloon. What they did >describe was - and you should know because it's in your >(excellent) books a 'parachute', an 'ice-cream cone', >something of 'tremendous size' for a few. Not to mention >the fact that Mantell attributed great speed to the object - >something I believe Skyhook balloons were >not generally known for. and you, strangely, replied: >>This is absolutely false in just about every particular, and >>it precisely underscores the reason I have a hard time >>taking you seriously on this matter. In fact, Mantell did >>not radically misperceive the Skyhook, and there is no >>evidence that he or anyone else who saw it did. Their >>problem was that they had never heard of or seen a >>Skyhook. Yeeees and? That's why they described it in terms which were not those of a balloon until hindsight was available. The words quoted were from your book and do not describe a balloon. The simple fact remains that Mantell and co were seeing a man-made object, not perceiving what it was (not even as generic balloon), believing it to be unusual and so radically misperceiving the object. >>and you're putting those silly stories into the >>witnesses' mouths. _All_ the words were taken from your books Jerry! >False. You simply don't know what you're talking about, >and you seem oddly determined to prove it over and over >again. Maybe your theory is that if you say something long >enough, by some process of rhetorical alchemy it will >become true. Won't happen, sad to say. 'Fraid I do know what I'm talking about Jerry. Not based on armchair research but based on twenty years of fairly intense investigation and research. I'm only going on that and what others have demonstrated to be true about misperception and UFOs. Of the Custer misperception you wrote: >Uh. Yeah. Your point? It's news to you that people see >Venus and mistake it for something else? It's news to you >that atmospheric conditions and optical effects can make >astronomical objects appear to change color? I can >understand why it may be news to Evan Connell (whose >book, which I read and enjoyed years ago, has been >roundly criticized by historians for many inaccuracies, >for whatever that's worth); but that it's news to you shocks >me. So you _have_ understood radical misperception all along Jerry but fail to be able to extend it to any UFO cases or to accept that as it is so prevalent it may be the stimuli for most of not all UFO sightings. >Sounds like Venus to me, fairly well described. We know >all kinds of witnesses have misperceived Venus, >unradically, for a UFO. Now, if Custer and his men had >mistaken it not for a rocket but for a winged elephant, then >I'd be impressed. THAT would be a radical misperception. And then you demonstrate that you haven't, after all, understood the principle. Surely misperceiving Venus, a slow moving planet, as a fast moving fire arrow is radical misperception? No? Mispreceiving Venus as a 'craft' is just about as radical as you can get I would have thought! Please say why you don't agree with this. >Wow -- and we all know how well trained Indian fighters, >outdoor men, and Indian scouts were for astronomical >observations. The scientific journals are overflowing with >their learned sightings and theories. Substitute 'policemen', or any other credible witness of your choice for 'Indian fighters' and you're getting warm Jerry. >Anyway, I guess we now know for sure what I have >suspected all along: "radical misperception" is whatever >Andy Roberts says it is. You keep trying that one Jerry to avoid the facts (and I noticed you chose not to comment on the W.W.II study of radical misperception). If I get someone else to demonstrate what RM is, would it just be 'whatever XXXX says it is'. >As I have said before and say it again, testimony can be >startlingly accurate sometimes and off the mark other >times. We agree! But in the case of UFOs and RM can you give me just_one_ case where the witnesses described a 'UFO' and where it was proved that what they described was what they had seen? Answer: You cant. But the UFO literature is riddled with cases, many cases, of 'UFO's being resolved as IFOs with the mechanism of confusion being RM. That's the point I have been making from the start. One which you occasionally agree with and then retract when it suits you! And finally you concluded: >Making huge claims on small evidence is just about the >perfect definition of pseudoscience. Huge claims built on huge evidence Jerry. If not, I repeat, show me the evidence. I'm afraid to say that your debate on this subject has shown you to be, as Rimmer says a 'world class fence sitter', unable accept the most basic and demonstrable of ufological tenets. I look forward to your reply, which I suspect will be what it always is when you cannot do find any genuine fault with the theory, which is to say 'whatever'! Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:32:27 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:33:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 18:43:48 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >Pardon my ignorance, but don't we need an individual baseline >specifically calibrated to Col. Corso's voice "stress" (or lack >thereof) before we conclusively compare it to a general or >universal baseline in any effort to electronically >post-determine whether he's telling the truth or not? Dennis, I thought Mike made it clear how the process works. The key is to find internal consistency. In other words, find where the subject is telling the truth and then use that to calibrate the truthfulness of other statements. >Without that, how do we know he wasn't just an excellent >raconteur, which is not necessarily the same thing as a >bald-faced liar? There is no indication anywhere on the tape that Col. Corso is lying or being deceptive in any way. >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think ordinary polygraph exams >are calibrated this way. That is, the examinee is asked a >question to which he has to "lie," which serves as a baseline or >register for his or her particular anxiety/stress level, >compared against obvious confirmations of fact, such as the >person's name and birth date. Yes, that is the way they work but VSA is not a polygraph. >Without an individualized calibration, this voice stress >analysis stuff seems about on a scientific par with Reagan's >voodoo economics. He wasn't lying per se -- he just didn't know >any better. Col. Corso has been called a liar many times on this list. There has never been any proof offered that his so-called lies were anything but simple mistakes. The VSA proves, beyond any shadow of doubt, to my way of thinking, that Col. Corso was not a bald-faced liar and that we should reconsider the information he gave us. >Not that I would ever accuse Mr. Corso of exaggeration, of course. I know you'd never do a thing like that. How could anyone even consider the possibility? >But what next to bolster this blatant baloney? Reverse speech >analysis? Blatant baloney?? It's the use of language like this that caused me to hire Mike in the first place. >Fact of the matter is, we've got his demonstratively bogus book. >And nothing could be more damaging or damning. Have you really read "The Day After Roswell? Would you like to point out just what it is that makes this such a 'bogus book'. All I've seen demonstrated on this list are a few possible mistakes that were made by either Col. Corso or Birnes, and none of them major mistakes. Could you be more specific? >Don't you just love coincidences? Corso just happens to be on >duty in Kansas in July, 1947, when the alien bodies pass through >his area Col. Corso spends several minutes on this "coinidendce', as you say, and it is clear that he is not lying about it. He is not making it up and it seems to have happened or at least he believes it happened just as he describes in his book.. >never mind that virtually every other "eyewitness" >account has always maintained that the bodies were _flown_, not >trucked, out of Roswell. And some 20 years later, Corso just >happens to be in position to have his 1947 "experience" >confirmed. Right. Just which eye witnesses are you talking about . If they're still alive would they be willing to be taped for VSA? And do you think that even if they knew something about aliens being flown here and there, that they knew the whole truth about these matters. Col. Corso saw what he believed to be an alien body floating in gel at Ft. Riley Kansas in July of 1947. You have no proof otherwise. I'd like the List to have a sincere discussion of Col. Corso's revelations. I'd like you involved. I think it's well overdue.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:40:14 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:35:17 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 03:41:11 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:44:30 +0100 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>I'm not arguing that airline pilots of policemen in Britain or >>>in America (who are the ones Hendry was actually talking about) >>>are not doing a good job of observing. I'm just saying that they >>>type of pbservation they are trained to do in not necessarily >>>the type of observation that is needed for UFO reports. >>-- >>>John Rimmer >Hi, >Who then is receiving UFO observation training? >Roy.. By definition, no one. isn't that the whole point? -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:25:10 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:36:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - Gehrman >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:32:27 -0700 >Col. Corso has been called a liar many times on this list. There >has never been any proof offered that his so-called lies were >anything but simple mistakes. The VSA proves, beyond any shadow >of doubt, to my way of thinking, that Col. Corso was not a >bald-faced liar and that we should reconsider the information he >gave us. Mike Kemp sent me the link to the software he used to conduct this VSA analysis. As a help file with the program points out, this isn't professional-level VSA software. The help file also points out that while several law enforcement organizations believe in VSA (the Missouri State Police, for instance), the US Defence Department doesn't think it works. Here are some additional comments from the help file, written by the man who wrote the program: To begin with this program is free of charge. I based it (loosely) on a program released by Paul B. Dennis a while back (does anyone know of his whereabouts?). I liked his motives, and like him I make no claims for VSA - you should just find out for yourself. (I�ve used it with some wave files of some famous speakers I found on the Internet at: http://www.involved.com/--that you can start with ) I�ve used it on files, and with live microphone input. (So far, with my sound card, the only way to get a microphone to work has needed a pre-amplifier applied to the sound card line-in socket - a tape recorder output into the same port works as well.) I�ve been messing with it since I first saw Mr. Dennis web page a couple of years ago. (see Truthvsa ), and I still don�t see this as an infallible device, although you may find it more than intriguing! ALSO it appears that using this program on someone without their prior knowledge and consent may be illegal in some places. Again, read Truthvsa, and check your local laws before doing something that might get you in trouble. ;) I wrote this program to make Mr. Dennis program useable enough so that I could find out for myself if VSA really works. I feel like while it�s useable enough to demonstrate the technology, it would be very foolish to base life decisions on this evidence alone. It�s more an interesting toy that you may find fun. Hmmm. "An interesting toy that you may find fun." And on the basis of that, we're told that Corso has now been proved correct beyond any shadow of doubt. Ed, maybe you're putting too much weight on what this very preliminary analysis tells you. Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:25:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:38:08 -0400 Subject: Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Stacy >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:51:40 -0500 >Listfolk, >In a recent contribution to the list, Dennis Stacy argues that >somehow I have misread David Hufford's book The Terror That >Comes in the Night. He then goes on to misrepresent the >implications of Hufford's work for other areas of anomaly >inquiry. Hufford, as you would not know from reading Stacy, is >keenly sensitive to those implications. As he has repeatedly >demonstrated, Stacy is unable to read Hufford in any way that >does not serve his -- Stacy's -- obsessive disdain for Budd >Hopkins and David Jacobs; to him, apparently, Hufford exists >primarily as a club with which to beat these two heretics. > Jerry, Listfolk, Whenever Jerry Clark enters into one of his high dudgeons, he miraculously acquires the ability to read minds and ascertain motives. Since Windows ate my first attempt at a response, I'll keep this one mercifully brief for everyone involved. If Clark wants to know what I think of current abduction research, and most major authority figures in the field, he can quote me (until further notice) as follows: "Much abduction theory, at present, is _way_ out in front of its data, and its data collection and analysis are suffering as a result. Adequate theory development regarding abduction experiences will require rigorous phenomenological inquiry in which the distinctions among observation, interpretation and language choice are made and empirically supported. Since all we have are reports, the reports must be as detailed and comparable as possible. Full, unedited accounts, not just summaries or frequency counts, will have to be published and analyzed. Good theory will also require an openness to the possible relationships of abduction sequences and other anomalous experiences, a connection frequently emphasized by abductees themselves, but strongly resisted by many investigators..." David Hufford wrote those words in 1994. Four years later, same seemingly studiously ignored, a leading abductionologist published a popular study of the subject with the subtitle "The Secret Agenda: What the Aliens Really Want...and How They Plan to Get It." So much for the "rigorous phenomenological inquiry" Hufford called for at the Abduction Study Conference at MIT. So much for the publication of "full, unedited accounts, not just summaries" in the interval by any of the major MIT participants, which included Mack, Hopkins, Jacobs, Smith and Carpenter, among others. Or maybe I just missed publication of same? Instead, we're told the sky is falling, possibly within our lifetime. If you truly understood and supported Hufford's work, as you never tire of telling us you do, you'd be wasting your time (because it would be time wasted) pushing his recommendations on some of your friends & colleagues in high places, not me and this list. I'm not referring to rhetorical understanding or all friends, mind. Bullard, Rodegheir, Appelle and others seem perfectly capable of driving with the "Hufford" brakes on. Others don't. You should be using Hufford as an instructive cudgel on the latter, not me, as they wouldn't listen to me if I told them it was raining in Texas, which it isn't. Finally, one more quote from Hufford's MIT paper (so you can't say I misrepresented it): "Theoretical narrowness and exclusivity are always damaging. I must admit I was astonished that the Roper Poll booklet, David Jacobs' recent book, Kenneth Rings' even more recent book and a number of other abduction publications make "Waking up paralyzed with a sense of a strange...presence" a central, pivotal element -- but _none_ of them cited my 1982 book devoted _entirely_ to that phenomenon, or any other literature on the subject." That was six years ago. The future of abduction research, I'm afraid, is not looking so bright that you'll need shades anytime soon, at least as far as Hufford's recommendations are concerned. But you no doubt beg to differ. Oops, one last thing! To the best of your knowledge (and you seem to know everything), has Hufford ever addressed the issue of the profligacy of regressive hypnosis in the recovery of abduction experiences and how it might conceivably alter or influence same? I don't remember him using it -- or, for that matter, requiring it -- in his own work. But what if he had? What book might have resulted? No doubt "The Terror That Comes in the Night: What the Old Hag Really Wants...and How She Plans to Get It." Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cuthbertson From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:02:24 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:40:07 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cuthbertson >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:40:14 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 03:41:11 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:44:30 +0100 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>I'm not arguing that airline pilots of policemen in Britain or >>>in America (who are the ones Hendry was actually talking about) >>>are not doing a good job of observing. I'm just saying that they >>>type of pbservation they are trained to do in not necessarily >>>the type of observation that is needed for UFO reports. >>>-- >>>John Rimmer >>Hi, >>Who then is receiving UFO observation training? >>Roy.. >By definition, no one. isn't that the whole point? Well then, as I understand the above point, essentially nobody is trained in the type of observation needed for UFO reports. The implication then, if I follow Rimmer, is that essentially no UFO report is reliable. What a neat way to dispose of the totality of UFO reports in one fell swoop; a truly global debunk! How impressive :-) Giving up and reverting to CNN, -Brian C.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:42:54 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 >>From: Jerome Clark <> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:00:03 -0500 Hi, Andy, >Thanks again for your reply. It seems that in your desperate >attempts to pour scorn on any form of ufological scepticism >which gets results you have begun contradicting yourself and >have forgotten why you are bothering to reply. Before I answer >your latest words, I'll just reiterate my case - which by the >way hasn't been dinted by your groundless protestations: By definition, I have the distinct impression, you regard any disagreement with you as "groundless protestation," and I have no trouble whatever believing that your views are sufficiently impervious to contrary argument that nothing, neither fact nor logic, will dislodge them. Your mind is not only closed but encased in concrete, I gather. >The original point I made was that the Rendlesham forest >'lights'/'UFOs' were most probably caused by lighthouse/ >lightship/stars because of what we know about the nature of >radical misperception (hereafter RM) in witnesses. I then >went on to give several examples of the resolution of UFO >cases into IFO with RM as the stimuli and suggested that >possibly_all_unresolved UFO cases may have RM at their >root. This assertion was based on the fact that as 'classic' >cases fall to RM many ufologists immediately 'forget' the >lessons it has taught them and go on to the next 'big' case. >You flustered a defence, against what I'm not sure, other >than your hatred of solved cases, resulting in your latest >replies.....the bones of which were: I have no idea what you're talking about when you refer to my "hatred of solved cases." Particularly weird, when more than once true believers have accused me of being a CIA agent for my skepticism of a wide range of to-me dubious UFO claims. My UFO Encyclopedia features many solved cases, including the Mantell incident, which apparently you forgot, when you wrote the above, that we have been discussing. I have also solved at least one case which for a time was thought to be a major and especially convincing UFO case: the 1897 CE3 in LeRoy, Kansas. But of course the truth is, you've just made that up, haven't you? I do have a disdain for ultrabelievers and ultraskeptics, however, whose simplistic desire for clear-cut answers even when they are not available to us has done enormous damage to rational UFO inquiry over the five decades of the controversy. >>You may consider this incredible, but in science you need >>to make a case, and you haven't made one. >I'm not sure I understand what, in your terms, 'a case' is. If >demonstrating complex cases of RM isn't one or referring to >writers and ufologists who have also come to similar >conclusions then I am at a loss to answer your point. A case is this, Andy: You can't extrapolate from an occasional (and sometimes even there disputed) instance of what you call "radical misperception" and use it to claim, without justification or empirical evidence, that such radical misperception is, rather than relatively rare and extreme, widespread. Until you do, I will accuse you of intellectual recklessness. >>(1) I and my sceptical friends believe we have >>demonstrated a handful of cases of radical misperception. >This is just silly talk Jerry. Please consider the following. >_95% of UFO cases are resolved. As they are always resolved >into IFOs consider the mechanism by which they were perceived as >UFOs in the first place. It is due to misperception, radical or >otherwise. So 95% for a start isn't a handful of cases', is it? The 95% figure, often bandied about, may or may not be true. When Blue Book was doing its most serious work, with the resources of the U.S. military and government at its command, it came up with a percentage of 20-25% unknowns. And even then it was rejecting most close-encounter cases a priori, dismissing them as "psychological." I think we know that most ostensible UFO cases are resolvable, but the precise percentage is up for discussion. I think we can agree that overwhelmingly, it is the least interesting "UFO" reports that are solvable. Few IFOs, in any event, are due to radical misperception. Ordinary misperception is nearly always the cause. >_Cases which lie outside that 95% and which have defied >resolution for a number of years, ie 'classic' cases are also >resolved occasionally in this way. There are several in the >UK alone. So these, added to the 95% already attributed to >misperception again hardly constitute a 'handful'. I gather from your previous communications that you regard even normal misperception -- as in the Mantell and Custer cases -- as "radical misperception." No wonder you've rushed down blind alleys. >>(2) UFOs don't exist, and only silly Americans think >>otherwise. >To paraphrase you Jerry, I think this phrase is "telling us >more, I fear, about Jerry Clark than about the tortured >relationship of UFOs to science". What do you mean by 'UFO' and >why are these 'UFOs' not resolvable? Please answer because I'm >curious. I think you've just made my point: "UFOs" -- unidentified flying objects, Andy --"don't exist." They're just IFOs to which foolish witnesses attached their own radical misperceptions. Fine. Now let's see the evidence -- and I don't mean a stray anecdote or two. IF -- a big if at this stage -- the ostensibly true UFO cases are solvable in more or less conventional terms, I would bet that investigators will find that the witnesses' testimony was essentially accurate; it was just their interpretation of what they saw that was wrong, or the peculiar circumstances. Analogies in other areas include many cases of from ball lightning to giant squids and sea serpents and more. >>(3) Therefore, all cases otherwise unexplainable must be >>due to radical misperception. >Possibly! But as I've repeated many times this theory is only >based on what we already know about the way UFO cases are >resolved into IFOs. We know no such thing. Radical misperception as a significant cause of IFO reporting has yet to be demonstrated. All you have done is to repeat the mantra over and over again, without producing any evidence to speak of. >>Allan believed, reasonably, that misperceptions are most >>likely to occur when the phenomenon being sighted is a >>nocturnal light - in other words, a usually distant, >>nebulous stimulus. >Like the Rendlesham case then eh? I doubt that Hendry would have been happy with a simplistic Magic Lighthouse explanation, which as Jenny Randles has repeatedly observed on this list fails to explain the most interesting aspects of the case. >>His views of the UFO phenomenon were much closer to >>mine than to yours, Andy. You might read the entry on him >>in my UFO Encyclopedia, which clears away much of the >>mythology surrounding Hendry and his views. >I wasn't trying to reinterpret Hendry for you Jerry as I'm sure >you understand him, and Hufford, better than anyone alive. But >he did point out that radical misperception is a factor in many, >many UFO cases and that 'trained' observers are as much >beglamoured as untrained ones. As nearly as I can figure, you are arguing that most ostensible UFO cases can be explained. I wonder if anyone on this list would disagree with you. That is beyond argument. What is arguable, to put it mildly, is your equation of ordinary misperception with radical misperception. I maintain that while ordinary misperception is common, radical misperception is relatively rare. Would-be explainers who apply the latter without justification are contributing only obfuscation to investigation. For example, in 1948 the official Air Force explanation for Mantell's "flying saucer" was the planet Venus, which in no way resembled what the witnesses described. If you had been around then, all of us would have been regaled with Robertsian clucking about "radical misperception." But by -- among other things -- paying attention to witness testimony and taking it seriously, investigators were able to find the true cause of the sighting, which was a Skyhook balloon. In other words, careless application of undemonstrated claims about radical misperception undercuts even skeptical approaches. You are making an extraordinary claim, Andy, and like anybody else, you have an obligation to provide the appropriate evidence, and to show what perceptual mechanisms (beyond the vague -- not to mention unfalsifiable -- "will to believe") are involved. >>Belief, alas, is the enemy. Let's see the evidence. A >>scattered anecdote or two is not evidence. >But, as I have demonstrated Jerry, and as the history of UFO to >IFO resolution demonstrates this theory is not based on >'scattered anecdote', but overwhelming evidence. What overwhelming evidence? >>I beg to differ about the Mantell case - he radically >>misperceived a man made object and died for the stupidity >>of it. None of his or anyone else's descriptions on that >>fateful January day described a balloon. What they did >>describe was - and you should know because it's in your >>(excellent) books a 'parachute', an 'ice-cream cone', >>something of 'tremendous size' for a few. Not to mention >>the fact that Mantell attributed great speed to the object - >>something I believe Skyhook balloons were >>not generally known for. >and you, strangely, replied: >>>This is absolutely false in just about every particular, and >>>it precisely underscores the reason I have a hard time >>>taking you seriously on this matter. In fact, Mantell did >>>not radically misperceive the Skyhook, and there is no >>>evidence that he or anyone else who saw it did. Their >>>problem was that they had never heard of or seen a >>>Skyhook. >Yeeees and? That's why they described it in terms which were not >those of a balloon until hindsight was available. The words >quoted were from your book and do not describe a balloon. The >simple fact remains that Mantell and co were seeing a man-made >object, not perceiving what it was (not even as generic >balloon), believing it to be unusual and so radically >misperceiving the object. This is rank nonsense. Witnesses described the object as resembling an "ice-cream cone" and a "parachute" -- not a bad description of a Skyhook miles from the observers. I refer interested readers to Jenny Randles's recent posting on the subject, concurring with me on the matter. If this is evidence of "radical misperception" -- or even ordinary misperception -- then I guess, as I have said earlier, RM is whatever you want it to be. >>False. You simply don't know what you're talking about, >>and you seem oddly determined to prove it over and over >>again. Maybe your theory is that if you say something long >>enough, by some process of rhetorical alchemy it will >>become true. Won't happen, sad to say. >'Fraid I do know what I'm talking about Jerry. Not based on >armchair research but based on twenty years of fairly intense >investigation and research. I'm only going on that and what >others have demonstrated to be true about misperception and >UFOs. I can only shake my head. If you are applying the reasoning to your field investigations that you are to your list contributions, maybe you're in the wrong subject. Based on what I've seen here, I'd have to be a fool not to have doubts about your judgments about what witnesses have or have not seen. So would anybody. It's clear you're going out there to interview witnesses with presuppositions that match those of any true believer, who is out there not to learn but to prove something. >Of the Custer misperception you wrote: >>Uh. Yeah. Your point? It's news to you that people see >>Venus and mistake it for something else? It's news to you >>that atmospheric conditions and optical effects can make >>astronomical objects appear to change color? I can >>understand why it may be news to Evan Connell (whose >>book, which I read and enjoyed years ago, has been >>roundly criticized by historians for many inaccuracies, >>for whatever that's worth); but that it's news to you shocks >>me. >So you _have_ understood radical misperception all along Jerry >but fail to be able to extend it to any UFO cases or to accept >that as it is so prevalent it may be the stimuli for most of not >all UFO sightings. Again, you demonstrate that in your mind ordinary misperception and radical misperception are synonymous. Which is not only false but radically unhelpful to anyone trying to make sense of what witnesses report. >>Sounds like Venus to me, fairly well described. We know >>all kinds of witnesses have misperceived Venus, >>unradically, for a UFO. Now, if Custer and his men had >>mistaken it not for a rocket but for a winged elephant, then >>I'd be impressed. THAT would be a radical misperception. >And then you demonstrate that you haven't, after all, understood >the principle. Surely misperceiving Venus, a slow moving planet, >as a fast moving fire arrow is radical misperception? No? >Mispreceiving Venus as a 'craft' is just about as radical as you >can get I would have thought! Please say why you don't agree >with this. This is interesting. So feeble is your argument that you're now making stuff up out of, it appears, your own desire to believe. You would have the rest of us believe that Custer and his men thought they saw a "fast moving fire arrow." In fact, in your post you quoted just the opposite: the object (Venus) was described as moving "slowly and majestically." As it rose higher in the sky, moreover, it "seemed to move more slowly." I guess there's a radical misperception here, Andy: yours. No, Custer did not radically misperceive Venus. He saw it rising in the sky and described it as nearly all others who have misperceived it have done thousands of times in the course of IFO history. I am incredulous that you're making so much of so little, and even more astounded that you're freely twisting the testimony. . Let me repeat, Andy: if Custer and his men had seen a winged elephant rather than a slow-moving, ascending light, _that_ would have been a radical misperception. >>Wow -- and we all know how well trained Indian fighters, >>outdoor men, and Indian scouts were for astronomical >>observations. The scientific journals are overflowing with >>their learned sightings and theories. >Substitute 'policemen', or any other credible witness of your >choice for 'Indian fighters' and you're getting warm Jerry. Sorry, old bean, as you Brits say. All you've succeeded in proving is the obvious: that nocturnal lights are more likely to be misperceived than other kinds of ostensible UFOs. Big deal. Custer's misperception was depressingly ordinary (your effort to make it otherwise notwithstanding), which is why I guess you had to cite nonexpert Evan Connell's naive observation on the subject to support your very weak point. >>Anyway, I guess we now know for sure what I have >>suspected all along: "radical misperception" is whatever >>Andy Roberts says it is. >You keep trying that one Jerry to avoid the facts (and I noticed >you chose not to comment on the W.W.II study of radical >misperception). If I get someone else to demonstrate what RM is, >would it just be 'whatever XXXX says it is'. I was afraid of boring readers. You took yet another nocturnal light case and established, yet again, what is not in dispute: nocturnal lights are easily and often misperceived. Big deal. >>As I have said before and say it again, testimony can be >>startlingly accurate sometimes and off the mark other >>times. >We agree! But in the case of UFOs and RM can you give me >just_one_ case where the witnesses described a 'UFO' and where >it was proved that what they described was what they had seen? What kind of question is that? If we know what UFOs are, we wouldn't call them UFOs. All we can say, after all conventional explanations seem to have failed (and unverified, unfalsifiable extraordinary claims about the ubiquity of "radical misperception" taken with as little seriousness as they deserve), what you have is an unknown. One day, if we are all lucky, the unknowns will be knowns, and we will no longer have to call them UFOs. About the only thing I'm certain of here is that when we know what UFOs are, we will have learned something interesting, either about ourselves, about nature, or about somebody else from somewhere else. >Answer: You cant. I think you mean "can't." Just did, sorry to have to tell you. >But the UFO literature is riddled with cases, many cases, of >'UFO's being resolved as IFOs with the mechanism of confusion >being RM. That's the point I have been making from the start. >One which you occasionally agree with and then retract when it >suits you! Since you have yet to demonstrate (except by proclamation, as above, and distortion of testimony) that radical -- as opposed to ordinary -- misperception is a frequent cause of IFO sightings, the above amounts to a mighty strange statement. >And finally you concluded: >>Making huge claims on small evidence is just about the >>perfect definition of pseudoscience. Nicely said, if I do say so myself. >Huge claims built on huge evidence Jerry. If not, I repeat, show >me the evidence. I'm afraid to say that your debate on this >subject has shown you to be, as Rimmer says a 'world class fence >sitter', unable accept the most basic and demonstrable of >ufological tenets. I look forward to your reply, which I suspect >will be what it always is when you cannot do find any genuine >fault with the theory, which is to say 'whatever'! Yeah, er, whatever. Beyond that, I'm afraid that this exchange simply underscores your penchant for making sweeping statements and indulging in reckless claims which you cannot validate empirically. Yeah, I guess I'd rather sit on the fence than fall down, with you and Humpty Dumpty, and risk cracking my head. At this stage of UFO history, it's a lot more honest to concede that we don't know than that we "know" all kinds of things we don't. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:51:52 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:46:43 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:17 +0100 Hi Jenny, All First let me state for the record that I have not once, ever attacked Jenny or her work. Second I stated quite clearly that it was my opinion and as far as I am aware this is a free country and we are allowed to think for ourselves. >>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>a number of times. Her explanation of new facts doesn't wash >>with me because it seams more like her explanation changes >>according to the crowd that she is hanging out with, but hey >>that is my opinion only. Jenny I have obviously hit a nerve here. I don't know if you managed to get past the first paragraph but this comment was exactly that, a comment. >Hi, >Hope you don't go in for deduction as a living, Sean, cause you >are not much good at it I'm afraid. Well I work with computers, so I'm afraid deduction is a part of my every day job. And I have to say, according to all my friends and colleagues I'm damn good at it. >I've explained precisely why my views on this case have >developed as the evidence has developed. If you want to make >inane judgements on that all I can say is that you wont cut it >as a UFO investigator because any Ufologist not willing to >follow where the evidence takes them is a liability not an >asset. Just what cuts it as an investigator? Writing books? Getting "well known"? I have done neither, nor have I been in the field as long as you. Does that make me less of an investigator than you then Jenny? As for being a liability, well now, I have been in this game that is ufoolagy for long enough to see people waft in and out of it. IMHO Some of these people came in expecting to solve the riddle, they couldn't, they got pissed off so they left it. Since I'm still around I would say that indicates that I have seen enough to warrant changing my conclusions on _some_ cases, thus I would say that I (using your words) "follow where the evidence takes them". Jenny pray tell, if I am a liability why would I, a hard line believer in alien visitation to this planet, write and article on how to explain most UFO's? >As I would have thought this list can see I don't support the >hardline views of this case - that its all cut and dried. But my >comments on it are based on years of witness interviews and >first hand research. They have nothing to do with the 'crowd I >am hanging out with' - as the Ufologists I regularly interact >with and think of as close colleagues and friends hasn't changed >much in those 20 years. As I said, >>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>a number of times. Are you denying this? >Her explanation of new facts doesn't wash >>with me because it seams more like her explanation changes >>according to the crowd that she is hanging out with, but hey >>that is my opinion only. As I said, and I repeat, this is my opinion. My opinion is based on what I have read, and seen, nothing more nothing less. >Although there have been some welcome new additions, of course. Obviously I'd better not count myself in this little click <G>. >So do me the favour of forming an opinion that at least makes >sense. Or one that agrees with you? >>Rendlesham forest and see for themselves just how much hokum >>this light house theory is. Hey people, why don't you get off >>your back side and go and have a look. >Why don't you set out some hard facts as to why it is 'hokum' >instead of issuing armchair pronouncements. That would be a >little more productive. Did I not say "Hey people, why don't you get off your backside and go and have a look"? The hard facts/actual evidence are/is not there to support a physical ship, there are only witness statements. A fact that debunkers make the most of. >I'd really like to see your hard reasoning that disputes the >evidence presented on this list because so far the skeptics have >been offering all the facts and the ones who disagree have done >nothing except call it hokum. Yes the debunkers are doing a good job of dissecting this case. I wish they would hurry up and explain how a white lighthouse light could be seen as a _red_ pulsing light seen within the forest. When they can do that I will look again, but until that time, In My Humble Opinion the light house theory is hokum! >Sadly you have to do better than that. If better than that means not having my own opinion rather than being told what my view should be, I'll be staying on the poorer side of better than that. Regards -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:27:09 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:51:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Jones >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:40:48 +0100 >>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:52:14 -0400 >>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>Subject: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> Hi Ron, Jenny >I don't have copyright clearance to do this. Or the technical >capabilities. But Peter Hough (my close friend and colleague) >(not on the net) owns copyright and has generally been happy to >make this extraordinary photo available. So if anyone has a way >to post it (a good quality first generation colour image shows >it best) I am sure he will oblige. >There is a full page colour reproduction in my book 'UFOs and >how to see them' - published in the UK by Collins & Brown and in >the US by Sterling. I have scanned the picture from Jenny's book "UFO's and how to see them" page 108, is this what you are looking for? -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 19:51:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:53:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:09:10 -0400 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Perhaps you'd like to cite me a case Jerry, just one case, where >>the witness or witnesses to a 'UFO' were proven correct in what >>they saw and reported. >Well, the Mantell case. Mantell's description of the object he >tragically chased was accurate. He saw a giant balloon (a >Skyhook) without knowing what it was, since the project was top >secret at the time. See my reconstruction of the case in The UFO >Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed. Where accurate descriptions of other sorts >of anomalous phenomena and experiences are concerned, with all >sorts of implications for UFO-observing and reporting, see David >Hufford's book, a devastating debunking of the myth of the >noncredible witness. Mantell is far from the only one. Indeed, anyone with experience in investigating UFO reports knows that the reason we are so often successful in determining the mundane causes of IFOs is because the witnesses are reasonably accurate in making observations and are reasonably capable of describing them. This is true even when the stimulus is one never previously perceived by the witness (such as Iridium satellite flares, for instance). Why there should be any dispute about this amazes me, since humans are constantly sensing, perceiving, classifying and integrating new information from the world. Indeed, a case could be made that stimuli closer to familiar stimuli are much more easily confused by recognition procedures in the brain than are very new ones. For instance, it would be hardly surprising if a witness incorrectly described the color of hair of another individual - unless that hair turned out to be bright pink. That would, naturally, be quite noticeable and memorable. The odd thing is that this commensense model of perception, easily validated by everyday experience, is turned on its head by debunkers, who prefer to invert the model and state that humans are less likely to successfully remember and recount the elements of unusual experiences than they are normal experiences. Indeed, since memory is at least partly a reconstructive process, it is not surprising that a trace which links to many other memories might accidentally replace an element of the trace with an element from another, very similar memory. It would be very surprising if a trace that was of something never before seen somehow took on elements from some more normal memory. Indeed, about the closest we have to this is what Hynek called "escalation of hypothesis", which is the witness' attempt to match the perception with memory and succeed at recognition. Most of the study of perceptual errors, it seems to me, reflects that the eagerness to succeed in recognition is one of the largest sources of error in recalled events - not the other way around. Thus we can actually expect accounts of anomalous perceptions to be more likely confabulated with normal features than the reverse. So let's try to avoid pretending that humans are blind morons who constantly confabulate the mysterious. If that were true, we would have a world populated by policemen sighting blue dwarves, purple flamingos with mohawks; with pilots perceiving the sky as red with black cube shaped clouds; and with housewives seeing their silverware as snakes out to attack them. No investigator can be sanguine about the complete and total accuracy of witness accounts. And an important part of investigation is determining that accuracy and capability. But outside of a few marginal individuals seeking attention with one wild story after another, the vast majority of witnesses are reliable, capable people, mystified by what they have seen and reporting their observations with reasonable accuracy - whether those observations are mundane in cause or not. And their reliability is how we determine that cause. Odd how organized efforts, like that of the Air Force, are able to successfuly identify the causes of reports if the witnesses neither perceive or report with a reasonable accuracy. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:57:09 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza spies an opportunity to get a word in edgeways on this thread & presents his compliments to the List. >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:48:48 +0100 >If I recall correctly, Peter Brookesmith was also advised by >Trinity House that for several years the beacon has been >shielded from sweeping so far inland, due to local complaints. I don't recall this last detail, and neither do I have the notes I took at the time to hand. However, Trinity House (whom I was querying on behalf of James as much as from personal curiosity) did tell me the precise angles (in degrees of the compass) within which the lighthouse shines. And the beam does not directly shine inland. There's no need for it to, anyway. However, they did also tell me (contrary to what someone recently asserted in this thread) that Orford Ness's light shows red, white or green, depending on where you are at sea. The red and green masks are visible north and south (or vice versa, I forget) of the Ness within a fairly narrow band. Anyone who has some slight acquaintance with navigation at sea will see the utility of this. It's even more apparent if you've sailed out of Orford (as I have) and know that stretch of the (legendarily treacherous North Sea) coast. If there was indeed mist, fog, or low cloud around the lighthouse on the night(s) 3TAF's finest were reeling around in the woods full of seasonal joys, then the beam visible from the forest would almost certainly have shown all three colors, reflected from the water vapor. Green is not that far on the spectrum from blue and the two colors are frequently confused or conflated. Green/blue confusion is also the commonest kind of color blindness. I don't know (because it's not entirely clear from the witness testimony) whether the reported red and blue lights were points, or flashes, or what. If the latter, then the lighthouse would account for the additional colors, quite apart from refractions - the prismatic effect Jenny mentions - caused by the fog. The MoD/NSA site on the Ness itself was dotted with fixed blue lights as well. These too could have, indeed almost certainly would have, caused refractions into a fog bank or cloud. So much for the lights. The witnesses (the dismissible Larry Warren apart) who claim to have seen a UFO landed in the woods are also those who chased what turned out to be a lighthouse beam. The UFO stories post-date the rather drier, and more embarrassing, official reports they made nearer the time of their experience. Naive and impressionable as I am, I am inclined to think they are making up the more elaborate stories, especially as the Rendlesham "case" was well established in ufolore by the time they came out of the woodwork with their tales. I don't care how plausible they are in the flesh. So is Bill English, a likeable fellow whose fantasies I think I nailed once and for all, even gaining the otherwise dubious approval of one J. Clark for my trouble. And I seem to be coming across fresh pathological liars almost daily in my tranquil domestic life at the moment, sufficient to make me a trifle cynical about virtually anyone's version of events, perhaps even my own, unless I know their background inside out. Mention of the MoD facility on the Ness reminds me of Jenny's claims about the OTH radar and the possiblity that it created an "Oz factor" or ASC among some of the boyos in the woods and made them see things that weren't there. I don't think this one will either hunt or fly, although someone out there may very well know more about OTH radar than I do. But still: the OTH hardware, as I recall, in the early 80s was _fixed_. It consisted of a whacking great array of struts and wires and it pointed in one direction - out to sea, in this case, in the general direction (if memory serves) of Murmansk. I cannot see how EM radiation from such a piece of kit could find its way 9 or 10 miles inland. Nor can I see any reason why OTH radars in the UK, especially experimental ones, would or could point inland at any time. If it could (I'm not entirely dismissing that possibility on present knowledge), then I'd suggest it may be possible to find out the strength of the signal. The inverse square law and an OS map will tell you what its strength was in the forest. Persinger will tell you if that strength is consistent with those associated with ASCs. These questions have to be explored if we're to make anything of a "radar effect". And while I'm about it. Lost in the latterday debate about Rendlesham has been an early story that an A10 Warthog was launched to go snooping about the forest floor with some kind of IR kit. No good. Doesn't exist. The best an A10 has by way of IR vision is a patch through from its missiles' warheads. This is pretty crude, designed to pick up hot tanks on a battlefield, not subtle signs on forest floors. The A10's aiming system is the Pave Penny laser, which depends on a ground force selecting the target and encoding it for the A10's on-board system. The notion that we have to take witnesses' statements at face value flies in the face of everything that ufologists have been finding out for the last half century. It seems one can't say this enough times to the soi-disant "UFO research community" (a cant term itself). About nineteen out of twenty "UFOs" turn out to be IFOs. Scientists are taught that if that proportion or more of their experiments are consistent, then the remainder is a random effect, or "noise". By that standard UFO reports are probably all reducible to IFOs. Let me repeat: probably. There may be something else in there (surprises have happened) but quoting Hufford and Truzzi is entirely beside the point when those in the cheap seats think they're part of a scientific enterprise and yet don't understand even that basic statistical assumption. Let alone Occam's Razor. The only "scientific" starting point for a ufological investigation (abductions are something else) is the null hypothesis: the witness was mistaken and UFOs don't exist. Then by all means present the overwhelming evidence that something really weird and inexplicable happened. It's not anyone else's *duty* to prove it didn't, though the temptation is often hard to resist and trying to do so is often a pleasant intellectual pastime. It's entirely the business of the presenting ufologist declaring the existence of an anomaly to join all the dots and shade in the squares. And it's scientific illiteracy to maintain otherwise. best wishes Porkscratching D. Mousemuncher Feline Happy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 23 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:59:15 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I'm not specifically talking about Rendlesham here, but in >certain close encounter situations where witnesses describe >alterations to their state of awareness, discontinuities in >recall, changes to the rate of flow of time and visual >hallucinations, I think those are pretty big clues that they are >not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. In truth, I am actually more surprised that such alterations are not more common in UFO reports. Let me give you some mundane examples. I was leading a rock climbing route on a one-hundred plus foot cliff when I slipped and took a fall. My closest protection was ten feet below my waist at the time, and it wasn't a very solid placement. As I fell, it seemed to take minutes. I could see every element of the cliff, I reasoned about what I would have to do if my closest protection failed, how much longer I would fall, how I would need to place my body. And then suddenly, time resumed its normal pace. Was this some "transdimensional experience"? Some alteration of the laws of time? Of course not. Similar alterations in the function of the brain are normal in all sorts of accounts of traumatic experiences. Reinhold Messner discusses how he hallucinated the presence of his brother and many other "presences" during his solo attempts on high mountains. Survivors of war and disasters recount altered perceptions and hallucinations, usually attributed to the stress of challenging situations or disorienting perceptions, or fear. Thus, to me it is not surprising that many witnesses report these changes in perception, strangely low levels of apparent fear, or major physical and psychological aftereffects. After all, these witnesses are unexpected confronted with large, manuvering apparently technological objects, or beings of unusual appearance and unknown intent in isolated settings. Let's just imagine how we would feel if the stimuli were more mundane... ... being buzzed threateningly by a helicopter while driving. ... being stalked by individuals of disreputable appearance in an isolated area... being caught in a building on fire, unable to escape. Hard to imagine one's perception being unaltered. Probably time will appear to slow. Probably focus will shift from certain unimportant channels to more important channels - or perhaps all senses will become drastically more sensitized. Unusual physiological sensations would not be surprising, and in very terrifying situations, with the right personality type, avoidance might become hallucination or denial. Indeed, certain aspects of experience might not be encoded in long-term memory, due to the drastically greater demands for perceptual processing. Thus, lapses in recall. I'm not sure why anyone would expect the close encounter witness to experience "normal, everyday, waking consciousness", given the fear and surprise that attends such situations. Now, given that, must we discount the accuracy of testimony from such witnesses? It depends on the level of fear, the stability of the witness, the accuracy of their normal recall, but research into PTSD does not suggest that accuracy is necessarily degraded by traumatic events, and some studies suggest it may be enhanced. This certainly isn't the last word on this issue, but I think it is much more profitable to first seek explanations of the state of the witness in their own physical, perceptual and psychological makeup. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:09:25 EDT Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:14:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help - Young >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 01:52:31 EDT >Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com> >>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 22:17:08 EDT >>Subject: Re: Request for Information - And Help >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:09:04 EDT >>>Subject: Request for Information - And Help >>><snip> >>>Stars which move within three to five degrees of arc, about >>>magnitude 4+, and move erratically, zigzagging, starting and >>>stopping. Witnesses. All of these events witnessed. And by non >>>believers who have given attributes which could not possibly >>>restrain even Fill Class from hysterical fits of laughing. >><snip> >>Jim, this sounds like autokinetic motion of the eye muscles. The >>eye is continually moving, the brain usually just filters it >>out. >Maybe. But would this phenom preclude just that one star >performing these acrobatics? In other words, would not the >stars in the vicinity also act the same way? Why just the >one? Jim, List: Because this usually happens with lights which seem isolated from other nearby objects. Only the star being stared at is noticed to "move", the rest is in peripheral vision or very dim. >And why do witnesses also see the same thing as I >see? Are their eyes also suffering from autokinetic muscle >movement? Yes, everyone has this motion at all times, but the brain usually filters out the movement. This effect is highly suggestable. For instance, I usually mention it in my adult astronomy course, which I've been giving for about 20 years. Once somebody mentions it, within seconds others notice the motion, too. Try a known star, like Deneb right now, high overhead. Check the identify with a star chart. Then just stare at it. Or better might be Altair, a little lower and with fewer bright stars nearby, particularly on a hazy night. >Been looking through telescopes for nearly 45 years. Never seen >anything like this. Only one star in a field of stars is moving >erratically. Yeh, Don't think that I've ever noticed it in a telescope, either. I've been using them since the 60's. Probably because the edge of the field is there as a reference. Clear skies, Bob Young
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:02:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:19:27 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >The notion that we have to take witnesses' statements at face >value flies in the face of everything that ufologists have been >finding out for the last half century. It seems one can't say >this enough times to the soi-disant "UFO research community" (a >cant term itself). About nineteen out of twenty "UFOs" turn out >to be IFOs. >Scientists are taught that if that proportion or >more of their experiments are consistent, then the remainder is >a random effect, or "noise". By that standard UFO reports are >probably all reducible to IFOs. Let me repeat: probably. If this proportion is to be cited, it would be a good idea to have a look at its source (and please note that no one in this discussion ever suggests simply taking witness statements at face value - but simply assert that witness statements have reasonable accuracy). As I recall, Project Blue Book, in its most intensely debunking phase, was able to claim it resolved 95% of cases, using some of the most dubious statistical procedures ever published. However, Blue Book's explanatory power was tested in 1952, when it was unable to explain a much higher percentage of cases than in any prior or subsequent period. The Condon Report, despite using a very low standard of filtering for its own reports, resolved somewhere between 70% and 80% of its cases. Many of those cases were "a challenge to the analyst" or "a metallic disk tens of meters in diameter" or "a natural phenomenon so rare as to have never before been observed" (that one is a paraphrase) Hynek's reevaluation of Blue Book found a higher proportion of unknowns that reported by the Air Force. None, I repeat, NONE of these studies attempted to restrict their samples to, for instance, DD, RV and CE cases. If that had been done, the percentage of unidentifieds would almost certainly have been significantly, if not many times, higher. Detailed investigations of historical and recent reports produces little support for the Misperception Hallucination and Hoax Hypothesis (MHH). Papers such as Tony Rullan's detailed examination of Levelland http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/guestpapers/levelland/index.htm my own investigation of local reports in CT http://www.temporaldoorway.com/mufonct/report/970819.htm http://www.temporaldoorway.com/mufonct/report/980419.htm http://www.temporaldoorway.com/mufonct/report/950715/index.htm http://www.temporaldoorway.com/mufonct/report/991213/index.htm offer no support for MHH in specific and detailed cases, most of which had multiple witnesses. Paul Hill's report, with its multiple witness triangulation, the Coyne case with its specific physical effects, the Colusa Canyon observations, the RB-47 case, and many others, are likewise suggestive of something other than support for MHH. Vallee's study of the 1954 wave found reasonable demographics for the witnesses involved - most were responsible individuals of known address engaged in normal activities. Needless to say, relatively few of the close encounters from that wave were ever identified as misperceptions or hoaxes. Vallee also found a significant "moon illusion" in size estimates, such that it seemed likely that interpretation of an objectively present object was responsible for the observations. My own study of the demographics of Hynek's unknowns from "UFO Evidence" suggests an expected distribution, with technical observers predominating in NL, DD and RV cases and with normal demographics increasing from CE-1 through CE-3. Given the typical isolation of the CE, and the proportion of technical personnel in the population, this is an expected result of an objectively existent phenomenon. Of course, this is a relatively uncontrolled sample, and cannot be given too much weight, but it is suggestive of the sorts of studies that should be undertaken. Given all this, it is more than rash to claim that past experience even suggests that all UFO reports are able to be dismissed as a statistical noise amidst IFOs. >There may be something else in there (surprises have happened) >but quoting Hufford and Truzzi is entirely beside the point when >those in the cheap seats think they're part of a scientific >enterprise and yet don't understand even that basic statistical >assumption. Let alone Occam's Razor. The only "scientific" >starting point for a ufological investigation (abductions are >something else) is the null hypothesis: the witness was mistaken >and UFOs don't exist. Then by all means present the overwhelming >evidence that something really weird and inexplicable happened. This, frankly, is nonsense. Scientific methods only dictate that any hypothesis that is offered be specific and, in some fashion, testable. As we can see from sciences similar to UFOlogy, such as ornithology, cosmology, and certain areas of paleontology and physics, testability also frequently means something other than taking samples into the lab. Indeed, in every one of the cases cited above, specific hypotheses as to the cause of the phenomena observed were advanced and observations, inquiries, or literature surveys were made to determine the plausibility of the hypothesis. Rullan's hypothesis was that the Levelland UFO was ball lightning. He was not able to support that. My own hypotheses in investigations have included aircraft. balloons, and other possible causes. Only after each of these hypotheses was tested against the observations and found wanting was the case admitted as an unknown. All of these activities are quite scientific. I have personally done some minor work on other hypotheses at what I call the "second level". For instance, since the Trans-en-Province case has been successfully able to resist attempts to explain it, I was able to formulate and test a set of hypotheses about when and how the circular trace that was found was able to have formed, under the assumption that it was caused by the presence of the object. Since the witness had not observed the trace prior to the presence of the object and it was present after the object departed, it was reasonable to make this connection. Null hypotheses have a role to play in science, but they are hardly the only sort of hypotheses. The Curies, for instance, did not use the null hypothesis to determine the presence and nature of radioactivity in radium. The null hypothesis was not used as an important part of accounting for observations that led to the determination of the existence of the nucleus of the atom. Neither Newton nor Einstein based their work on the null hypothesis that gravity did not exist. >It's not anyone else's *duty* to prove it didn't, though the >temptation is often hard to resist and trying to do so is often >a pleasant intellectual pastime. It's entirely the business of >the presenting ufologist declaring the existence of an anomaly >to join all the dots and shade in the squares. And it's >scientific illiteracy to maintain otherwise. Actually, it is scientific illiteracy to pretend that anyone who advances a hypothesis, including the null hypothesis, is exempt from offering methods and tests. The cases I listed above are cases which test the null hypothesis. In those cases, the null hypothesis has failed. Those cases are joined by many others. What is interesting is not those cases which have supported the null hypothesis, but is the fact that a significant quantity of well-investgated cases have failed to support it. Just as one can claim that the body of UFO cases contains IFOs that have not been revealed due to insufficient investigation, one can also see the potential for significant misexplained UFO cases in the body of IFO cases. Which of these is dominant remains unexplored. Over fifty years, literally thousands of observations remain unexplained by MHH. One would think that this would be sufficient to put quiet to the idea that the MHH is capable of explaining the body of interesting UFO observations. Indeed, using, for instance, the Hynek definition, UFO reports are those which the MHH cannot explain - thus one cannot use the MHH to explain UFOs; a basic principle of logical literacy. It should be clear that even one case that stands against the MHH completely refutes its contention that all UFO reports have a mundane explanation. Also, it should be clear that to disprove the MHH is not to assert, prove or even support, ETH or any of the other origin and intent hypotheses. While relatively few of the cases over the last fifty years have received the sort of investigation that can firmly and completely establish them as base data with the sort of solidity we desire, we nevertheless have a reasonably accurate database from which some sorts of analyses can be performed, and against which a variety of physical, psychological and sociological hypotheses can be tested. The fact that MHH advocates are constantly claiming that they do not need to offer their hypothesis for testing prevents them from seriously entering discourse on this problem. The nonsense about pelicans at Ranier, a balloon at Socorro, mirages at Papua, meteors viewed by Coyne, et. al., are hypothesis of such obvious invalidity as to simply waste time that should be placed on "second level" analysis of reports that meet the Hynek definition. Are we ready for third level analyses? That is, hypotheses of cause, origin, and intent (if any)? How can that be when we have not done the requisite second level analysis? How can that be when our few best and brightest have to continually waste their time refuting nonsense propositions that "disprove" solid cases? (Make no mistake, I am prepared to accept any serious hypotheses, but too many of the MHH proposals are prima facie unprovable or invalid for serious attention, and any attention granted them is usually a waste, except insofar as it prevents contamination of the database with nonsense explanations). In closing, I would say that we would do better to deal with some sort of actual work on the substance of the UFO problem than to have to continually argue against the sort of negativity represented by the cited post. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:32:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:22:16 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 >>From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 >>>From: Jerome Clark <> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:00:03 -0500 <snip> >No, Custer did not radically misperceive Venus. He saw it rising >in the sky and described it as nearly all others who have >misperceived it have done thousands of times in the course of >IFO history. I am incredulous that you're making so much of so >little, and even more astounded that you're freely twisting the >testimony. <snip> >Sorry, old bean, as you Brits say. All you've succeeded in >proving is the obvious: that nocturnal lights are more likely to >be misperceived than other kinds of ostensible UFOs. Big deal. >Custer's misperception was depressingly ordinary (your effort to >make it otherwise notwithstanding), which is why I guess you had >to cite nonexpert Evan Connell's naive observation on the >subject to support your very weak point. <snip> >I was afraid of boring readers. You took yet another nocturnal >light case and established, yet again, what is not in dispute: >nocturnal lights are easily and often misperceived. Big deal. Andy, Jerry, I don't have a dog in this particular fight, which seems to be an endless argument over the definition or meaning of the word radical as attached to perception, or rather misperception. That said, here is my understanding of Venus and its movements, and anyone who knows better is welcome to correct me. As I understand it, Venus is never (routinely) visible more than about 22 degrees above or below the horizon, which roughly equates with the planetary plane. When Venus is visible as the Evening Star, it's in a setting mode. Otherwise, it would appear straight overhead at night, which never happens. When Venus appears to be rising, it must be in its aspect as the Morning Star. Point is: if Custer and associates misperceived a rising Venus, it would probably have been a daylight misperception rather than a nocturnal one. And by daylight, I don't mean high noon, simply a skyscape which is gradually growing lighter rather than darker. In any event, not another nocturnal light. I'm just shocked that Jerry couldn't congratulate Briton Andy for having read a recent account of Custer's demise in the first place, however critically received. Bet he was too busy brushing up on his Yorkshire pudding. Full disclosure: I read Evan Connell's "Morning Star", too. But the Venus sighting completely escaped me. Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Cecchini From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 02:11:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:25:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Cecchini >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:27:09 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Jones >I have scanned the picture from Jenny's book "UFO's and how to >see them" page 108, is this what you are looking for? Yes, thank you very much. I've been unable to find that anywhere.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:50:25 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:34:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Randles >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:27:09 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' - Jones >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:40:48 +0100 >>>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:52:14 -0400 >>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >>>Subject: Randles' 'The Alien On Ilkley Moor' >>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi Ron, Jenny >>I don't have copyright clearance to do this. Or the technical >>capabilities. But Peter Hough (my close friend and colleague) >>(not on the net) owns copyright and has generally been happy to >>make this extraordinary photo available. So if anyone has a way >>to post it (a good quality first generation colour image shows >>it best) I am sure he will oblige. >>There is a full page colour reproduction in my book 'UFOs and >>how to see them' - published in the UK by Collins & Brown and in >>the US by Sterling. >I have scanned the picture from Jenny's book "UFO's and how to >see them" page 108, is this what you are looking for? Hi, Yes, it is (did you ask Peter first BTW?) (I wont tell him, and I doubt he'd object for purposes of discussion on this list - but please do understand this is not for reproduction in books/magazines/web sites without checking with him first owing to the copyright status of this image that Peter holds) Its not a perfect reproduction by any means. The original image is a lot sharper and clearer (although still fuzzy due to the high ASA and consequent grain of the film - being used by the witness to photograph dawn from the moor over the surrounding villages). (Bruce did try some scanning work but I think the grain made it impossible to do such analysis in a meaningful way) (No doubt Bruce will elaborate) And the witness was filming what he said he was BTW - the first thing Peter and I did was study the rest of his shots and the other images on it are consistent with his story. There are no other shots of the alien as might occur if, say, he was setting up a model and trying out different lighting conditions or poses to see which one produced a convincing image before submitting the best one to Ufologists. A hoaxers trick that you may have come across - or perhaps not if you don't ask to see all their other surrounding images on the appropriate roll of film! The photo is - of course - intrinsically unbelievable. After all its an image of a little green man. And Peter and I suspected a 'set up' here - that is some devious minded sceptic testing the UFO community with a 'suck it and see' style of hoax. So for a while we worked on that premise (the witness - to be fair to him - understood why we did so and accepted the necessity when we eventually explained to him why we were employing curious tactics). The investigation of this case has been long and complex and one or two elements that have emerged may well suggest caution. But on the whole it has not fallen apart and the witness 13 years on stands by his story - despite never having gone public and not having made any money out of the photo. But I can see why Ufologists would be (properly) wary of this case. Its extraordinary evidence associated with even more amazing claims (aside from the abduction there is alleged physical evidence - a compass needle that reversed polarity for instance - and a subsequent MIB story). So it needs more than just the average degree of support to take it seriously. Indeed my paper on this case to the MIT symposium was excluded from the proceedings that were published subsequently. I was told because they could not reproduce the photo adequately, which was no doubt true, but I would not be surprised if they really thought it was too OTT for such a publication. Maybe I am doing them a disservice here - but its not a criticism in any case. Peter and I have fought against this case in our own minds for many years owing to its intrinsic 'impossibility'. So I would expect the MIT symposium to be rightly wary. But the bottom line - as I have often said - is that you can only present the facts as you find them. And in this case the photo was studied by several photographic labs (including Kodak), the physical evidence by two university labs, and the witness studied by a clinical psychologist. Not one of these sources found evidence to seriously challenge the case. On the 'radical misperception' debate BTW - the UK media (who were provided with a copy of the photo by a Ufologist against the knowledge of Peter and I and without the consent or cooperation of the witness) 'identified' it - possibly peeved at the witnesses lack of interest in cheque book Ufology. We are to accept that this image depicts an insurance salesman riding his bicycle, whilst wearing a blue anorak and carrying a briefcase. Now that would be a radical misperception! Thankfully we were able to interview said 'alien' and he assures us this story was told to the paper by colleagues as a joke. He certainly was not responsible. Move over Orford Ness lighthouse - perhaps. Although Ufologists are not immune from exaggeration. I saw the case discussed by one who contended that you could actually see the baby alien being carried in the backpack on the main aliens shoulders. It is interesting to me how this photo acts - rather like an ink blot test - and possibly like most UFO cases - as a reflection of ones own fascinations. Maybe we all see within it what we hope to see. But - like I said - if you have any specific questions on the investigation/or supporting facts of the case, I'll try to help. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:17:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:39:15 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:51:52 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:17 +0100 >Hi Jenny, All >First let me state for the record that I have not once, ever >attacked Jenny or her work. Second I stated quite clearly that it >was my opinion and as far as I am aware this is a free country and >we are allowed to think for ourselves. Hi, I have no argument with that Sean. On either count. >>>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>>a number of times. Her explanation of new facts doesn't wash >>>with me because it seams more like her explanation changes >>>according to the crowd that she is hanging out with, but hey >>>that is my opinion only. >Jenny I have obviously hit a nerve here. I don't know if you >managed to get past the first paragraph but this comment was >exactly that, a comment. Of course, and an opinion you are entitled to hold. I was merely setting out why you are way off beam. Of course, you 'hit a nerve' because you are guessing here why I have 'changed my mind' and you are simply misguided. I would answer that in two separate ways: 1: Its less a change of mind as an evolution of thought. This happens in all investigations - or it should do - with all Ufologists. The day you decide from the word go what an answer to a case is and then stick rigidly to that for fear of someone saying you have renamed on your previous opinion, is the day facts stop being sacrosanct in UFO investigation. They should always determine what your opinion is not some silly ideal of clinging to a mind set or preconceived idea. So here my views have inevitably evolved through time as the evidence has accumulated and adapted out perception of the case. I'd be worried if they hadn't - frankly. 2: That accumulating evidence has markedly altered since l997. You cannot avoid that reality and if you sweep the new data under the carpet and stick blindly to your faith in this case then in my view you are not behaving as a UFO investigator should behave and following the trail of the evidence. An awful lot of people on this list seem to be fighting on instinct over this case - like circling the wagons and warding of invaders who are shooting arrows at one of Ufology's treasured cases. But no cases are above explanation and when hard evidence (and that's what this is) comes to light that poses a massive challenge the failure is to not consider it. Being accused of having the temerity to pay attention to new facts is hardly the worst crime a Ufologist can be accused of. Indeed its one misdemeanour we should all be happy to plead guilty to. So - yes - my views on the lighthouse theory are considerably more positive than they were because the newly acquired evidence dictates that they have to be. The one thing I was really objecting to was your suggestion that I was 'playing to the crowd' - because I am pretty well out on my own on this one - utterly scuppering that idea. I don't endorse the lighthouse as the final solution to this case - to the disappointment I am sure of many in British Ufology who would hope that I might. This has brought some 'debate' between myself and colleagues because I keep arguing about things like the close encounter effects that hold me back. I have no idea whether I ever will settle on a final answer to this case - and if I do what it will be. But right now we can only weigh up the contrasting possibilities - none of which totally explain this case. But what the lighthouse theory undoubtedly does is very reasonably illuminate much of it. I don't see how anybody honestly judging the facts cannot admit that at least to themselves even if they are not prepared to do so on this open list. And my surety that the lighthouse and other IFOs clearly had a bigger role in this case than we (and I) previously imagined - is hardly what most of this list want me to say. But its the only honest thing I can say based on the facts before us. What I say about this case has nothing at all to do with the views of those around me. Because, Sean. Many people in British Ufology 20 years ago were openly critical of this case when Brenda Butler, Dot Street and I first got involved days after it happened. They were sure it was not a real case at all and told us that we were wasting our time chasing rumours and phantoms. As BUFORA's Director of Investigations I had a huge job persuading my colleagues to take it remotely seriously - as explained in 'Sky Crash' in l984. Only the FOIA revelation of the Halt memo in Summer l983 suddenly made Ufologists wake up and smell the coffee. For over two years I had fought against the trend from all sides of British Ufology and the record shows this. So the one thing I have never done on this case is play to the galleries. You can take it that what I say on this list during this debate is exactly what I believe based on the evidence as we have it right now. But, of course, if significant new evidence does one day emerge I will reassess those views. Or would it be perfectly okay to adapt my views to a less sceptical stance - but not to one that is more sceptical? If that's what anybody out there is thinking - ask yourself what that implies. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:05:05 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:42:02 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>I don't know (because it's not entirely clear from the witness >testimony) whether the reported red and blue lights were points, >or flashes, or what. If the latter, then the lighthouse would >account for the additional colours, quite apart from refractions >- the prismatic effect Jenny mentions - caused by the fog. The >MoD/NSA site on the Ness itself was dotted with fixed blue >lights as well. These too could have, indeed almost certainly >would have, caused refractions into a fog bank or cloud. Hi, Yes, the bank of bluish lights (they were really very white but looked blue due to coastal haze in my experience) have always been a factor, as I have long reported. The coincidence between their visibility in certain spots clear of trees (when they suddenly appear and in the darkness you would not have a clue that they are out on the Ness and not inside the forest) was always too much to ignore. They were to the side of the lighthouse - though. Don't forget the optical retinal distortion effect of seeing orange and blue lights inside your own eyes! In fact you can all do a D.I.Y. 'How to be a Rendlesham witness' experiment. Although I wouldn't recommend you making chances with your eyesight - so don't advise you do this. But orange and blue after images are very commonly seen inside the optic system after staring at a bright white light and then facing darkness. Don't forget that's exactly what these witnesses were doing - so its wrong to assume all the lights they saw were necessarily on the UFO rather than artifacts of their own imagery. I suspect what was seen will turn out to be a complex interaction of many sources. I have also seen the lighthouse 'yellowed' by distance and haze. And if you listen to the Halt report that's what they say - how it has a yellow tinge. Possibly Ian Ridpath (who filmed the original lighthouse light in l983 for the BBC) could arrange technical tests on the frequency of light being emitted and we can judge this alongside the atmospheric conditions on the night the footage was taken and the conditions on 26 and 28 December l980. That might be a practical way to progress this debate and offer hard evidence (one way or the other) as to the visible appearance of the light based on angstrom readings. I don't know if this is possible. Its just a suggestion. The UFO stories post-date the rather drier, and more >embarrassing, official reports they made nearer the time of >their experience. Naive and impressionable as I am, I am >inclined to think they are making up the more elaborate stories, >especially as the Rendlesham "case" was well established in >ufolore by the time they came out of the woodwork with their >tales. I don't care how plausible they are in the flesh. Sorry, Peter, I don't think this will wash. Penniston first spoke (covertly) to us when writing Sky Crash in l983/4. Burroughs did at length to me in Phoenix in l989. This was long before the l997 revelation of the original witness statements. Both these men told the more elaborate version of the case including the close encounter aspects. Both said they had deliberately undersold their story on the original witness statements. Indeed that they discussed this even as they left the forest that night. Penniston was a career airman and believed that his job was on the line if he told them he had walked right up to a landed UFO as an energy field washed over and made their hair stand bolt upright . He more or less persuaded Burroughs it was in their best interests to play this all down officially. They were more forthcoming than they intended to be because back at base they discovered that Watton had allegedly confirmed a radar tracking of the object they saw. (Something Watton have never confirmed since when asked - although never denied either - but which is consistent with the Watton radar story I first heard from an officer on the base in January l981 - before I had ever heard of Rendlesham Forest, Woodbridge, Halt or anything to do with this case - as none of this was yet public knowledge) Moreover, Halt backs all of this up. He told me that it was his idea to use the innocuous phrase 'unidentified lights' and not include the more fantastic elements on the official report. Indeed that he too was wary of the repercussions and would have told all (as would the other men) if sufficient faith had been shown in them by the MoD to take the matter further. But they never did pursue it - so they never got to see the deeper story or the physical evidence (i.e. the Halt tape, the samples and photos that it reports being taken and Halts plaster casts of the rabbit holes). So they left it as reported on the official (and rather muted) memo over two weeks later. You can, of course, say that they told it like it was in the l981 statements then made up the rest. But I don't see how that is reasonable when compared with the facts here. Certainly their consistently told version of events - that they had reasons to undersell the story in the l981 reports and that the 'true' story was always the version told by Burroughs and Penniston about the close encounter phase - is at least as likely to be true. Personally, based on my first hand experience of this case, I don't disbelieve Halt, Burroughs and Penniston with regards to the stranger version being the true version. How we interpret that stranger version is quite another matter, of course. But I think it is inconsistent with the facts as I saw them unfold to argue that the witnesses exaggerated from the completely accurate start point of their witness statements in l981. And before anyone out there suggests - aha - so why didn't they then just 'make up' the phantom lighthouse chase reported in those l981 reports as a way to kill off the story on the official records - when they really knew they hadn't been fooled at all by the lighthouse? Well that's hard to accept. Why? Many reasons. Halt always said he took witness statements and they were restrained but honest. It is hard to imagine senior USAF personnel deliberately lying in official records - surely a more career threatening move than telling the truth? And we still need a good answer why none of these men ever reported between l981 and the l997 'discovery' of the original statements that the lighthouse theory is dead because - we saw it, recognised it and - if this were true - indeed made up a story that we were fooled by it on our official reports in order to get the authorities off our backs? Three of the four witnesses involved here (Halt, Burroughs and Penniston) have all now spoken many times and said none of this. I have no reason to suppose they were lying. They came together in l994 when David Alpin and I brought them to the UK when we made our 'Strange But True?' special on the case. This event and the extensive new data it provided was why I wrote 'UFO Crash Landing?' afterwards. In the long interviews we did with all three witnesses (much of which was not transmitted) these three men say what I report above about the underselling of the original reports (which was what they had said before in private) but not one of them so much as hints at the inclusion of the bogus lighthouse chase contained in their official statements. This is indeed very puzzling. As of l994 these statements were still undisclosed but they surely knew that they were in the possession of Ufologists and could be revealed at any time. Why they didn't say -when asked (as of course we did ask) - what about the lighthouse theory - well actually we were briefly fooled by the lighthouse after the UFO departed. But it wasn't the same thing. So we know the UFO wasn't the lighthouse? I am still baffled why nobody chose to do this. It is one of the really puzzling riddles to this case that taxes both the sceptics and the ones supporting a stranger reality to this case. Because the realisation that they were fooled by the lighthouse on the same night does not just boost the sceptics it also boosts those who think the lighthouse was not the cause. Why? Because if these witnesses saw, were fooled, but immediately identified the lighthouse as an IFO source different from the one seen earlier it strengthens their assurance that the original UFO was odder. And would emphatically renounce the lighthouse theory if offered in response to it - which they have all seemingly declined to do. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:48:25 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:44:20 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >In truth, I am actually more surprised that such alterations >are not more common in UFO reports. Hi, I think they are a lot more common but rarely asked about - or offered by witnesses - because of the idea that they take us away from an alien contact scenario and into a mind phenomenon concept. Some witnesses also feel that they are likely to make them appear less reliable in the eyes of a Ufologist they want to bring on their side. >Was this some "transdimensional experience"? Some alteration >of the laws of time? Of course not. >Similar alterations in the function of the brain are normal in >all sorts of accounts of traumatic experiences. Reinhold Messner >discusses how he hallucinated the presence of his brother and >many other "presences" during his solo attempts on high >mountains. Survivors of war and disasters recount altered >perceptions and hallucinations, usually attributed to the stress >of challenging situations or disorienting perceptions, or fear. >Thus, to me it is not surprising that many witnesses report >these changes in perception, strangely low levels of apparent >fear, or major physical and psychological aftereffects. After >all, these witnesses are unexpected confronted with large, >manuvering apparently technological objects, or beings of >unusual appearance and unknown intent in isolated settings. >Hard to imagine one's perception being unaltered. Probably time >will appear to slow. Probably focus will shift from certain >unimportant channels to more important channels - or perhaps all >senses will become drastically more sensitized. Unusual >physiological sensations would not be surprising, and in very >terrifying situations, with the right personality type, >avoidance might become hallucination or denial. All of this is perfectly valid in my experience. The Oz Factor symptoms - as you describe - cross boundaries and do occur in other phenomena. Some deemed supernatural. Some clearly not (as those you describe) Most phenomena (such as alien contact and NDEs) cross boundaries to such an extent that we are all arguing incessantly as to whether these events result from psychological processes or are a symptom of an extraordinary event. This provokes the aliens versus mind phenomena or visions of the afterlife versus brain states debate we see. In a NDE (near death experience) - for instance - a witness will often report dissociation effects and changes in the perception of time. I have come upon it in other areas like precognition, a person falling off a cliff into soft snow (and so never actually close to death - simply scared to death) and many more. The question is which of these described symptoms are described consistently because they are human psychological responses to a commonly perceived trauma (regardless of the origin of that trauma) and how many - if any - are genuine physiological sensations caused by actual physical forces? I think there are some of each, but its difficult to be sure that they are not all psychologically induced. I suspect the apparent similarities between the NDE and abduction - for example - are not because people who think they have died and gone to heaven have really been kidnapped by aliens (or indeed vice versa). Rather that many of the symptoms described (the ASC - out of body state, floating sensations, changes to awareness of time) are common to both as a consequence of both being extreme events within the hidden capacity and experience of the human mind. As such it is not relevant whether these people really have been abducted or visited heaven. In the sense of understanding the apparent parallels between the two phenomena. The parallels result from the symptoms and not the cause. Its a bit like saying two people report this odd sense of Euphoria. One has just won $1 million on the lottery. Another has just drunk three bottles of wine. The states they describe are identical. Therefore there is a direct link between drinking wine and winning the lottery. Sadly not! Here both create the same emotive response by stimulating similar psychological processes via the mystery of human brain states. Unravelling the patterns will possibly illuminate the consequences of drinking wine and may help shed light on how you will feel if you win the lottery. But the things provoke the similar causes will be different in these two cases and the apparent link between the phenomena exposed by the similar after effects would be an illusion. That may be going on in the processes that you describe. Best wishes, Jenny Randles Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Recent London Footage From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:36:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:47:54 -0400 Subject: Recent London Footage >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 02:44:51 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Subject: 'Lost Haven' Updates... >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hi All, >I have just updated the site. Yes I know I have just launched it >but UFO data comes pretty quick around here. Please check the >following link, where you will see fresh UFO images from London >and Wiltshire as well as Farnborough. >Also you can download a recent piece of quite remarkable UFO >footage taken in London: >http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Chrismart.htm >This page is dedicated to the sheer hard work by Chris Martin on >capturing such amazing pieces of UFO film. Roy, Thanks for putting the images and compressed AVI I gave you online so quickly. I still have the uncompressed AVIs and full-sized images on my system. Chris brought his latest material to me last week and we spent quite a few hours working on it. I note that you are the only researcher to have found this of any interest. I have sent private mails to other researchers offering to send them high quality images but so far I have been ignored. This is interesting in itself. Anyone who would like to see high-res images (1600x1200) please contact me and I will send them privately in jpg format. All the best, Dave Bowden
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:00:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:49:53 -0400 Subject: Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Clark >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:25:34 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:51:40 -0500 Hi, Dennis, >So much for the "rigorous phenomenological inquiry" Hufford >called for at the Abduction Study Conference at MIT. So much for >the publication of "full, unedited accounts, not just summaries" >in the interval by any of the major MIT participants, which >included Mack, Hopkins, Jacobs, Smith and Carpenter, among >others. Or maybe I just missed publication of same? Instead, >we're told the sky is falling, possibly within our lifetime. I don't really get the point here, unless it's to endorse your obsessive Hopkins/Jacobs/et al.-bashing, which I have no intention of doing. My views on the abduction phenomenon appear in a publication you may have heard of, The Anomalist, Spring 2000. The paper was based on a lecture I gave at the Intruders Conference in NYC in April 1999. Budd Hopkins invited me specifically because he knew I hold a view different from his own, and he respected that. In refusing to act the monstrous caricature you always make him out to be, Budd must be a constant source of disappointment to you. >If you truly understood and supported Hufford's work, as you >never tire of telling us you do, you'd be wasting your time >(because it would be time wasted) pushing his recommendations on >some of your friends & colleagues in high places, not me and >this list. Well, to paraphrase Br'er Bob, if you've got to serve somebody, it may as well be yourself, which seems to be the philosophy you're pushing here. Another way of putting it: everybody is at fault but you. >I'm not referring to rhetorical understanding or all friends, >mind. Bullard, Rodegheir, Appelle and others seem perfectly >capable of driving with the "Hufford" brakes on. Others don't. >You should be using Hufford as an instructive cudgel on the >latter, not me, as they wouldn't listen to me if I told them it >was raining in Texas, which it isn't. If you feel that strongly about it, why aren't you using it on your abduction-bashing friends as well? >Finally, one more quote from Hufford's MIT paper (so you can't >say I misrepresented it): >"Theoretical narrowness and exclusivity are always damaging. I >must admit I was astonished that the Roper Poll booklet, David >Jacobs' recent book, Kenneth Ring's even more recent book and a >number of other abduction publications make "Waking up paralyzed >with a sense of a strange...presence" a central, pivotal element >-- but _none_ of them cited my 1982 book devoted _entirely_ to >that phenomenon, or any other literature on the subject." A good point. I have serious reservations, which I was expressing to Budd before it was ever published, about the Roper poll, and I've expressed these in print as well. Generally speaking, when I read an ostensible abduction account that begins with what sounds like sleep paralysis, the alarm bells sound. Their continued sounding depends on what happens next. Actually, however, Keel's books contain more sleep-paralysis stories than Hopkins's do. Keel even had them himself, explaining them -- of course -- as the machinations of evil ultraterrestrials. >That was six years ago. The future of abduction research, I'm >afraid, is not looking so bright that you'll need shades anytime >soon, at least as far as Hufford's recommendations are >concerned. No thanks, in part, to the abduction bashers whose excesses you never seem to find the time to criticize. For the lack of progress on this issue, there's plenty of blame to go around. That said, I'm largely out of sympathy with your obsessive grudge against Hopkins and Jacobs, whom -- whether ultimately they are validated or disconfirmed -- I do not doubt history will treat more kindly than their contemporaries. Though I do not believe he has proved his case by any means, I think Jacobs's abduction books are pretty damned interesting. He has proposed the first major hypothesis about why -- from the point of view of an abduction literalist -- the phenomenon occurs. Right or wrong, he has made an extraordinarily interesting contribution to the discussion. And if we're all lucky, he's 100% mistaken. >But you no doubt beg to differ. You got it. Cheers, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 34 From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:04:03 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:50:57 -0400 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 34 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan@aol.com> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 5, Number 34 August 24, 2000 Editor: Joseph Trainor UFO FLEET SEEN BY THOUSANDS IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN A major UFO incident rocked the Southwest Asian nations of Afghanistan and Pakistan on Tuesday night, August 15, 2000. The fleet of UFOs was first seen at 8:15 p.m. in Kandahar, a city in Afghanistan located 200 kilometers (120 miles) southwest of Kabul, the national capital. "Eyewitnesses in Kandahar told Afghan Islamic Press that objects looking like missiles, like 'flames of fire,' moved through the air around 8 p.m. in the evening and fell" across the border in neighboring Pakistan. "'We did not know what they were,' the eyewitnesses said." "People have also observed these things in the border areas of Pakistan, , Shahrkotal, and in Spin Dolbak in Kandahar province." The UFOs were "also seen in Samangan province and Urozgan province" in Afghanistan. "In Afghanistan, the Taliban (ruling Islamic party--J.T.) wondered whether the USA had come out with another cruise missile attack on Osama bin-Laden's hideouts. Frantic calls, mostly by radio and satellite, were made to Khost, Jallalabad and Kabul. By midnight, the Taliban knew and were relieved that this wasn't the case." "Taliban official Mulla Ahmadullah Ahmadi in Kandahar said, 'Some people saw the star-like objects here at 8:15 p.m. They said they made no noise like the cruise missiles and were brightly lit. Also, they said the objects were flying towards Pakistan. Then it became obvious that this was no fresh (new) U.S. cruise missile attack on Afghanistan.'" "The mystery objects, according to reports, have also been sighted in Afghanistan's Zahul province neighboring Kandahar. It is probable that they were seen elsewhere in Afghanistan, as well, but poor means of communication ensures that it will be weeks before such information reaches the media." The UFOs crossed the border into Pakistan at about 8:20 p.m., heading southwest towards the city of Quetta, in Pakistan's Baluchistan province located about 200 kilometers (120 miles) southeast of Kandahar. "Official sources in Quetta said Baluchistan's high- ranking government functionaries spent Tuesday night and the whole of Wednesday," August 16, 2000, "discussing the sighting and searching for the elusive objects." "An aerial reconnaissance was also carried out in Loralal, Barkhan and Kohlu, the places where the flying objects were sighted by many people and also where some of them reportedly fell. A (Pakistani Air Force) helicopter was sent to carry out this task but it returned empty handed." In addition to the civilian eyewitnesses, the UFOs "were also sighted by Colonel Asmatullah," chief of military security for the governor of Baluchistan, "who saw them sailing over Koh-i-Murdar mountain which overlooks Quetta." "Baluchistan Home Secretary Shahryar Khan Mahsud said he is using every means to unlock the mystery of the flying lights." Mahsud said, "We would have dismissed them as gossip if a few people had seen them at just a few places. But we are being told of sightings at several places in northern and central Baluchistan. They were reportedly seen at Chaghi, Quetta, Pishin, Qiila Abdullah, Loralal, Barkhan, Kohlu and Qiila Saifullah." A lone saucer was also seen at Dera Ghazi Khan in the Punjab. (See the Afghan Islamic Press report of August 16, 2000, "Agency claims people saw objects like missiles fly over Afghanistan." Also The News of UK for August 17, 2000, "No clue yet as to mysterious lights" by Rahimullah Yusufzai. Many thanks to Martin Montague and Gerry Lovell for forwarding these reports.) (Editor's Note: Quetta was the site of a mid-air UFO explosion and crash on January 25, 1923. See Unexplained Mysteries of the Twentieth Century by Janet and Colin Bord, Contemporary Books, New York, N.Y., 1989, page 223.) TWO SETS OF CROP CIRCLES APPEAR IN CANADA "A central Ontario farmer refuses to believe aliens or Star Wars weapons are responsible for three neatly-formed circles that have appeared in a grain field." The three crop circles were discovered in a farm field belonging to Garnet Horne, 59, who lives in Oro-Medonte Township, near Orillia, Ontario, Canada (population 26,000), located 72 kilometers (45 miles) north of Toronto. "'I try to live in the real world,' Garnet Horne, 59, said yesterday," Friday, August 11, 2000. "At first the family suspected the three circles-- 23, 15 and 12 meters (75, 49 and 39 feet) in diameter-- were a prank." "'I figured some jackass tramped it down to get our goat,' Horne's elder brother, Donald, said." "But there were no pathways leading to and from the three circles." "'We got right down and looked for fingerprints,' said Garnet, 'Not a boot heel mark, nothing. It isn't human. It's got me beat.'" "Inside each circle the barley and oats have been flattened to the ground in a symmetrical, counter-clockwise (anti-clockwise in UK--J.T.) swirl. Around the circular edges the flattened grain meets a perfectly upright wall of ripened oats and barely." "'It's not aliens, and it's not somebody tramping it down,' said Garnet, 'I can't explain it.'" "Garnet first spotted the circles while driving by his field at dusk on Thursday," August 10, 2000. "'It scared the wits out of me,' he said." "This is not the first time crop circles have appeared west of Orillia, Ont. near Bass Lake. In 1992 and 1993, circular patterns appeared about three kilometers north of the Horne farm in a corn field." (See the Calgary Sun for August 12, 2000, "Crop circles puzzle farmer.") On Wednesday, August 15, 2000, a crop circle was found on a farm in Grenfells, Saskatchewan, Canada (population 1,200), a small town on Provincial Highway 1 about 48 kilometers (30 miles) east of Regina. "The formation is a small single circle, only about 10 feet )3 meters) in diameter in mature wheat. What is interesting about the circle, however, is the lay, which is radial, with the wheat stalks flattened out from the centre to the outside edge." "A similar pattern was seen in the large seven-circled Edmonton (Alberta) Number 2 formation in a barley field last year," i.e. in the summer of 1999. "No tracks were reported in or around the circle, and the centre region is darkened or singed." The Horne farm and the Grenfells formations are respectively the third and fourth crop circle cases in Canada for the year 2000. (Many thanks to Paul Anderson of Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada for these reports.) UFO FLAP CONTINUES IN SASKATCHEWAN Eyewitness Dale L. reports, "On the morning of" Tuesday, "August 8, 2000, at 6:11 a.m., I was driving to work in Vonda, Sask. when I observed the following:" "In the southeastern sky at approximately 100 degrees magnetic from my location, which was at the turnoff from (Provincial) Highway 41, south of Smitts, Sask., which leads to Vonda" when "I saw a ball of white light in the sky. It appeared to be about 30 degrees above the horizon but shone very bright even though the sun was up and shining in the sky. I stopped my car on the turnoff from Highway 41 and observed the light and noticed that it appeared to be moving. After a minute of watching, I continued to drive south on the local grid road." "From time to time I would glance out the car window and noticed that the light was slowly getting fainter and fainter until it disappeared." "About five minutes later, while still driving and on the same road, I again noticed the brilliantly white object in approximately the same area it had been in earlier. Again I glanced at it from time to time while driving, and again it slowly faded out until it had disappeared. Shortly after this I arrived at work and went inside and saw the light no more." "It was not an airplane since it made no noise. It might have been a ballon but there were no ballons in the area. I sent an email to CJWW to ask.. On August 9, 2000, at approximately 10:50 a.m., I received a call from Neil Dillinger at CJWW, who advised me that he had checked with the airport, and there were no ballons in the area." (Email Form Report) TWO RED UFOs HOVER OVER PHOENIX, ARIZONA Channel 10 News in Phoenix, Arizona was flooded with calls Tuesday night, August 15, 2000, when dozens of people reported seeing two red UFOs hovering over the city. Eyewitnesses C.B. and Jan, who live in Mesa *oiouklation 289,000) just south of Phoenix, reported, "On Tuesday, August 15, 2000, at 8:15 p.m., Jan and I were sitting on our patio when we looked in the northern sky and noticed two bright red lights that were approximately the size of golf balls." "He got the binoculars which removes the object seven times closer," Jan added, "The two red lights were set one above the other as if looking at a clock. One light at the 12 o'clock position and the other at 5 (o'clock). They were hovering perfectly still. The approximate distance from our yard was about five miles (eight kilometers).: C.B. reported, "While viewing the two red objects for over five minutes, they changed color from bright red to bright amber. The upper light started to flicker and within three to four seconds it disappeared." "Approximately five minutes passed with the lower amber light remaining," he added, "Jan called her daughter Kelli to go outside and to look in the northeastern sky, and, while they were talking, it started to flicker, and in three to four seconds--it was gone!" C.B. then phoned Channel 10 in Phoenix and was told by the switchboard operator that the TV station had "received a lot of calls about those two red lights." He then called the Mesa Police Department, where, he said, the police dispatcher reportedly "said that it was a military exercise involving Falcon helicopters." (Email Form Report) (Editor's Comment: I couldn't find any mention of "Falcon helicopters" in my aircraft recognition handbook. Could "Falcon" be the code name for black helicopters?) GREEN UFO SIGHTED IN THE ITALIAN ALPS During the week of August 7, 2000, a luminous green disc emitting a soft glow was seen circling mountain peaks in the Italian Alps. Eyewitness reports were received from many residents in the alpine valleys of Trentino and Adige, located 140 kilometers (84 miles) north of Verona. The disc made no sound, and its speed varied from slow to extremely fast. (See the Italian newspaper L'Adige for August 10, 2000.) Elsewhere in Italy, a luminous green orb was seen and videotaped in Morrone, a small town in Abruzzo province. On Tuesday, August 15, 2000, "a single luminous white body with a short bright tail was seen by hundreds" in Umbria province in central Italy. (Grazie a Edoardo Russo, Roberto Labanti, Maurizio Verga e Giorgio Rossolillo di CISU per questi rapporti.) TWO ROTATING UFOs SEEN IN NORTHUMBERLAND, UK On Thursday, August 17, 2000, at 11:45 p.m., Alfred D. reports, "My son and a neighbour's daughter had just seen a UFO here in Northumberland." The sighting took place in Widdrington, located about 40 miles (64 kilometers) north of Newcastle- upon-Tyne. "There were two bright lights in the west. The lights were going round (rotating--J.T.) in a peculiar pattern and travelling northward. The sighting lasted for about five seconds. Then the lights disappeared.. They were right here in the village of Widdrington, which is not far from Morpeth." (Email Form Report) MIRACLES REPORTED AT A MASSACRE SITE IN RUSSIA A mine shaft where Zionist Bolsheviks massacred prisoners in July 1918 is now a part of a Russian Orthodox monastery and the site of many miracles. The Monastery of the Newly Martyred Russians opened in 1992 with the canonization of the Grand Princess Yelizaveta Fyodorovna, the sister-in-law of the recently-canonized Czar Nicholas II. The monastery is built over an abandoned mine in Alapayevsk, a small town located about 400 kilometers (240 miles) south of Omsk. "Marked by a simple wooden Orthodox cross and a sign warning visitors not to venture into it for danger of collapse, the shaft is the centerpiece of the Monastery of the Newly Martyred Russians." "As a German-born Protestant," Yelizaveta Fyodorovna "spanned East and West. Born in 1864, she converted to" the Russian Orthodox Church "in 1891 after marrying Grand Prince Sergei Alexandrovich Romanov," the czar's brother. "While serving as the governor of Moscow, Prince Sergei was assassinated in 1905, widowing Fyorodovna, who petitioned the czar to pardon the assassin." "She became increasingly pious, founding a convent in Moscow and devoting herself to cjaritable works. Following the 1917revolution, the Bolsheviks arrested her, eventually taking her to Alapayevsk and killing her." In July 1918, the same month the Russian royal family was shot in Yekaterinburg, a platoon of Zionists "threw Fyorodovna and others into a pit and hurled grenades after them." Since then, however, some strange happenings have been reported at the crime scene. Abbott Moses, 30, leader of the monastery, "speaks with a sense of awe about the miraculous pit," and "told of how, when Fyorodovna's body was taken from the shaft a few months after her death, singing was heard and an unexploded grenade was found next to her still-intact body." "Nowadays, the pit is the source of an equally miraculous phenomenon." "'There have been a few cases where a sweet smell has come out of the shaft,' said Moses, who has deep blue eyes, freckles and a wisky red beard. 'In May of 1998, for a few days around the birthday of the last czar himself, it happened! I came by, smelled it and though, Oh, it's spring, and there are flowers. But there were no flowers.'" "Today the convent she started is under reconstruction in central Moscow, and she is increasingly venerated." (See the Minneapolis, Minn. Star-Tribune for August 19, 2000, "Monastery honors new Russian saint," page B6.) TEXAS STANDOFF ENDANGERS BORN-AGAIN CHRISTIANS A tense standoff in the East Texas town of Trinidad (population 1,050) has 17 evangelical Christians holed up on a ranch, surrounded by a federal task force. On Tuesday, August 15, 2000, troops and vehicles of the Multi-Juristdictional Task Force (MJTF) moved into strategic positions around the ranch which belongs to John J. Gray, 51, of Trinidad. Staying at the ranch are Gray, whose nickname is "Joe," his daughters, Rachel Dempsey and Lisa Tarkington, and Mrs. Tarkington's two sons, aged two and four years old. Also staying at the Gray ranch are another seven adults and five children. According to the San Antonio Express-News, in July 2000, a Henderson County grand jury indicted Gray on two charges. Bench warrants were reportedly issued but have not yet been served. Also, Lisa Tarkington's estranged husband, Keith Tarkington, reportedly has obtained a court order granting him custody of the two boys, and he has reportedly asked authorities to extract the boys from the ranch. The Express-News quoted the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as saying the ranch residents are members of a small religious sect called the Embassy of Heaven. It further stated that the Embassy of Heaven is based in Oregon and has 400 members across the USA. Embassy of Heaven members reportedly "drive cars without license plates and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior." (Editor's Comment: Obviously, these are capital crimes in the opinion of the Supreme Rectum, Rabbi Meir Lau.) The Express-News quoted an ADLspokeswoman as saying, "They have opted out of the system." (Editor's Comment: So to hell with the Constitution and our courts of law, we now have the ADL condemning born-again Christians to death because of their religious views.) Yet, in a statement released to radio talk show host Alex Jones, the Grays denied that they are members of the Embassy of Heaven. "We are born-again Christians," the Grays' statement said, "This is not a cult, just Christians who believe the government and courts are corrupt." Lisa Tarkington reportedly said, "They want to put a mark on your forehead, the Mark of the Beast." According to the Houston Chronicle, the bench warrants charged Gray with "disarming a police officer" and "assault on a police officer." The charges stem from an altercation near Palestine, Texas on December 24, 1999. According to the Grays' statement, a man named "Curtis Martin suggested we take a ride to Palestine, Tex.to look at a cabin which Joe had built for a friend... When Curtis said he was going to carry (a firearm--J.T.) and suggested Joe do the same, Joe agreed to do so." "As they approached Palestine, Curtis sped past a DPS (Texas Department of Public Safety--J.T.) car with two officers inside. The officers turned around, followed and stopped the vehicle in which Joe was a passenger. After being told to get out, Curtis quickly exited the vehicle and said to Joe, 'Sorry, Joe,':" the Gray family statement alleged. "The other officer went around to Joe's side, opened the door and asked Joe if he was armed. Joe sat there calmly and replied that he was. After the officer asked Joe whether he had a concealed-carry permit, Joe replied he didn't need one; it was his God-given right and affirmed by the (USA) Constitution. The officer shouted that it was not a right, drew his pistol, aimed it at Joe and screamed at Joe to get out of the car," the statement alleged. "As Joe reached up to remove the automatic seatbelt so he could exit, the officer started shouting. 'He's going for his gun! He's going for his gun!' Joe answered that he wasn't going for his gun and sat back down with his feet on the floor, and officer continued to shout," the statement further alleged. The altercation ensued, and Gray was placed under arrest. According to the family statement, "Joe remained in the Palestine jail for two weeks without any charges being filed." However, Gray reportedly did not appear before the county grand jury hearing. The county district attorney was quoted as saying, "We don't want another Waco. We need a peaceful solution." (See the San Antonio, Tex. Express-News for August 14, 2000. Also the Houston, Tex. Chronicle August 18, 2000, "Standoff continues amid attack rumors." Many thanks to Rick Wilde of America's Hope and Alex Jones for the news articles.) from the UFO Files... 1766: RENEGADE SAINT One of the strangest cases to come out of Eighteenth Century France was the curious affair of Suzanne Labrousse. The daughter of a well-to-do farmer, Suzanne was born in 1747 in Vanxains, a village near Riberac in what is now France's department of Dordogne. Even as a small child, Suzanne was given to falling into trances, usually at the foot of an old oak tree on the family farm. Her brothers and sisters would have to shake her to bring her out of it. Suzanne "often went looking for God at the far end of her parents' meadow," where, she wrote, "the golden-flowered broom grows, and the pink-belled heather. I lay on my back and stared up at the sky for a long time, because I had been told that God lived beyond the blue...When the clouds chased each other across the sky and were lost behind the huge forest of La Double, I always hoped that he would appear in a rift between them." "I was nine years old and the desire to climb up into the sky to see God was obsessing me more all the time. Rest had become almost impossible. At last I could bear it on longer, and I made up my mind to die." Hearing that a neighbor had died after accidentally eating a spider that was inside a grape, Suzanne began collecting spiders. But before she had a chance to carry out her plan, she overhead her mother teaching her brothers their catechism lesson. Mme. Labrousse said suicide was as much a sin as murder. Suzanne immediately began doing penance for her near-sin, and the round of medieval self-mortifications continued throughout adolescence. Day and night she could be found in the church at Vanxains, deep in prayer and meditation. "But God kept playing his eternal game of hide-and-seek with her as with everyone else." In 1766, Suzanne reached her nineteenth birthday. She was "of a size somewhat taller than average, she is slender and quick by nature, and her attempts to appear stiff and cool do not always succeed. She is rather a beautiful young woman" but with "a vague and squinting expression to her deep blue eyes. Her hair is of a fine chestnut color with amber glints." But "Suzette" dressed down. "Her body is ageless in the loose gown of the Perigord peasant woman, with a gray shawl top that makes her look like a nun. She is one, too, but of her own order." And finally, after years of prayer and mortification, Suzanne makes contact with the Almighty. Kneeling in the old church, Suzanne wrote, "I was praying and watching night spread over the chancel. The sacrarium lamp was flickering as though it wanted to go out. I came closer because I could no longer see the door of the tabernacle with the host behind it, and in the host was Jesus. Just then I felt as though carried away by an extraordinary surge of love, and a voice said to me, 'Leave the house of your mother and father. Go out into the world, unknown and a beggar, because I want, through a humble girl, to bring down several of the Great of this worldand to put to rights several evils in my church." So Suzanne hits the road, wandering all over the Perigord and Guyenne regions, as far as Libourne. Crowds flock to hear the new prophetess, "la femme Suzette" or "la Deborah de Riberac." Suzanne "will have none of the convents that are fighting to get her: Notre Dame, St. Benoit, and Ste. Claire in Perigueux, the Uruslines in Libourne, the Little Sisters of Riberac and Aubeterre." But the convents want to put her on display like pandas in a zoo. Look, there's our resident saint. If you want to talk to her, that'll be five livres. Suzanne turns them all down. "I prefer to retreat alone," she tells them, "That is what God requires of me." In that fateful year of 1776, Suzanne returns to "my beloved Vanxains. There, at least, I would be able to be alone with myself." Monsignor de Flamarens, the Bishop of Perigueux contributes 300 livres so that the parish can build a one-room house for Suzanne right next to the church. Maybe now she'll stop wandering and stirring up his diocese. But "the voice" has new work for Suzanne. Some interesting things are going on in this June of 1776. In Philadelphia, a sandy-haired Virginia lawyer named Thjomas Jefferson has taken the hopeless task of trying to write a document for a committee. In Ingolstadt, Germany, a professor named Adam Weishaupt summons the ruling circle of his new Illuminati for a magickal conclave. And in Canajoharie, New York, Thayendanega, also known as Joseph Brant, sees a vision of his grandfather, the war chief Tiyanoga, dead since 1755, warning of the doom about to fall on the Ganegahaga=ono. (Mohawk Indians--J.T.) Night after night, Suzanne is jolted from sleep by "the voice," which sends her to her quill and notebook, admonishing her to write down what she has just dreamed. By 1779, the book is complete--Suzette's Guide to the Future. She carries it to Perigueux and hand-delivers it to Monsignor de Flamarens. Weeks pass. No word from the bishop. Suzanne takes a hike down to Perigueux. "I am very unhappy indeed to be such a subject of contradiction for many persons," she tells the bishop. "Some of the people I know take me for mad, others for a liar and hypocrite. Only the good people of Vanxains feel any respect at all for me and even some affection. The thought of my mission never leaves me in peace. At night voices seem to be urging me on, 'Rise up and go!' they tell me in the midst of the stillness. You do not believe in the authenticity of my mission, Monsignor? Give me back the papers I entrusted to you. I shall burn them in your presence." "No, no, my daughter, I shall not impose that sacrifice upon you. Your manuscripts are in the hands of learned theologians, gentlemen from Paris. Indeed, you will have to abide by their judgement, but they will not make up their minds in such a hurry." He gives her a curious sidelong glance. "But...do you really believe in everything you say?" "More than my life." The game goes on for days. The next time Suzanne calls, Monsignor de Flamarens is far more hostile. "No, I shall certainly not make your case known. People would think I was mad." "He forbids her his door, but how long can you keep Joan of Arc in the waiting room? She periodically descends upon the episcopal portals with a great rustle of angels' wings. 'Monsignor, I have come to know your answer as to what is in the manuscript.'" He tells Suzanne that he actually sent the manuscipt to Rome. Weeks later, Suzanne returns, eager to hear what Pope Pius VI has to say." But Monsignor de Flamarens refuses to see her under any circumstances. Dejected, Suzanne returns to the family farm in Vanxains. She arrives on September 29, 1779, and to her surprise, there is a visitor waiting in her parents' sitting room--a 43-year-old priest named Christophe- Antoine Gerle. Dom Gerle lends a sympathetic ear, as Suzanne prattles on and on about "the future." She wrote, "When I was expressing to the Reverend Father Gerle my astonishment that all the other priests had treated me like a madwoman, he answered, 'Remember that the prophets also were judged mad. But the dreadful events they foretold came to pass all the same.'" But Suzanne has put her trust in the wrong man. Gerle is a bad one, and ten years hence, in the French Revolution, he'll prove just how bad he really is. "Dom Gerle blesses her once more and goes back to his priory, thoughful and happy...He takes (the rest of) her manuscripts with him, and he doesn't burn them." Dom Gerle is 43 and the prior of a Carthusian monastery. He's risen about as far as he can go in the Roman Catholic Church. But a clever fellow armed with knowledge of the future can rise higher. Much higher. As he rides his mule back to Notre Dame de Vauclaire, he cherishes his own personal vision of the future--himself as the supreme pontiff of a new global religion. Suzanne still has a long life ahead of her. She'll spend the coming revolution, which she saw in her dreams, running and hiding from the Comite de Salut Publique (Committee of Public Safety--J.T.) Our girl is definitely on the Most Wanted list of the Illuminati. She lives on until 1821, a latter-day Cassndra whose dire prophecies came true but who was fated never to be believed. Out of Vanxains I have called my daughter? And in March of 1780, in the Lateran Palace in Rome, Pope Pius VI adjusts his Franklin-style glasses, reading by candlelight. He reads the latest page of Suzette's Guide to the Future. Frowning, he mutters to himself, "Who the hell is Monica Lewinsky?" Licking his fingertip, he turns the page and reads a bit more. Brown eyes bulge wide. With a jolt, the glasses fly right off his nose. "Mama mia!" (See The Wind from America by Claude Manceron, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, N.Y., 1978, pages 195 to 203. Also Enigmes de Mlle. La Brousse, commencees en 1766 by Bishop Pierre Pontard, Paris, 1791.) (Editor's Comment: Pope Pius VI, the pope of the French Revolution, was born Giovanni Angelo Braschi in Cesena, Italy on December 27, 1717. Ironically, that day in the Roman Catholic calendar is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, the babies of Bethlehem massacred by Herod. Strange.) We'll be back next week with more UFO and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you then. UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2000 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. ============================================= Note for UK Readers: Channel 5 are showing "UFOs over Phoenix" on Bank Holiday Monday at 7.00pm ============================================= E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Cheshire UFO & Crop Circles @ Fortean Times From: Mark Pilkington <Mark.Pilkington@johnbrown.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:21:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:52:37 -0400 Subject: Cheshire UFO & Crop Circles @ Fortean Times Just added to the Fortean Times web site: 2 articles that relate to recent UFO Updates discussions. Andy Roberts on the Cheshire UFO video saga & An interview with some of the UK's veteran circlemakers (be they hoax hoaxers or 'the real thing'): http://www.forteantimes.com -------------- Mark Pilkington Reporter, online & reviews editor Fortean Times, 136-142 Bramley Road, London W10 6SR, UK ftfreelance@johnbrown.co.uk TEL: 0207 565 3125 FAX: 0207 565 3055 ------------------------------ http://www.forteantimes.com ------------------------------- "This [polar icecap melting] will unlock from their prison of ice, the monsters who vanished centuries before recorded history. They will walk your streets and devour your friends!" Forbidden Predictions based on Nostradamus and the Tarot, The Amazing Criswell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Montreal 'UFO Expert' Sentenced From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:53:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:55:19 -0400 Subject: Montreal 'UFO Expert' Sentenced Source: The Montreal Gazette http://www.montrealgazette.com:80/news/pages/000823/4632499.html Wednesday 23 August 2000 UFO expert's views on sex judged out of this world Sentenced to year in jail for molesting boys GEORGE KALOGERAKIS The Gazette A bizarre court case that heard talk of flying saucers and sex ended yesterday with Quebec's foremost UFO expert being jailed for molesting three boys. Richard Glenn was sentenced to one year in jail following a jury trial that heard how he first had sex with aliens when they abducted him at age 5. That calm statement from Glenn led the judge to wonder out loud whether his mind was all there. The 54-year-old Mont-Saint-Hilaire man fought the charges against him by saying he was following quasi-religious beliefs meant to teach children about sex at a young age. He espoused tantra sex, an ancient subset of Hinduism and Buddhism that Glenn says allows you to harness your sexual energy. "I always said pedagogy, not pedophilia," Glenn told the judge yesterday. "I think it is clear I am not a pedophile. I just have original ideas." But Superior Court Justice Lise Cote didn't buy it. She rejected the defence's suggestion of community work as not enough to show society's condemnation for Glenn preying on vulnerable boys. Glenn is a well-known personality in francophone circles. He had a popular cable show for 20 years about extraterrestrials and gives workshops on the occult, aliens and parapsychology. Three men testified at Glenn's spring trial in Saint-Hyacinthe's courthouse, describing events that happened in the early 1980s, when they were between 10 and 13. Two talked of isolated incidents where Glenn touched one's genitals and forced the other's hand onto the man's penis. The third boy said Glenn molested him about 40 times after entrancing him at the age of 10 with stories of UFOs and sex. Glenn promised him the sex acts would one day help the boy soar through the skies in a flying saucer. That victim said he was disappointed that Glenn continues to minimize what he did. "In my dreams, I see him come and apologize to me," the 29-year-old said after the sentencing. "But I'm dreaming in Technicolor. He'll never do it." Glenn admitted to performing sex acts with the boy, but said they happened only as the boy approached his 14th birthday, the age of consent. He denied touching the other two. A jury found him guilty in April of molesting all three. He is appealing the verdict. During yesterday's sentencing arguments, Glenn told the judge he realizes his views could make him a hero to pedophiles because of his notoriety. Glenn promised to fight that, saying he was going to use his Web site to discourage child sex abuse. That reflects a change from his past views. Glenn always contended he was being persecuted because North America wasn't ready for his enlightened thinking. A court-appointed psychologist checked out Glenn's Web site this summer and was shocked to find it contained details about how pedophilia was accepted in other cultures and gave a list of countries specifying at what age it was legal to have sex. That is all gone now, said psychologist Edouard Beltrami, who added that Glenn is waking up to the fact that his views about adult-child sex are not acceptable. "It is not the fear of prison that will make him change," Beltrami added. "There is a part of him that would find it interesting to be martyred for a good cause." Glenn was charged in 1992 and 1993 with molesting two girls. He was acquitted in both cases. Parents also complained about his behaviour when he was a physical-education teacher, before his UFO cable show. Upon hearing yesterday he would be going to jail, Glenn looked over at a reporter, wiggled his eyebrows and smiled. He waved goodbye to family and supporters of his views on UFOs and sex before being taken away by guards. Todd Lemire Michigan UFO Central http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html -- "But I must point out that we have much better eyewitness evidence available for UFOs than I have for the Christian religion." Barry H. Downing, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Possible Explanation For Balochistan UFOs From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:55:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:56:29 -0400 Subject: Possible Explanation For Balochistan UFOs http://www.indiaserver.com:80/thehindu/2000/08/24/stories/03240001.htm Todd Lemire Michigan UFO CENTRAL http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html -- "But I must point out that we have much better eyewitness evidence available for UFOs than I have for the Christian religion." Barry H. Downing, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:58:52 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:35:56 -0400 Subject: Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 >>From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 Hi Jerry, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. We both have clear views on the matter and both think we are right! I still think that you are smugly complacent in the face of massive evidence to the contrary and that the sheer weight of case numbers resolved to IFO status proves my point. If you wish to be part of a system which seeks to perpetuate mystery then you'll get the ufology you deserve. What you won't get is answers. You also fail to understand the nature of mispercpetion as your quote about Custer illustrates: >Let me repeat, Andy: if Custer and his men had seen a winged >elephant rather than a slow-moving, ascending light, _that_ >would have been a radical misperception. No Jerry - because elephants can't fly! That would have been an hallucination. Different kettle, as we say in these parts. >Yeah, er, whatever. Beyond that, I'm afraid that this exchange >simply underscores your penchant for making sweeping statements >and indulging in reckless claims which you cannot validate >empirically. Yeah, I guess I'd rather sit on the fence than fall >down, with you and Humpty Dumpty, and risk cracking my head. At >this stage of UFO history, it's a lot more honest to concede >that we don't know than that we "know" all kinds of things we >don't. I was only commenting on things we _did_ know Jerry, all based on case work, field work and research. And it wasn't I who somewhat recklessly made predictions and then failed to qualify or amplify them! I'd recommend you got out there in the field and did some _real_ investigation Jerry, read some more books about misperception and we'll play this game again in a year or two. But thanks for the illuminating insight into the darkest recesses of the Clark cranium. Dennis wrote: >I'm just shocked that Jerry couldn't congratulate Briton Andy >for having read a recent account of Custer's demise in the first >place, however critically received. Bet he was too busy brushing >up on his Yorkshire pudding. I like to keep up with C19th American history Dennis - and it's a bonus when you get an excellent example of radical misperception thrown in free. >Full disclosure: I read Evan Connell's "Morning Star", too. But >the Venus sighting completely escaped me. It's there on page 182-183 (Pimlico edition). Perhaps you (radically) misperceived it as a flying elephant Dennis! Happy Trails Andy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:35:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:42:43 -0400 Subject: Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Velez >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:00:40 -0500 >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:25:34 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >>>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:51:40 -0500 Hi Jerry, Sasquatch, You wrote: >when I read an ostensible abduction account that begins with >what sounds like sleep paralysis, the alarm bells sound. Their >continued sounding depends on what happens next. Actually, >however, Keel's books contain more sleep-paralysis stories than >Hopkins's do. Keel even had them himself, explaining them -- of >course -- as the machinations of evil ultraterrestrials. I have to agree with you when it comes to accounts that begin "with what sounds like sleep paralysis." Easily 80% of the reports I recieve start in bed in the middle of the night. My question has to do with the other 20 or so percent of the reports I get. Is _anyone_ doing any kind of comprehensive investigation of reports where the individual is out and about involved in their daily business when they are suddenly confronted with a "UFO" or its occupants and where either partial or full recollection (or missing time) is involved? It seems to me that tackling the 'night visitations' is fairly easy meat in terms of being able to come up with plausible and prosaic explanations. Incidents involving a fully conscious individual in the middle of the business of their day where they are for all intents and purposes 'captured' (taken) by the occupants of an unidentified air craft (UFO) seems to me to be the real 'meat' of the abduction reports that really needs to be thoroughly investigated and somehow explained. I have had one such abduction experience and I know of others who have reported an identical scenario. (Beginning with Villas-Boas, Betty & Barney Hill, the Allagash four etc.) Other than Hopkins/Jacobs/Fowler/Mack who have relied mostly on information obtained from hypnosis sessions for their supportive material, is this type of abduction (which begins with an uncomfortably close-up UFO encounter and that proceeds to escalate rapidly into an out and out kidnapping,) being looked into by anyone other than those few well known authors/investigators? Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:47:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:43:43 -0400 Subject: Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness - Stacy >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Myth of the Noncredible Witness >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:00:40 -0500 >That said, I'm largely out of sympathy with your obsessive >grudge against Hopkins and Jacobs, whom -- whether ultimately >they are validated or disconfirmed -- I do not doubt history >will treat more kindly than their contemporaries. Though I do >not believe he has proved his case by any means, I think >Jacobs's abduction books are pretty damned interesting. He has >proposed the first major hypothesis about why -- from the point >of view of an abduction literalist -- the phenomenon occurs. >Right or wrong, he has made an extraordinarily interesting >contribution to the discussion. And if we're all lucky, he's >100% mistaken. >Jerry Clark Jerry, I'd respond, but that would only brand me an obsessive! Congratulations on the latest book sale, btw. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:45:36 -0400 Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? Dear All Having been interested by the news that Chris Martin has put some of his footage on his Lost Haven website I decided to have a look. Firstly the link to the footage seems to be faulty. I certainly couldn't get to download the footage anyway. Secondly we hear that he has more footage, but of the alien visitors themselves! Is this footage on the website? No, we're asked to talk to Chris at the Leeds conference if we want to see it. Nice plug Chris. So there you have it folks, someone's sitting on some real evidence of aliens piloting UFOs but no press conference, the footage is only available by appointment. Is it time to discuss everyone pulling together and amassing any credible evidence for dissemination by the scientific community? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 'RM'- Maccabee's Definition From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:35 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:50:39 -0400 Subject: 'RM'- Maccabee's Definition >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 >>From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 Total snip of long discussion regarding "Radical Misperception, a term invented by Andy Roberts to explain why the reports of UFOs usually turn out to be explained. I realized long ago... over 20 years ago.... that the fact that most sightings end up explained is because most witnesses describe the sighting with considerable accuracy. What has happened is not misperception or "RM", but rather _misinterpretation_ or perhaps "Radical Misinterpretation." So I hereby invent a new term with the same initials, RM, but a different meaning. In investigator trainee lectures I have emphasized that a main job of the UFO investigator (and also other types of investigators, including those on the TWA800 crash) is to separate interpretation from observation. Usually you have to "remove" the interpretation from the basic observation. ("Tell me what you SAW, not what you think you saw!!") If you can get accurate details on the observation then you have a chance to solve the sighting if it were a conventional phenomenon. In fact, from the point of view of the investigator who no longer has the observed phenomenon to analyze, all that is available is the historical record of the sighting, which includes the description(s) by the witness(es). If the descriptions(s) is(are) accurate then the phenomenon should be identifiable, if it is a conventional phenomenon. The Mantell case has been cited as a case of RM (Roberts definition). I claim loudly that it was a case of RM (Maccabee definition) and that once the interpretation had been removed from the report the description was clear. That fact that no one realized what was being described is relevant only in that it prevented the investigators from being able to identify the actual cause of the sighting at the tme. Once that cause was known from other information, however, the description given by the witness was found to be quite accurate. An amusing (to me) example of the witness descriptions being used to solve som UFO sightings is the case of numerous UFOs over South America in the latter 1970's. James Oberg patted himself on the back for having solved that one. He reported the descriptions given by the witnesses and the fact that the witnesses all claimed they were occasionally seeing UFOs high in the western sky long after sunset. The witnesses gave rather expicit descriptions, And then someone got photos or film of a Russian rocket dumping fuel at high altitude. Oberg decided to match up the dates and times of the sightings with the date and times of rocket launches, I think from Baikanur (sp?), in th FSU. In a lecture I heard Oberg pointed out how "wrong" the witnesses had been in describing these "objects" (fuel dumps) as flying craft high in the sky. He went on to use this as evidence that witness reports couldn't be trusted. The amusing irony of this was that it was the descriptions of the witnesses that allowed Oberg to "nail" the sightings as fuel dumps as soon as film of a dump was available: the verbal descriptions and numerous drawings of the "UFOs" matched the images in th film. The witnesses WERE accurate in terms of time of sighting, direction, and "shape" of the phenomenon, and it was the witnesses descriptions that allowed Oberg to claim he had solved the sightings. I would agree with Andy that RM (Roberts definition) can occur under conditions of "difficult seeing." Nevertheless the witness could be completely accurate in describing what he saw, its just that his description would not be what he "should" have seen under normal viewing. A crude example: if you are looking into a curved mirror but you don't know it is a curved mirror, you will see shapes of straight objects which appear bent. Your perception of the bending is correct, and your report of the bent object is correct and there is no way that an investigator could identify such a "bent object" as long as neither the investigator nor the witness realize the witness was observing the object reflected in a bent mirror. Another form of "RM" (Roberts) might occur due to the witness's own inability to perceive (poor eyesight, temporary flash blindedness, etc.) However, I would agree with Jerry that most cases by far are caused by "normal "misperception" or really the inability of the witness to identify the phenomenon, not because he doesn't perceive it correctly (as in "looking through a glass darkly") but because he simply doesn't recognize it. It is then the job of the investigator to separate the observation from the interpretation gven by the witness and to use all possible means to identify the phenomenon frm the description. This, by the way, is why I "like" at least photo/film/video cases. A recorded image does not prove a UFO, but it does act as an aid to the witness recollection and in the case of clear photos can provide physical (photographic) evidence to compare with poposed explanations. In 1955 the Air Force published Special Report #14 which reported, among other things, that the more reliable a sighting, the less likely it was to be expainable. This was based on the analysis of 3200 sightings that were broken into 4 reliability groups. The least reliable sightings (about 500) had a large fraction of cases with insufficient information for identification, whereas the most reliable (about 300) had the least number of cases with insufficient information. The percentage of identifiable sightings was the same in the least and most reliable sightings groups (about 60%). However, the least reliable group had 18% unexplained, but the most reliable group had about 35% unexplained. This result conflicts with the ordinary meaning of reliable if TRue UFOs (TRUFOs) had NOT been sighted, but instead all unexplained cases resulted from errors: errors in reporting, errors in the sighting, misperception or even RM (either definition). UFO - object/phenomenon not recognized by the witness and reported to an investigator as an unknown TRUFO = a UFO that remains unexplained after investigation. If reliability has its ordinary meaning, that reliable witnesses make accurate reports with few mistakes, then the statistical result of the Battelle Memorial Institute study implies that witnesses have seen TRUFOs. I wrote this in an extensive analysis of SR#14 about 25 years ago and Allan Hendry used my comments in his UFO Handbook.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:54:45 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >The Duke of Mendoza spies an opportunity to get a word in >edgeways on this thread & presents his compliments to the List. >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:48:48 +0100 >>If I recall correctly, Peter Brookesmith was also advised by >>Trinity House that for several years the beacon has been >>shielded from sweeping so far inland, due to local complaints. >I don't recall this last detail, and neither do I have the notes >I took at the time to hand. However, Trinity House (whom I was >querying on behalf of James as much as from personal curiosity) >did tell me the precise angles (in degrees of the compass) >within which the lighthouse shines. And the beam does not >directly shine inland. There's no need for it to, anyway. >However, they did also tell me (contrary to what someone >recently asserted in this thread) that Orford Ness's light shows >red, white or green, depending on where you are at sea. The red >and green masks are visible north and south (or vice versa, I >forget) of the Ness within a fairly narrow band. Anyone who has >some slight acquaintance with navigation at sea will see the >utility of this. It's even more apparent if you've sailed out of >Orford (as I have) and know that stretch of the (legendarily >treacherous North Sea) coast. >If there was indeed mist, fog, or low cloud around the >lighthouse on the night(s) 3TAF's finest were reeling around in >the woods full of seasonal joys, then the beam visible from the f>orest would almost certainly have shown all three colors, r.eflected from the water vapor. Green is not that far on the >spectrum from blue and the two colors are frequently confused or >conflated. Green/blue confusion is also the commonest kind of >color blindness. To quote the Duke, I spot a chance to get a word in edgewise. I must say that I have not become and expert on Rendlesham and therefore am not aware of details that I presume the experts would consider most mundane. HOwever, this information about the ligthouse is intriguing from the optical point of view. I note Duke's claim that the light house beams out toward the sea (no need to shine inland) with, he claims, three colors. I don't recall anyone reporting 3 colors being visible to someone in the woods near Rendlsham forest,. It has been my impression that the references to the witnesses seeing the lighthouse refer to observing a flashing white light. If this is true then th lighthouse did shine inland. But were there any other colors? Duke speculates that light from red and green Sectors of the (I presume) rotating beam, sectors that point out toward the sea, could "reflect from the water vapor" and thus be visible to observers some miles away inland... to which I respond "Tilt!" (Pinball term) I don't have a map showing the lighthouse handy by. But if the red and green sectors are pointing away from the witnesses you can pretty well scrub the idea of seeing much light if the witnesses were miles away. First it is necessary to know how the beam works. Often a _white_ light will have a curved mirror rotate around it to reflect the light making a rotating beam. This beam of white rotates around inside a cylinder made up of sections of colored glass or clear glass. As the beam rotates it sweeps across the clear or colored glass as it points in various direction. I gather that when the beam points inland.... if it does (did) point inland... that it goes through clear glass. A beam can create quite a bright flash at a long distance (which is its value) but light reflected from fog would be relatively dim. If the white beam was filtered b red or green it would indeed illuminate nearby fog to some degree, but somone who is in the opposite direction from the beam would barely see this glow in the atmosphere. At the very least the glow would be much much lower in intensity than the beam shining directly at the observer. The inverse square law applies to both the beam and to the light scattered from the fog droplets. However, the beam starts out greatly concentrated in intensity whereas the glow from the fog is diffuse. If I were provided with accurate information on the light itself (rotating or turning on and off? intensity of the beam in candlepower? are there several colored filters? Azimuth angles of various color beams? Azimuth from lighthouse to observers as compared with the directions of the colored beams. Distance to the observers) and information on the weather (was there a fog? how dense? Visibility range according to local weather records.... maybe in the Air Force Base records!.... ) I could attempt a calculation to see quantitatively whether or not it makes any sense to suggest that the witnesses would have noticed multicolored lights from the lighthouse. (Note: I carried out a comparable calculation as part of my investigation of th New Zealand sightings of Dec. 1978.) >I don't know (because it's not entirely clear from the witness >testimony) whether the reported red and blue lights were points, >or flashes, or what. If the latter, then the lighthouse would >account for the additional colors, quite apart from refractions >- the prismatic effect Jenny mentions - caused by the fog. The >MoD/NSA site on the Ness itself was dotted with fixed blue >lights as well. These too could have, indeed almost certainly >would have, caused refractions into a fog bank or cloud. I wouldn't attribute much color shift to fog, prismatic or otherwise. White light transiting fog stays basically the same color because the fog droplets are "so big" they scatter all wavelengths of isible light. The prismatic effect applies to water droplets, which are much larger than fog particles, and the prism effect (rainbow) is seen at a particular angle with respect to the light souce (fr a rainbow, 42 degrees from the direction opposite to the direction to 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:56:35 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. <snip> >500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. >Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? Roy... Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still 'damaged' after the object departed.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:45:23 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:58:18 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:51:52 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >>>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>>a number of times. >Are you denying this? Shock horrr. A ufologist changes her mind! Never been heard of before, of course, but I always thought being able to change your mind in the face of new evidnce was regarded as a good thing in the world outside ufology. >Yes the debunkers are doing a good job of dissecting this case. >I wish they would hurry up and explain how a white lighthouse >light could be seen as a _red_ pulsing light seen within the >forest. Refraction? -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:35:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:00:10 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:02:24 -0500 (CDT) >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net> >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:40:14 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 03:41:11 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Hi, >>>Who then is receiving UFO observation training? >>By definition, no one. isn't that the whole point? >Well then, as I understand the above point, essentially nobody >is trained in the type of observation needed for UFO reports. >The implication then, if I follow Rimmer, is that essentially no >UFO report is reliable. >What a neat way to dispose of the totality of UFO reports in one >fell swoop; a truly global debunk! How impressive :-) >Giving up and reverting to CNN, >-Brian C. I think you've got it in one there. No UFO report is essentially reliable, just as no eyewitness report of a traffic accident is totally reliable. Any report by a single eyewitness has to be examined and compared to reports from other people who were there at the time of the incident, and looked at alongside other evidence, e.g. bent car, landing traces, etc., etc. If you regard eyewitness UFO reports at being totally objective records of actual events you're probably in with the majority of UFO enthusiasts, but I don't think that's a very scientific attitude. Enjoy CNN. Whenever I've seen it on a TV in a hotel room it looked OK to me. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:41:54 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:01:29 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:17:17 +0100 Hi Jenny >Hi, >I have no argument with that Sean. On either count. I am always glad to avoid an argument where it is unnecessary. >Of course, and an opinion you are entitled to hold. I was >merely setting out why you are way off beam. Of course, you 'hit >a nerve' because you are guessing here why I have 'changed my >mind' and you are simply misguided. Misguided? Since I made my own mind up on this and I was not led to this conclusion by anything other than my own thoughts, I would argue about misguided. However, I am happy to change my opinion on this matter to some extent having read your reply. <snip> >But, of course, if significant new evidence does one day emerge >I will reassess those views. Or would it be perfectly okay to >adapt my views to a less sceptical stance - but not to one that >is more sceptical? I have no problem with you adopting a more sceptical stance. I have no problem with you being less sceptical. My only issue, for which you point out, you have your reasons, is why you appear to swing one way then the next every so often. I would question anyone who does this, I am not being vindictive when I keep asking you about it. >If that's what anybody out there is thinking - ask yourself what >that implies. I try not to think as it hurts too much, but before I go could I ask one question, why did you not respond to the rest of my posting? -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:46:59 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:02:22 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:48:48 +0100 Hi James >Penniston, in common with Burroughs and Halt in their detailed, >public accounts, forgot to mention the abortive lighthouse chase >that first night. It was far from the only anomaly between the >stories previously told and what could suddenly now be >evidenced. An analysis of those anomalies can be seen in >'Resolving Rendlesham', at: I would like to suggest that having once chased the lighthouse light they would be wise to it a second time thus not be so readily mistaken. Or is that too simple a possibility? As far as the recent 1997 issuing of statements etc, I am sadly lacking in copies to review in detail, could you direct me to where I might obtain copies please. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 24 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:31:53 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:04:12 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >The Duke of Mendoza spies an opportunity to get a word in >edgeways on this thread & presents his compliments to the List. <snip> >There may be something else in there (surprises have happened) >but quoting Hufford and Truzzi is entirely beside the point when >those in the cheap seats think they're part of a scientific >enterprise and yet don't understand even that basic statistical >assumption. Let alone Occam's Razor. Being that I am seated in one of those bargain unpadded seats may I pass a comment here? Occam's razor. Lets define Occam's Razor approach. All things being equal, the simplest explanation is often the correct one. Two things here. 1) How do we _know_ all things are equal? 2) Any razor, including Occam's cuts both ways. For example For fifty plus years now there have been many UFO reports. Over this fifty some years a small percentage remains unresolved. Now correct me if I am wrong but using Occam's Razor you are saying that: Because 95 percent are resolvable the other 5 percent must also be resolvable. Could it not also be said: Because 5 percent remain unresolved, there _must_ be something to this phenomenon. Just a thought. >The only "scientific" >starting point for a ufological investigation (abductions are >something else) is the null hypothesis: the witness was mistaken >and UFOs don't exist. Then by all means present the overwhelming >evidence that something really weird and inexplicable happened. >It's not anyone else's *duty* to prove it didn't, though the >temptation is often hard to resist and trying to do so is often >a pleasant intellectual pastime. It's entirely the business of >the presenting ufologist declaring the existence of an anomaly >to join all the dots and shade in the squares. And it's >scientific illiteracy to maintain otherwise. Being that I am not a scientist, I am also often at loggerheads with scientists, could you explain to a simpleton like little ole moi, why you start from the null hypothesis? Why not start from: What the witness saw was unidentifiable therefor an investigation is needed to try and identify _if_possible_ what the witness saw, and accept that it might not be identifiable. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Housekeeping: Filter Problems From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:38:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:38:27 -0400 Subject: Housekeeping: Filter Problems Serge Salvaille recently changed servers. As a result, I created a new filer in Eudora Pro for him neglecting to un-click the 'Incoming' box. This caused any in-bound mail from Serge to go directly to his mail-box here, un-seen by me. My apologies to Serge for the frustration it caused and my thanks to Docca Morty for relaying Serge's message that indicated there was a problem. There follow several messages from Serge dating back to the first week in August... 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:49:09 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:40:37 -0400 Subject: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:21:29 -0400 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:56:58 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hello John and List, Thanks for the reply <snip> >>"In interviews and in writing, and specifically in a letter sent >>October 17, 1995 <snip> <snip> >Allow me to present Ms. Denise Di Ianni with the 'noose' (her >own letter to me) she may use to publicly hang her sorry, lying >ass with. Please see attached gif's. Her comments on that site >imply that we are afraid of investigation or close scrutiny. It >isn't true. Not a word of it. <snip> It figures ;) Do you happen to have a copy of the October 17, 1995, letter? If not, it does not really matter, but it would be interesting to read. I suspect you have gone to great lengths to set the record straight with NOVA and eventually failed. In any case, I would like to have your permission to at least make an enquiry to NOVA. If this is a problem with you, fine. Please let me know either way. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:42:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille >Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:41:21 -0400 >From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >--- while waiting for Greg or anyone else to level the playing >field a bit, eh what, chaps, and show us all some indisputable >facts about alleged abductions before they whinge about skeptics >playing fast and loose with any other purported facts. Or being >derisive, or ironic, as the number of hypotheses may be. <snip> Hello Peter, I'll take you to the task and raise the game. I don't think that Greg and your...self (please include in the 3 dots any trademark narcissistic descriptions you feel appropriate) differ in any way: you are both trying to serve your belief systems. For that purpose you both tend to establish a few psychological urban legends. Maybe we should first formulate the problem: Creatures apparently non-human are abducting people. Since there is no hard physical evidence of this, skeptics shut themselves to any other argument and say this is all a figment of the imagination. On the other hand, despite the lack of hard evidence, believers are ready to go all the way and propose individual perceptions as evidence of the reality of the experience. Of course I hear John Velez in the back of the class over there who says: "There is physical evidence you twit, what about those body marks?" He may be right all the way: twit and body marks. Will that persuade a skeptic? Hardly. But this is an entirely different matter. I understand that believers make assumptions difficult to swallow. But a few, even superficial, observations should, in a simple agnostic mind, raise questions. In many cases, the alleged victims suffer from symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Literature has it that PTSD is a mental illness caused by traumatic EVENTS in one's life. At http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/womens_ptsd/35615, you will find the usual stuff: "The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which both of the following were present: the person experienced, witnessed, or was confronted with an event or events that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of self or others the person's response involved intense fear, helplessness, or horror. Note: In children, this may be expressed instead by disorganized or agitated behavior." Carry on: "Other causes can also include: Witnessing someone being killed, maimed, or seriously injured. Being in a military combat or war zone Being imprisoned or held captive. Being tormented, terrified, stalked, or humiliated by someone repeatedly and intentionally. Being physically tortured by someone Accidentally causing serious injury or death to another person. Females in the Medical helping professions whom are unable to relieve the emotional stress of their workload." Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Please state in the literature a case of PTSD based on fantasy. Is the bar too high for you? Unless you know something new, Alien Abduction has _not_ been diagnosed a psychological disorder. It is not in the repertoire of mental illnesses. On the other hand, some skeptics, in light of their obvious omniscience, make assumptions that are hard to swallow: there is no physical evidence, hence the abduction experience must be a fantasy. There is no _detected_ physical evidence would be more appropriate. I understand this precision may be deterrent to a skeptic's credo but, what can I say?, life sucks. Please note that you cannot conclude from a false premise. Unless you are trying to stuff up a straw man. Not that believers and skeptics don't sometimes sleep in the same bed: they seem fairly uneasy with human reactions, are prone to fantasize on psychological realities and ignore the essentials. Refer to the PTSD phenomenon mentioned above, do your homework and then have a sane discussion. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:54:15 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:45:19 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille >Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:52:38 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 05:31:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>>From: Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com> >>>>Subject: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >I shall do my best to point to things which I consider unfair. >Even if it is I whom I must point to. It is beyond my ken why >you insist on thinking that if one is not for you, he is against >you. This world is big enough for everyone to voice an opinion. >If said opinion is counter to yours, so be it. This kind of attitude has had great people in history lead other people to hell (they had no choice) and back. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:30:31 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:47:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:09:01 -0400 >From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Hel-loooo!! The man sold 140 files for a hundred bucks a piece. >Some of those files were files of children. You really need to >take a step back and consider the laws that were broken here. My >advice is for you to call Department of Health, Health >Professionals Quality Assurance Division. They can tell you >where you can get copies of the rules and regulations governing >LCSWs in their states. <snip> >>Why do you not trash mine? As for being self centered, I think >>not. I am very terribly sorry that Carpenter must endure this >>harrassment. That is what bothers me. And I have continuously >>voiced that opinion. Carpenter is not guilty of revealing >>personal information. He said so. You beleived that since his >>ex-wife told you that her file was not redacted, then all the >>files must not have been redacted. That was an assumption on >>your and others' part. I do not think this to be so. Not unless >>or until it can be proven. It is not truth until then. >More doublespeak. You said all of the files were redacted. Now >you say that the file of Carpenter's ex-wife was _not_ redacted. >You can't have it both ways. Make up your mind. Were _all_ the >files redacted or not? Hello Katherine, Jim, John and List, If I understand the man correctly (Jim Mortellaro), he simply stated that: 1. The _only_ un-redacted file was Carpenter's ex-wife's. I do not believe he his having it both ways. _All the other_ files were redacted. 2. The case of The People Against John Carpenter is based on the false assumption that Carpenter sold 140 _un-redacted_ files to Bigelow. 3. With all the efforts to contact the other 139 persons, the detractors of John Carpenter presume that he sold 140 un- redacted files. 4. There is thus no reason to pursue this matter any further. This is what Jim Mortellaro said. I am not calling anyone names. I just want to know. Is the following true or untrue? John Carpenter sold 140 abductees' files to the NIDS. 139 were redacted. 1 was not: his ex-wife's file. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 23:14:20 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:52:15 -0400 Subject: Re: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness - Salvaille >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: The Myth Of The Noncredible Witness >Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:51:40 -0500 >Listfolk, >In a recent contribution to the list, Dennis Stacy argues that >somehow I have misread David Hufford's book The Terror That >Comes in the Night. He then goes on to misrepresent the >implications of Hufford's work for other areas of anomaly >inquiry. <snip> Wow Jerry, This post was extraordinary. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Frghtening Technology From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:18:49 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:53:34 -0400 Subject: Frghtening Technology Hello List, Worth reading. If the truth is out there, it may be in the verge of disappearing. http://www.britannica.com/bcom/original/article/0,5744,9806,00.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:47:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:55:13 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 19:51:42 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:11:22 -0500 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:09:10 -0400 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >No investigator can be sanguine about the complete and total >accuracy of witness accounts. And an important part of >investigation is determining that accuracy and capability. But >outside of a few marginal individuals seeking attention with one >wild story after another, the vast majority of witnesses are >reliable, capable people, mystified by what they have seen and >reporting their observations with reasonable accuracy - whether >those observations are mundane in cause or not. >And their reliability is how we determine that cause. Odd how >organized efforts, like that of the Air Force, are able to >successfuly identify the causes of reports if the witnesses >neither perceive or report with a reasonable accuracy. Mark, Jerome, Andy and List, at: http://www.lawinfo.com/biz/blinder/exposing.html Quote "17.3 The Vulnerability of Eye Witness Testimony Let us examine a number of the confounding factors listed in the preceding: a. Stress The more stressful an event, the more likely that the event occurred will be remembered; but the accuracy of remembered details within the event still remains inversely proportionate to the stress involved. Thus, that a double homicide occurred right before your eyes is likely to be remembered forever, but such discriminating details as subtle facial characteristics of those involved are no more -- and in fact may be less -- well- remembered than those of individuals participating in less traumatic episodes. So dramatic an event is likely to be further ingrained as the witness goes over it again and again in his or her mind, but such rehearsal does not increase the accuracy of details that were initially perceived incorrectly; all that rehearsal does is increase confidence, not accuracy. Unquote All the insurance investigators I have talked to were unanimous: 10 witnesses of the same accident will come up with 10 different stories. The investigator does get the picture but cannot be too picky on the details. The way questions are asked can also direct the testimonies. An example I read implied 2 test groups watching a filmed segment of a car accident. One group was asked to describe the car "crash" or "smash", while the other was asked to talk about the 2 "bumping" car. One of the 2 groups reported much (more?) broken glasses. I let you guess which one. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:57:59 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. ><snip> >>500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >>inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >>ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. >>Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >>incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >>areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? >Roy... >Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >'damaged' after the object departed. Gentlemen and EBK, NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It cannot be started again. FYI Jim Mortellaro, Inspector, NY State Police Auxiliary
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:32:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:00:15 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:41:54 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:17:17 +0100 >I try not to think as it hurts too much, but before I go could I >ask one question, why did you not respond to the rest of my >posting? Hi, Largely due to the warp drive having overloaded and the time dilation coils failing to improve on one day equals 24 hours. I am happy to answer questions on this list, but sadly I do have other things to do as well. So several hours a day (as its been of late answering messages) is something I have to restrict. I thought I answered all your salient points not covered in my other (many!) replies on this case to the list. But if there are ones I missed you think are important, please try again and I'll do my best. On the question of the lighthouse and colouration. Firstly, I never saw the lighthouse emit the coloured lights referred to by Peter Brookesmith. The lighthouse was a fairly modest white light - that's all. I did see it dulled to a yellowish hue through sea mist once (that will of course have the water droplets Bruce suggests are needed to create a mirage effect). But I should make clear that this was never a spectacular sight. It is hard to imagine how the lighthouse - on its own - could fool so many people for so long. Certainly there are elements of the lights appearance that relate to the case - the way it sits on the ground due to the lie of the land, for instance. But I personally feel that the only way the lighthouse can reasonably be used to explain the primary features of this case is if something made it appear far more spectacular on that Christmas weekend than it has ever appeared when I have been out there. The mirage effect was suggested by me for three primary reasons. But it is - I admit - a theory. Nothing more. (1) There are suggestions of mist from the available weather data (and I have seen mist in this area myself). Against that I have to raise Halt's insistence to me that he took his dictaphone out there to produce the infamous Halt tape because the second night - 28 December - was windy and would have made note taking difficult. Wind and mist are relatively inconsistent. (2) I have a painting on my bedroom wall of the incident (based on access to a sketch by one of the primary witnesses ). I wish I could scan this - but I don't have a scanner. But it is very easy to see this as a lighthouse beam that is spread by refraction. It never occurred to me until fairly recently but its like that vase that can look two ways according to your mind set when you look at it (classic optical illusion). Once you see this painting as a lighthouse beam shining at you then its hard to see it any other way. (3) I have seen a mirage created by a bright star shining through mist as it rose above a reservoir at Weir in Rossendale. This was during a UFO investigation chasing a classic IFO case that turned out to be a gliding commercial cargo plane (another bizarre story that was recently dramatised from my report in 'The Pennine UFO Mystery' in the drama series 'Heartbeat' BTW!) The way the star became slightly yellow/orange and enlarged as a consequence of shining through the mist was stunning. Once you have seen this you realise that an effect on the (certainly brighter) lighthouse is more than feasible. As for the lighthouse visibility - from the East Gate you could not miss the beam that swept above the tree line. It was so visible on every sweep that I don't believe that anyone regularly serving here would not spot it and ascertain out of sheer curiosity what it was. You would have to be pretty useless security guards not to do so. As such I do accept the witness testimony that they were aware of the lighthouse. From the gate there is no way you can see the light itself and you need to be well into the forest for that. With the trees also now stacked up in front of you blocking the path ahead the beam is no longer obvious. So by the time you actually see the lighthouse itself some time later it appears unconnected with the previous sweeping beam seen from the edge of the forest. You could easily perceive these as two unrelated events. You have to go there and see all of this first hand to understand why this argument is far less stupid than it probably sounds if you are 5000 miles away with no grasp of the geography or inclination to think this case can be resolved in such apparently ludicrous terms. Sadly going there now isn't much help either. Not simply the hurricane that devastated the area 13 years ago but the huge tree felling that occurred in the immediate vicinity of the sighting shortly after the encounter. These have considerably changed the environment meaning you cannot now reproduce the circumstances experienced by the airmen 20 years ago. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:17:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:06:46 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:32:27 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' <snip> >That said, here is my understanding of Venus and its movements, >and anyone who knows better is welcome to correct me. As I >understand it, Venus is never (routinely) visible more than >about 22 degrees above or below the horizon, which roughly >equates with the planetary plane. Har Har Har. True, Venus is never visible _below_ the horizon. (Neither is anything else!) Actually Venus can be as high as about 40 degrees above the horizon. >When Venus is visible as the Evening Star, it's in a setting >mode. Otherwise, it would appear straight overhead at night, >which never happens. When Venus appears to be rising, it must be >in its aspect as the Morning Star. True >Point is: if Custer and associates misperceived a rising Venus, >it would probably have been a daylight misperception rather than >a nocturnal one. And by daylight, I don't mean high noon, simply >a skyscape which is gradually growing lighter rather than >darker. In any event, not another nocturnal light. Could see Venus several hours before sunset at its greatest distance from the sun. One would really have to check the exact date and time of the sighting to see where Venus would appear in the sky.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:22:07 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:04:14 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:05:05 +0100 Jenny wrote: >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >>From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza >><DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>The UFO stories post-date the rather drier, and more >>embarrassing, official reports they made nearer the time of >>their experience. Naive and impressionable as I am, I am >>inclined to think they are making up the more elaborate stories, >>especially as the Rendlesham "case" was well established in >>ufolore by the time they came out of the woodwork with their >>tales. I don't care how plausible they are in the flesh. >Sorry, Peter, I don't think this will wash. Penniston first spoke >(covertly) to us when writing Sky Crash in l983/4. Burroughs did >at length to me in Phoenix in l989. This was long before the l997 >revelation of the original witness statements. >Both these men told the more elaborate version of the case >including the close encounter aspects. Both said they had >deliberately undersold their story on the original witness >statements. Indeed that they discussed this even as they left the >forest that night. Penniston was a career airman and believed >that his job was on the line if he told them he had walked right >up to a landed UFO as an energy field washed over and made their >hair stand bolt upright . He more or less persuaded Burroughs it >was in their best interests to play this all down officially. Jenny, There's a significant obstacle to this scenario being sustainable - we have five early testimonies of what transpired that first night and they are all reasonably consistent. To reiterate, aside from the three security police directly involved - Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston - there was also MSgt Chandler, who had met up with them and remained by their vehicle on the logging road into Rendlesham forest and Flight (Shift) Commander Buran, stationed back at Central Security Control. As we now know, Cabansag documents a simple tale of how the red and blue lights were quickly lost from sight and, contrary to the other accounts, indicates these lights were never seen again at any time after they entered the forest. The patrol then pursued a beacon light visible near the 'glowing farmhouse'. He also notes, "Our route through the forest and field was a direct one, straight towards the light". There seems no doubt this beacon was Orford Ness, as Burroughs testifies, "Once we reached the farmer's house we could see a beacon going around so we went towards it. We followed it for about 2 miles before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse". Chandler states, "Each time Penniston gave me the indication that he was about to reach the area where the lights were, he would give an extended estimated location. He eventually arrived at a 'beacon light', however, he stated that this was not the light or lights he had originally observed. He was instructed to return". Buran recalls, "SSgt Penniston reported getting near the 'object' and then all of a sudden said they had gone past it and were looking at a marker beacon that was in the same general direction as the other lights". If Burroughs and Penniston, "deliberately undersold their story on the original witness statements", why are all five accounts so comparable? Instead, all documented evidence seems to confirm that only a fleeting glimpse of 'an object' producing the red and blue lights was actually reported at the time. It's not as if we have Cabansag describing how they encountered a 'craft' which later 'took off', or Buran and Chandler recalling how Penniston alerted CSC that it was an unidentified 'craft', that he was examining it at close range, touching it, writing a detailed description of it, drawing with astonishing accuracy in the dark of night the craft's profile and 'strange symbols', how it then 'took off' [which surely Chandler would have seen] etc... Nope... either they _all_ agreed to omit these critical details from their official reports, or Central Security Control were never advised of this potentially serious security threat, or... these subsequent, above claims of Penniston's never happened. What exactly did Burroughs undersell in his original story? As I've highlighted, on two separate occasions after he 'came out' as a witness, Burroughs clarified he had only seen some 'strange' lights and never a 'craft'. An important question - did Burroughs ever say he observed, as Penniston later asserted, the lights ['craft', in Penniston's case] rise up through the trees and depart at tremendous speed? I can't find any reference to this in his public statements, only that the lights 'disappeared', same as stated in his original written testimony. >You can, of course, say that they told it like it was in the l981 >statements then made up the rest. But I don't see how that is >reasonable when compared with the facts here. Surely it's this reasoning which is contrary to the established facts? >It is hard to imagine senior USAF personnel deliberately lying in >official records - surely a more career threatening move than >telling the truth? For the close encounter, the lengthy craft examination and on-the-spot documentation, its lift off through the trees et al to have any substance - contrary to what was documented in five, separate official statements - doesn't that necessitate an even more complicated web of 'career threatening' deceit? >Why they didn't say -when asked (as of course we did ask) - what >about the lighthouse theory - well actually we were briefly >fooled by the lighthouse after the UFO departed. But it wasn't >the same thing. So we know the UFO wasn't the lighthouse? >I am still baffled why nobody chose to do this. However, in 'UFO Crash Landing?', you wrote: "Burroughs (who had lived locally for 18 months and was familiar with the woods) said he saw the lighthouse as well as the UFO that night but never mentioned it because it was, 'just sitting there as always'." Given what we've learned since, how can this be anything other than untrue! James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:18:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:11:21 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:02:38 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:06:29 -0400 >>From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>The notion that we have to take witnesses' statements at face >>value flies in the face of everything that ufologists have been >>finding out for the last half century. It seems one can't say >>this enough times to the soi-disant "UFO research community" (a >>cant term itself). About nineteen out of twenty "UFOs" turn out >>to be IFOs. >>Scientists are taught that if that proportion or >>more of their experiments are consistent, then the remainder is >>a random effect, or "noise". By that standard UFO reports are >>probably all reducible to IFOs. Let me repeat: probably.> >If this proportion is to be cited, it would be a good idea to >have a look at its source (and please note that no one in this >discussion ever suggests simply taking witness statements at >face value - but simply assert that witness statements have >reasonable accuracy). <snip> >>There may be something else in there (surprises have happened) >>but quoting Hufford and Truzzi is entirely beside the point when >>those in the cheap seats think they're part of a scientific >>enterprise and yet don't understand even that basic statistical >>assumption. Let alone Occam's Razor. The only "scientific" >>starting point for a ufological investigation (abductions are >>something else) is the null hypothesis: the witness was mistaken >>and UFOs don't exist. Then by all means present the overwhelming >>evidence that something really weird and inexplicable happened. This is almost correct. Ignore the "UFOs don't exist hypothesis" because we don't a priori know whether they were or were not involved in a particular sighting. Instead assume the sighting is explainable in a conventional manner, UFO reality notwithstanding. This forces one to propose one or more explanations for the sighting. Then it is necessary to offer the most convincing proof possible that a particular explanation is correct. This is where skeptic/debunkers often "drop the ball." Mark wrote: >This, frankly, is nonsense. Scientific methods only dictate that >any hypothesis that is offered be specific and, in some fashion, >testable. As we can see from sciences similar to UFOlogy, such >as ornithology, cosmology, and certain areas of paleontology and >physics, testability also frequently means something other than >taking samples into the lab. This is "forensic physics"... assume the sighting is explainable and then try to prove it. >Indeed, in every one of the cases cited above, specific >hypotheses as to the cause of the phenomena observed were >advanced and observations, inquiries, or literature surveys were >made to determine the plausibility of the hypothesis. Rullan's >hypothesis was that the Levelland UFO was ball lightning. He was >not able to support that. My own hypotheses in investigations >have included aircraft. balloons, and other possible causes. >Only after each of these hypotheses was tested against the >observations and found wanting was the case admitted as an >unknown. All of these activities are quite scientific. <snip> >While relatively few of the cases over the last fifty years have >received the sort of investigation that can firmly and >completely establish them as base data with the sort of solidity >we desire, we nevertheless have a reasonably accurate database >from which some sorts of analyses can be performed, and against >which a variety of physical, psychological and sociological >hypotheses can be tested. The fact that MHH advocates are >constantly claiming that they do not need to offer their >hypothesis for testing prevents them from seriously entering >discourse on this problem. The nonsense about pelicans at >Ranier, a balloon at Socorro, mirages at Papua, meteors viewed >by Coyne, et. al., are hypothesis of such obvious invalidity as >to simply waste time that should be placed on "second level" >analysis of reports that meet the Hynek definition. The failure to thoroughly test explanatory hypothesis is what I have called the failure of UFO skeptisicm. See "Prosaic Explanations: the Failure of UFO Skepticism" in "Articles" at www.brumac.8k.com. >Are we ready for third level analyses? That is, hypotheses of >cause, origin, and intent (if any)? How can that be when we have >not done the requisite second level analysis? How can that be >when our few best and brightest have to continually waste their >time refuting nonsense propositions that "disprove" solid cases? Hear! Hear! Lotta time wasted on pelicans.!!!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 05:55:37 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:18:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Dear All >Having been interested by the news that Chris Martin has put >some of his footage on his Lost Haven website I decided to have >a look. >Firstly the link to the footage seems to be faulty. I certainly >couldn't get to download the footage anyway. >Secondly we hear that he has more footage, but of the alien >visitors themselves! Is this footage on the website? No, we're >asked to talk to Chris at the Leeds conference if we want to see >it. Nice plug Chris. > >So there you have it folks, someone's sitting on some real >evidence of aliens piloting UFOs but no press conference, the >footage is only available by appointment. >Is it time to discuss everyone pulling together and amassing any >credible evidence for dissemination by the scientific community? Hello All & Terry, You know I just hate it when people rush into blind alleys and get their facts wrong! Firstly, The Lost Haven http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Chrismart.htm is my web site, I am not sure how you are reading your UpDates but I didn't think anyone could have missed the posts on UpDates informing people of such detail. Secondly, you seem to have personally attacked Chris Martin for no apparent reason, that makes no sense to myself and possibly to others on this List. It seems that in your writing your "Video Footage of Aliens Withheld?" mail, you have not entirely got your facts correct. I wonder, before you wrote your attack on Chris' did you ask yourself if you have ever had the chance to even whisper a word in Chris's ear? Thirdly, the link to the film works perfectly well - I know as I have had people checking it for me. Also you have clearly thrown this out of proportion. Here are some simple facts in which you should know. If anyone who has been studying UK UFO research over at least the last two years, they should have heard or at least read info on film footage which had been taken by Chris. Please check UFO magazine back issues. Chris's footage has also appeared on Hessemans UFO tapes at some stage, and he has been on many UK TV programs concerning his footage. Terry what cave have you been living in? At least see the footage, and perhaps look and search out other footage of Chris Martin's (It's called 'Investigation') before you pour scorn over the events. Thank you for the revelation, and perhaps pay more attention to your UpDates mail. Kind Regards, Roy.. Keep Smiling...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Cydonian Imperative Update - 8-25-00 From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 22:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:20:19 -0400 Subject: Cydonian Imperative Update - 8-25-00 8-25-00 New "Face" Discovered? http://www.geocities.com/macbot/imperative7.html ===== Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) 239 E. Sea Independence, MO 64050 816-833-5910 (home) MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html Cydonia: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html Books: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/bookreviews.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:48:21 EDT Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:23:30 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak >From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:58:52 +0100 >Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:35:56 -0400 >Subject: Re: he Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Roberts >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 >You also fail to understand the nature of mispercpetion as your >quote about Custer illustrates: >>Let me repeat, Andy: if Custer and his men had seen a winged >>elephant rather than a slow-moving, ascending light, _that_ >>would have been a radical misperception. >No Jerry - because elephants can't fly! That would have been an >hallucination. Different kettle, as we say in these parts. On the contrary, sometimes elephants CAN fly, as the following quirky UFO case illustrates. This is from John Spencer's, "The UFO Encyclopedia", 1991. "FLYING ELEPHANT -- Not all apparently exotic sightings of UFOs remain unexplained. In April 1979 there was a report of an orange flying elephant seen by many passengers from the windows of an aircraft. Even the most uncritical UFO researchers might have thought that this was one case that belonged at the hallucination end of the spectrum, but in fact investigation proved that the object was indeed a huge orange-coloured elephant balloon. It had been used to publicise a circus, had broken loose and was flying at 36,000 feet!" Despite the high strangeness factor, this wasn't a hallucination. Nor was it a "radical misperception" or "radical misidentification." The object was accurately described, which led to its eventual mundane explanation. That is exactly Jerry Clark's point. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Former Security Officer: Bush To Reveal UFO Secrets From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:09:38 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:25:31 -0400 Subject: Former Security Officer: Bush To Reveal UFO Secrets Source: Wireless Flash via InternetTrash, http://www.nettoilet.com/news/getarticle.shtml?2000/08/09/item1.html Wireless Flash News Service, formerly a part of Copley News Service, provides daily feature and entertainment content to more than 800 broadcast outlets, newspapers and web sites world wide. Homepage: http://www.flashnews.com Stig *** Friday, 25-Aug-2000 01:33:37 EDT BUSH PROMISES TO REVEAL UFO SECRETS SPRINGDALE, Ark. (Wireless Flash) -- If George W. Bush gets elected, his first duty may be to officially recognize E.T. That's according to a former Army security officer who claims Bush personally promised him that, if elected, he will immediately assign Dick Cheney to investigate the matter of aliens and UFOs. 61-year-old Charles Huffer of Springdale, Arkansas, says he tape recorded Bush's paranormal promise and claims the Texas governor stated that Cheney would "get right on it." Although Presidents Carter and Clinton made similar promises, Huffer thinks Bush will actually make good on his promise since he didn't qualify his remarks. If he doesn't keep his UFO pledge, Huffer thinks it could backfire on Bush in the same way his father's broken promise of "Read my lips: No new taxes." ** *Copyright Notices
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:49:36 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:50:16 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:46:59 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' Sean wrote: >I would like to suggest that having once chased the lighthouse >light they would be wise to it a second time thus not be so >readily mistaken. Or is that too simple a possibility? Sean, Problem was - nobody as yet knew that Burroughs and co. had been so deceived by the lighthouse. Halt didn't take any statements from the original participants until early January (he's explained this was due to the holiday period). So... when Halt and his merry band of men were in the forest, effectively investigating the previous incident and checking the supposed 'landing marks' for radiation etc., they were in the same location and... would you know it... right next to the 'glowing farmhouse', in the same place as that deceptive lighthouse beacon, Lt. Bruce Englund spots a small light through the trees... and the rest, as they say, is hysteria. When Halt first read those statements, surely he realised that the lighthouse had played a significant role in the first incident and would have verified it wasn't the same beacon he had observed. Such cursory checking - what was a prerequisite even if Halt had been confident of no connection - doesn't seem to have been undertaken. To hopefully help understand the close proximity of the lighthouse to the farmhouse, I've re-scanned Ian Ridpath's photo which shows the relationship between both and a hi-res scan [449k] can be seen at: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/ridpath3.jpg As we can see, the lighthouse is where Halt states the tiny, 'flashing red [yellow] light' was located. >As far as the recent 1997 issuing of statements etc, I am sadly >lacking in copies to review in detail, could you direct me to >where I might obtain copies please. I'll post transcripts separately. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:10:13 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:57:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >So there you have it folks, someone's sitting on some real >evidence of aliens piloting UFOs but no press conference, the >footage is only available by appointment. Hi All, Just to add further detail to my first response : Chris actually put an ad in UFO magazine some time ago, informing their readers what he had been filming in London. He then asked and has invited a numerous amount of people, to come and do a sky watch in his place of filming, so that people may have the chance to see' what he has been catching on video. Chris, is one of the most placid chap's you could wish to meet, and he has even had people in his house checking out his video footage, the reason he does not hawk around the www, is the reason demonstrated in Terry's mail. As far as I am aware Chris has never refused anyone to view his footage, and he welcomes feedback and contact on his video footage. So before we make this into a 1950's spoof headline, and try to make it sound and look silly, I ask any serious Investigator to contact Chris Martin, we a view to look at his film footage. And then for Terry to attack Chris, for giving his debut lecture at Leeds is also out of order, you refer to plugging himself ' well tell me one UFOlogist who is on this list who doesn't want to sell the book that they have painstakingly put together over some time? Terry, why don't you ask Dave Bowden who is also on this List and who is the very person who has edited, Chris's latest footage, to send you some of the really sharp images of the footage just taken. I have viewed this footage with Dave, and I must inform everyone that is of very high quality, both in picture, and of the object caught on the tape. Perhaps once you have received the data, you may be in a better position, to carry out a more detailed and thoughtful response to this list. I am sure this way, you and many others who you may you speak for, will like to hear what the results of your investigation into this footage has been. I take it you won't be at Leeds, perhaps you should be you might be filled-in more! Kind Regards, Roy.. www.thelosthaven.co.uk ... Keep Smiling..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Henry From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:19:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:00:31 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Henry >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. ><snip> >>500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >>inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >>ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. >>Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >>incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >>areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? >Roy... >Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >'damaged' after the object departed. The Minnesota Val Johnson case and the late 70's case involving a local policeman's car in Elmwood, WI were both cases of permanent damage to cars and their electrical systems. Joel Henry Minnesota MUFON ---------------------------------------------------------------- Minnesota MUFON Field Investigator, Minnesota MUFON Journal Editor, Minnesota MUFON Webmaster Minnesota MUFON Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~jhenry/index.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Latest Comments From BUFOSC From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:51:49 EDT Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:53:47 -0400 Subject: Latest Comments From BUFOSC Dear All, There's nothing like being vindicated - either publicly or privately. When bringing the intriguing Cheshire UFO video to media attention, as is standard procedure within BUFOSC, we strongly suspected that UFO cases were being under-reported because the Noisy Negativists (thanks Stanton) of the anti-UFO Police Squad, whose tactics are more amusing than Leslie Neilsen's, have put people off coming forward through their deliberate and calculated attacks upon both witnesses and investigators. In addition, we suspected that most UFO witnesses have no idea who to contact in the unlikely event of a sighting or what is rather pseudoscientifically described as a UFO "experience". So we contact the media at every opportunity and new cases come in - some of which are really exciting! Effective tactics! LOADSA MONEY! OR NOT? Contrary to cheap shots about "the thorny issue of money" (Roberts et al) we made NO money at all from the Cheshire video. I have never received a penny and don't expect to. So far Karl Woods, who has put his video footage in the hands of the very cheque-book (and why not?) Birdsall Machine for their September UFO event in Leeds, has made somewhere in the region of �1,000. NOT A BIRD THIS TIME BUT A BALLOON? Not bad for something that he now says - he didn't originally in two interviews, one by Dave Kelly and Eric Morris, and a later one by myself - in both the local Northwich newspapers (Guardian and Chronicle respectively) looked like a "helium balloon". All very strange and Karl now puts his faith in his mysterious colleague Mike who appeared from the start to have a powerful influence on his videographer friend and who, originally, claimed to be "on attachment to the RAF" and now claims to be, via the ufomag.co.uk website, an Air Traffic Controller. So he's a trained observer? Gulp... CAN'T SEE FOR LOOKING! We've been over the business of trained observers before: Police, Army, Navy, Man with Dog We all know that there are no experts where anomalous phenomena are concerned. Human perception aside, about the best you can say is that whatever is seen "was not a regular aircraft". Which is about as far as Karl Woods had gone initially. His friend Mike, the pushy one interested in money and who initially asked me to act as their "agent", based his theories of a true UFO on his work with the Royal Observers Corps - something that Karl Woods similarly claimed membership of before we learned that his eyesight is very poor. Nevertheless, video analysis expert Russ Callaghan, who, by all accounts, learned his trade driving the buses in Bradford, has "cleaned the images up" and shed absolutely no light on the mystery at all... DESPERATION SETS IN In a rather disingenuous statement, seized upon by desperate skeptics like Andy Roberts, Russ, with whom I'd spoken the day before their Woods material was released onto the UFO Magazine (UK) website, said in typical Birdsallian fashion that Woods was "disappointed" with our treatment of his video despite the fact that we acted with his permission and under his guidance at all times, as noted in replies to his very expensive Manchester-based Solicitors Mace-Jones. COPYRIGHT AND ALOT OF HOT AIR Woods simply wanted to know how many copies of his video existed in the public domain because he now, after the event, wanted to 'assert copyright' - having previously told three witnesses that he has passed copyright onto BUFOSC and wanted to "stay in the background". Cheque book Ufology indeed!!!! There were no "legal notices" sent to either Eric Morris or myself although we considered asking our own solicitors to write to Woods after he claimed that we were "making hundreds of pounds" from the Daily Post newspaper. This stupid lie was repeated by Birdsall and Callaghan in telephone conversations with me but then they only had Wood's word for it. The Daily Post has now paid Karl Woods a princely �20 for illegally using a video still photographed from the BBC TV coverage of the video the day before its own report was published! A tangled web indeed but we were a little disappointed that, after assurances that we would not be attacked on the UFOmag website, they went ahead anyway. Oh well, it's part of the UFO Industry I suppose...we have nothing personal against Graham Birdsall and Russ Callaghan but I think we can now take their future assurances as meaningless. "BEST EVER" FOOTAGE OR JUST "INTERESTING FOOTAGE? People choose to believe who they want to believe and most skeptics choose to believe Russ Callaghan, tactically and ironically, when dealing with the "thorny issue" of whether our video analysis expert actually mentioned the words "best ever" to Eric Morris. Eric maintains, and did from the start just a few short weeks ago, that these words were used. In fact, and despite Graham Birdsall's support for Callaghan's position, the words were allegedly uttered whilst Callaghan's wife Louise was putting the family dogs in the back of the car - out of earshot just before leaving Eric's house in Northwich, Cheshire, after their flying visit across the Pennines. This means that she cannot be a witness although we find ourselves impressed by her family loyalty. I suspect that Russ had to back track but then we all do especially when faced with, shall we say, economic pressures. He's a good man at heart... THE FINAL COUNTDOWN The skeptics have come out of this looking rather stupid because the majority of them had not seen the footage - and still haven't - despite their hot air about scientific analysis and so on. Their claim to be 'the establishment' in either British or transcontinental Ufology is entirely bogus and their hysterical outbursts, circling of wagons and over-excitement means that they will never be taken seriously. I have received several emails from surprising sources supporting my principled stand against their attacks and lack of information. Their tactics, to paraphrase Whitley Strieber, are simple: Attack and debunk the investigators Attack and debunk the witnesses They could not, and have not, conducted any meaningful analysis here and although NIDS offered to assist us later on, the matter is now out of our hands and we suspect that the Woods video will die a death after its fleeting appearance at the forthcoming Birdsall Fest. THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS Andy Roberts describes me glowingly as "mercurial", "of general infamy" and more besides which is hardly a surprise. He likes erecting false targets in order to shoot them down and has now had to climb down and admit that Nick Pope, as I said in my first "skilfully worded" Press Release, had a "minor involvement" with us. We never said Nick had seen the footage and why should he when we were asking about NOTAMS? My general role has always been to push each of the main theories surrounding Ufology when appearing on TV, radio or in local newspapers and Roberts had to climb down when I proved beyond any doubt that I had worked, last year, with Paul Devereux - something that he chose to deny in advance of the facts. (I mentioned support for the earthlights theories.) If Roberts and co had ever actually listened to one of my radio interviews either here or in the USA - for which I have never been paid - he'd know, and I suspect he does anyway, that I have NEVER ruled out the possibility of an alien presence/existence. Yes, there are natural phenomena, secret military aircraft, high strangeness and reports of Venus but they are largely unrelated to the extraterrestrials I know to have been here... The information came my way by surprise but has, over the last year, caused me to make major alterations to my worldview. This is an important point because people like James Easton don't like it when you change your mind. This appears to be a new rule of pigeon-hole Ufology; don't change your mind based on new evidence and if you do you're "suspect"... It's just a good thing that the criminal justice system doesn't work this way otherwise numerous innocent men and women would still be behind bars... WAKE UP TO COMPLEXITY! Too many people in Ufology appear to have to support just one theory - ETH, the riduculous Nazi Saucers theory, the psycho-social theory etc. Why can't they embrace all the evidence and then choose to tap away at a chosen area? Just because earthlights are real natural phenomena increasingly the focus for scientific research doesn't mean that aliens don't exist or that man-made UFOs are a myth. Just because ET has visited earth doesn't mean that he/she/it built the Pyramids, helped found MJ-12 and encouraged the election of George Bush...Neither does it mean that aliens are 'abducting' people. Such shallow and simplistic views... I don't, as it happens, believe that close encounters are evidence of extraterrestrial visitation or abduction. It is very obvious that the American military know about occasional penetrations of our collective defences and you may all rest assured that procedures to deal with these have been in place for some time. Whether or not a handful of Internet Skeptics choose to attack, debunk and/or defame this claim makes absolutely no difference to me whatsoever. I have had my Epiphany, so to speak, but whether or not the incident I know about has any relationship to other claimed events, contact or visitation is purely a matter of speculation. But when you know about things like these official handling of the UFO subject becomes ever so clear. AND FINALLY... The Cheshire Footage Fiasco is now behind us and we are stronger than before. No doubt Rob Rickard will allow Andy Roberts and co full access, without right to reply, to his Fortean Times magazine and website in order to continue their quest into oblivion. In the end, it really doesn't matter because new and exciting footage will be shown at the forthcoming Ellesmere Port Conference. It takes place Saturday 16th September and another event is pencilled in for November. There is no cheque-book Ufology in my case but when Andy Roberts, Dave Clarke and an/others appeared on the "X-Files or X-Fools" debate shown live on Carlton TV a while ago Andy was trumpeting the fact that he'd only appeared because he was receiving a "juicy" fee. Watch our for flying cheque books, they may be misidentified..... Tim Matthews - British UFO Studies Centre.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 25 Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:13:04 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:58:30 -0400 Subject: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:49:09 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? - Velez >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 01:21:29 -0400 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:56:58 -0700 >>>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: NOVA Offered Medical Exams For Implants? >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Hello John and List, > >Thanks for the reply ><snip> >>>"In interviews and in writing, and specifically in a letter sent ><snip> >>Allow me to present Ms. Denise Di Ianni with the 'noose' (her >>own letter to me) she may use to publicly hang her sorry, lying >>ass with. Please see attached gif's. Her comments on that site >>imply that we are afraid of investigation or close scrutiny. It >>isn't true. Not a word of it. ><snip> >It figures ;) >Do you happen to have a copy of the October 17, 1995, letter? I attached it to my original submission to the list Serge. Go back to the archive (or your own UpDates archive) and look for it. EBK sent it out with the post as an attachment. I scanned the letters and sent them in as JPG.s rather than an OCR copy so that the NOVA letterhead and Denise DiIanni's signature could be seen. Basically, the letter was a list of 'excuses' that Denise offered me as to why NOVA would _not_ conduct the tests that I had requested as a condition of my participation. (ie; physical, psychological, polygraph tests etc.) I made it a 'condition' for my participation, she/NOVA refused to perform them, and now she claims that it was 'us' who didn't want the tests performed. Pure bovine excretion coming from her. >If not, it does not really matter, but it would be interesting >to read. I trashed the JPG.s Serge, you'll have to EBK if he kept a copy of them. I have the originals so I didn't feel a need to keep the JPGs on my hard drive. Sorry. >I suspect you have gone to great lengths to set the record >straight with NOVA and eventually failed. Yes, "great lengths." No, I don't think we failed though. A majority of the people who follow the doings in ufology _have heard_ our side of the story. There isn't much I can do about the general world-wide viewing audience however. I still, to this day, get letters from people all over the globe who have only recently viewed the segment in thier own countries and I answer all of those as best I can. It's more of a pain-in-the- ass than an opportunity to set the record straight however because everytime I get one of those letters it brings it all back up to the surface for me. I'd rather just as soon forget the whole maddening and distasteful episode. "Everytime I try to get out,..they pull me back in!"(Michael Corleone, Godfather II) <LOL> >In any case, I would like to have your permission to at least >make an enquiry to NOVA. If this is a problem with you, fine. You don't need my permission to contact anybody Serge. Especially WGBH/NOVA. Personally I hope you annoy the hell out of them! <LOL> >Please let me know either way. Just did. :) Regards, John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 17:15:42 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:57:48 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:22:07 +0100 >Regarding: >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:05:05 +0100 >Jenny, >There's a significant obstacle to this scenario being >sustainable - we have five early testimonies of what transpired >that first night and they are all reasonably consistent. >To reiterate, aside from the three security police directly >involved - Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston - there was also >MSgt Chandler, who had met up with them and remained by their >vehicle on the logging road into Rendlesham forest and Flight >(Shift) Commander Buran, stationed back at Central Security >Control. >If Burroughs and Penniston, "deliberately undersold their story >on the original witness statements", why are all five accounts >so comparable? Hi, This whole area is a minefield as we both know and I doubt that - unless and until Burroughs and Penniston (and particularly Cabansag - who has yet to speak at all post his l981 statement) are prepared to explain the huge questions outstanding over the discrepancies here - we will ever know the answers to these questions. Maybe Georgina can tell us they have done exactly that for her? Or is that also something we have to wait to find out? There are various issues surrounding the l981 statements: Firstly, Burroughs, Penniston and Cabansag are the only three who were potentially in a close encounter situation. Its worth noting that the other two men don't even seem to have mentioned seeing the lighthouse (as Buran wouldn't because was not even in the forest). He and Chandler really are only reflecting the reported story. As such it really only matters what B, P & C (Burroughs, Penniston & Cabansag) claim about what they saw and how this matches what is said in their original statements. As I note both B & P have - since the day they started talking - claimed they deliberately told only the 'we saw lights' story and left out all the close encounter effects they insist really happened. It is odd that if these things occurred nobody else would have got a sense of this close encounter happening - i.e. Chandler who was not far away in particular - but not in visual contact with these men (and I discuss this very problem in 'The UFOs that never were'). But its arguable that the only three who know are the three who were out there allegedly having the close encounter. So we either have to accept that they did have such an episode and simply did not report it as they say. Or they didn't - what's in their statements are all that ever happened - and they have lied and made up the close encounter. That's the stark choice here. IMO they are not lying. They did experience the close encounter effects, did agree between themselves to undersell the story for the record to protect themselves and that's why there is a discrepancy. Yes this begs many huge questions - as we both know - that only these men can answer. Why tell Ufologists the full story if they were afraid of its effect on their careers? (Possibly by l983 and l989 they were not so afraid and preferred to tell the truth). Why withhold the lighthouse chase sequel?- since if they identified this light as the lighthouse telling the world this news from the day that the lighthouse was first mentioned in l983 would have scuppered that whole theory (viz - we KNOW it wasn't the lighthouse because we saw that too later and whilst it briefly fooled us we soon worked out what it was and it was very different from the UFO we saw) (that is exactly what Penniston reports). (I am guessing here that maybe they - like Halt - got confused over the lightship/lighthouse and have only belatedly realised the possibility that there were two lights to be seen out there - but that is pure speculation that might not be true) On the other hand we would have to ask why lie and make up stories that are so at odds with statements they have signed and put record and so are likely to be used against them? Its not like they could have any expectation of confabulating here without detection because nobody knew the truth. If the truth was what they put in their initial statements then it was a time bomb waiting to expose their close encounter allegations. This action is difficult to comprehend. >Instead, all documented evidence seems to confirm that only a >fleeting glimpse of 'an object' producing the red and blue >lights was actually reported at the time. Which is not to say that its all that these men actually experienced. Cabansag is the key. Why is he still silent? Is Halt right in his scribbled note on Cabansag statement that implies this man (in Halts opinion) wasn't telling all he knew? If so did he too experience the close encounter and get 'freaked out'? Is Cabansag keeping out of the limelight because he doesn't want to contradict B & P as he would have to do if he knows their close encounter story isn't true? What he has to say on this is now crucial one way or the other. >Nope... either they _all_ agreed to omit these critical details >from their official reports, or Central Security Control were >never advised of this potentially serious security threat, or... >these subsequent, above claims of Penniston's never happened. Agreed it comes down to that. But B & P say that they DID agree to curtail the story to just lights even whilst still in the forest. So their own testimony reasonably explains why the statements have the form they do. Heres what Penniston said to us when we made Strange But True? in l994: 'John and I decided that we could not tell them everything.It was too fantastic.' Burroughs supported this. Penniston added 'We just told (the lieutenant) that we had seen some lights in the woods and found impressions on the ground. We felt it best to leave it at that.' This is three years before you revealed those statements don't forget. So in face of all this you cannot just assume they are making it up and do have to establish that they are deliberately lying on this point (and in the process frankly demolishing any shred of credibility the case might have left) - or you have to accept what they say to be true. Given the fact that P said what he did from17 years ago and B told this to me 11 years ago. Given that the close encounter story about one man trying to climb on top of the UFO was so widely known around base that we feature it in Sky Crash written in l983 (long before these witnesses spoke openly) I do think the balance here supports the long term consistent of this story - and hence provides at least a viable case that this is what happened. If B & P had simply retrospectively claimed the close encounter phase - say in l997 when the statements emerged - it would be a very different matter. They didn't. They have stood by their close encounter version from the minute either men said anything in person. That's surely significant. Well it is to me. >What exactly did Burroughs undersell in his original story? As >I've highlighted, on two separate occasions after he 'came out' as >a witness, Burroughs clarified he had only seen some 'strange' >lights and never a 'craft'. The details of what he told me are included in 'From out of the blue' (where I use a pseudonym for John Burroughs as at that time he had not yet decided to go public with his story). So read the accounts in that book attributed to John Cadbury and you will see exactly what he was saying as long ago as l989. And 'UFO Crash Landing?' has much more data from Burroughs and Penniston taken from the voluminous interviews given to us for 'Strange But True?' in l994 (some never shown on TV as we filmed far more than we used) . This sets out in a full chapter their version of the close encounter phase and has many quotes. You will find his story is consistent. It always has been. Unlike some witnesses it has not altered every other year. Any investigator would find that significant I think. In l989 B said to me - amongst other things - that the object was basically just like Christmas tree lights, that it caused him to blank out and recover awareness elsewhere in the forest. He added that it was in effect just a light phenomenon and he saw no structured craft at all. Nor did he see any aliens. But there was a form to it. Indeed we discussed the possibility of some kind of UAP - a strange natural phenomenon - seemingly a possibility that he had never considered before. He agreed this was possible. But he definitely was very persuasive against the lighthouse theory because of the close encounter phase. This was what convinced him it was not possible. With respect James, I sat through hours of this. My sense very definitely is that John Burroughs was telling me very openly and honestly what he experienced. Ray Boeche spoke briefly to John as long ago as l984 and I think he sensed this sincerity as well. And Ray is professionally well used to hearing people talk candidly. I agree that getting involved in a case may cloud your perception and I have been accused of being too close to this by colleagues in UFOIN. I can accept that. But equally such intimate association and direct experience of these witnesses offers something no judgement years after the fact or divorced from the actual witnesses can ever bring. This case is more than statements on paper. It is a very human experience. I cannot prove that you are wrong. But I believe the close encounter phase of this incident really happened and that Burroughs and Penniston are telling it straight when they say why they downplayed the report in their l981 statements. This doesn't mean they saw a spaceship. It doesn't even mean the lighthouse could not be the answer. But I feel that to take those original statements as the bottom line in this case is premature because it does not take account of all the evidence. >An important question - did Burroughs ever say he observed, as >Penniston later asserted, the lights ['craft', in Penniston's >case] rise up through the trees and depart at tremendous speed? >I can't find any reference to this in his public statements, >only that the lights 'disappeared', same as stated in his >original written testimony. Heres what he told me in l989 'It moved slowly at first, but then it could move so fast and it turned at right angles in an impossible way. I do not know any technology - certainly not in l980, probably not even now, that could do the things this did. It was just like magic.' I think you see that the sudden acceleration was so swift that it virtually disappeared on the spot. Plus John clearly believed he was 'relocated' during an altered state of consciousness. Many witnesses in those circumstances - as you know - say the witness just disappeared when in fact they just stopped seeing it for a time. But in l994 he elaborated when we made Strange But True? on the 'was it an object or just lights?' and 'how did it depart?' questions - saying: 'The best way I can describe the object that emerged from this background is that it was a very brilliant white light with multi-coloured lights inside.' He added that it was transparent, you could almost see through it and so calling it lights or an object was difficult because neither word fits. Interestingly Penniston says it was 'opaque' and 'misty' a bit like moulded glass with 'no sharp edges' - not a rock hard spaceship like object. So the two men are much closer together in their versions than you suggest. That was my sense from their stories. As for its departure heres what Burroughs told us in l994: 'One minute it was there. Then it climbed skyward and was gone like a blur. There was no sound and I felt no blast of air from any exhausts.' So I think you can see from this (which is in 'UFO Crash Landing?') that he did indeed describe its departure much like Penninston did - though in less graphic terms (these are just personalty differences effecting how the two men describe what they saw). So its not really true to say he never saw it leave. Again its a question of semantics. I got the sense often in this case trained military men used to dealing in procedures and machinery were struggling to explain magical things that were striking them dumb via reports they knew could wreck their careers. Regardless of what they did - or did not - really see - you have to appreciate why they had very good reason to be circumspect in what they reported. Indeed John said to me once 'words are useless'. You also have to appreciate this difficulty I think. These guys were really awestruck by all this. >in 'UFO Crash Landing?', you wrote: >"Burroughs (who had lived locally for 18 months and was familiar >with the woods) said he saw the lighthouse as well as the UFO >that night but never mentioned it because it was, 'just sitting >there as always'." >Given what we've learned since, how can this be anything other >than untrue! There are ways. For instance, if John saw the lightship and thought that it was the lighthouse he could be telling the truth. Because they don't mention Shipwash in their l981 statements and you might ask exactly the same questions as to why they do not. From the site the Shipwash lightship looked exactly like what you would expect a lighthouse to look like - a distant flashing light. It was nowhere near the UFO and I doubt you would have reason to mention its presence in your report. So Burroughs doesn't necessarily have to be lying here. He could simply have been mistaken - thought he saw the lighthouse and so didn't mention it (but in fact what he thought was the lighthouse was the lightship). But like I have said several times these witnesses do have a lot of explaining to do. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:59:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:01:39 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Velez >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:30:31 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:09:01 -0400 >>From: Katherine Hubbell <C8tlin@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:51:24 -0400 (EDT) >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Mortellaro >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca< >>>>Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:31:56 -0400 >>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>Hel-loooo!! The man sold 140 files for a hundred bucks a piece. >>Some of those files were files of children. You really need to >>take a step back and consider the laws that were broken here. My >>advice is for you to call Department of Health, Health >>Professionals Quality Assurance Division. They can tell you >>where you can get copies of the rules and regulations governing >>LCSWs in their states. ><snip> >>>Why do you not trash mine? As for being self centered, I think >>>not. I am very terribly sorry that Carpenter must endure this >>>harrassment. That is what bothers me. And I have continuously >>>voiced that opinion. Carpenter is not guilty of revealing >>>personal information. He said so. You beleived that since his >>>ex-wife told you that her file was not redacted, then all the >>>files must not have been redacted. That was an assumption on >>>your and others' part. I do not think this to be so. Not unless >>>or until it can be proven. It is not truth until then. >>More doublespeak. You said all of the files were redacted. Now >>you say that the file of Carpenter's ex-wife was _not_ redacted. >>You can't have it both ways. Make up your mind. Were _all_ the >>files redacted or not? >Hello Katherine, Jim, John and List, >If I understand the man correctly (Jim Mortellaro), he simply >stated that: >1. The _only_ un-redacted file was Carpenter's ex-wife's. I do >not believe he his having it both ways. _All the other_ files >were redacted. >2. The case of The People Against John Carpenter is based on the >false assumption that Carpenter sold 140 _un-redacted_ files to >Bigelow. >3. With all the efforts to contact the other 139 persons, the >detractors of John Carpenter presume that he sold 140 un- >redacted files. >4. There is thus no reason to pursue this matter any further. >This is what Jim Mortellaro said. >I am not calling anyone names. I just want to know. Is the >following true or untrue? Hi Serge, I know that you are responding to Katherine Hubbell's posting but I just want to set the record straight once and for all. Before I tackle the points you raised above, you also asked: >John Carpenter sold 140 abductees' files to the NIDS. 139 were >redacted. 1 was not: his ex-wife's file. We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. I 'think' MUFON is conducting an internal investigation into the whole matter so I am waiting along with everbody else to see what they find out. The probelm all along has been that no one knows 'how many' of the files were properly sanitized or not. Until that is established (by someone other than Carpenter) it remains an open and _valid_ question. You listed the following: >If I understand the man correctly (Jim Mortellaro), he simply >stated that: I give you much credit for "understanding" any portion of what he says! And,... he rarely if ever states anything "simply." <LOL> >1. The _only_ un-redacted file was Carpenter's ex-wife's. I do >not believe he his having it both ways. _All the other_ files >were redacted. Says Carpenter. The 'veracity' of his statement is _yet_ to be determined. >2. The case of The People Against John Carpenter is based on the >false assumption that Carpenter sold 140 _un-redacted_ files to >Bigelow. "False assumption?" Have you been following this thread Serge? The sale was _confirmed_ by Walt Andrus, Robert Bigelow, John Carpenter, and Dr.Alexander of NIDS. What "assumptions?" >3. With all the efforts to contact the other 139 persons, the >detractors of John Carpenter presume that he sold 140 un- >redacted files. Serge all I and a few others were asking for all along was that he (John Carpenter) notify his own clients that; a. he sold their files, and b. that he provide them with a brief written and signed statement that he in fact properly sanitized _all_ of their files for _any_ personally identifying information. It was _Mortellaro_ that was painting it all as a personal "attack" on John Carpenter by his "detractors." (namely us) Balderdash. >4. There is thus no reason to pursue this matter any further. Oh you bet there is! Until Carpenter notifies those other 120 families that he sold their personal reports/files, and provides them with written assurances that he properly redacted _all_ of the files for personal/identifying information, this whole issue will remain very much alive. >This is what Jim Mortellaro said. <LOL> So far, what Mr. Mortellaro has contributed is: First, that I somehow "implicated" Budd Hopkins ("by past association") when I reported the sale of abductee files by Carpenter. (distracting garbage to the main issue) Then, when that 'tack' failed, he started talking about his long and deep association between himself and Budd/IF. When I confronted him about the 'veracity' of that claim he then launched into several tirades about how I was destroying Carpenter and ufology, about my AIC list and last but not least my own character. It is only after all that failed that he chose to (finally) make his "points." For the first month or so all he did was to work really hard at creating static noise/distractions from the main issues that I had raised (as stated above) and to contribute all kinds rancorous comments and statements. _That_ is "what Mortellaro said." Regards, John Velez, * Hateful, Paranoid King of the Abductees ;) *Titles bestowed on me by Mr. Mortellaro in 'off list' postings to others - who then thoughtfully shared his 'behind my back' mutterings with me. Yep, the docca is a real man of character all right. He's proven that time and again. :) JV
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:13:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:28:52 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:58:52 +0100 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:03:00 -0500 >>>From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:04:11 +0100 Hi, Andy, >I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this >one. We both have clear views on the matter and both think we >are right! I still think that you are smugly complacent in the >face of massive evidence to the contrary and that the sheer >weight of case numbers resolved to IFO status proves my point. If there is not one I am not, for all my faults, it is "smugly complacent," which is why I have been able, over the long years of my involvement in ufology, to change my mind about various issues and cases as relevant evidence came to light. (That's one reason, for example, I am not part of ufology's psychosocial school, which I helped invent in the 1970s.) On the other hand, last time - according to you - I wasn't "smugly complacent," just a maker of "groundless protestations." Apparently unaware that you were contradicting yourself, you also accused me of being a world-class "fence-sitter." You both attack my positions and charge that I have none, which is the sort of cognitive dissonance we all have come to expect from you. Look, Andy, I'm sure you're a nice guy, and I haven't forgotten that you and I are probably the only two listfolk who can discuss the Incredible String Band intelligently (or maybe even know what an ISB is or was). You simply have not made a case, and no amount of rhetorical excess is going to change that. I just hope, as one who wishes you well, that you will start thinking about that and maybe you, too, will change your mind. >If you wish to be part of a system which seeks to perpetuate >mystery then you'll get the ufology you deserve. What you won't >get is answers. I'm not interested in perpetuating mystery where none exists. Nor, unlike you, am I willing to settle for bogus "answers" that only shed further darkness on the question at hand. You have to learn to separate what you want to believe from what you can demonstrate to be true. >You also fail to understand the nature of mispercpetion as your >quote about Custer illustrates: Nonsense. I do understand when someone invents witness testimony, as you did, to prove a point - an issue you shamelessly fail to address (or apologize for) in your posting here. I do understand that Custer and his men suffered no such thing as radical misperception; they simply misinterpreted what they saw, even though they described it with reasonable accuracy - which is more than you did with their testimony. >>Let me repeat, Andy: if Custer and his men had seen a winged >>elephant rather than a slow-moving, ascending light, _that_ >>would have been a radical misperception. >No Jerry - because elephants can't fly! That would have been an >hallucination. Different kettle, as we say in these parts. But of course you're having the equivalents of flying elephants all over the place in your unfalsifiable claims about radical misperception. What you're offering instead of science is wishful thinking, and if that's the case, it makes you part of the problem, as opposed to the solution. >>Yeah, er, whatever. Beyond that, I'm afraid that this exchange >>simply underscores your penchant for making sweeping statements >>and indulging in reckless claims which you cannot validate >>empirically. Yeah, I guess I'd rather sit on the fence than fall >>down, with you and Humpty Dumpty, and risk cracking my head. At >>this stage of UFO history, it's a lot more honest to concede >>that we don't know than that we "know" all kinds of things we >>don't. >I was only commenting on things we _did_ know Jerry, all based >on case work, field work and research. So was I. As I pointed out, and as Mark Cashman did in his usual eloquent fashion on a separate posting, the claim, which you made repeatedly, that IFOs comprise 95% of sightings is not something we "know" but is in fact a dubious allegation which at significant moments in UFO history has been called into question. If you think you "know" all kinds of things you can't demonstrate, well, Andy, I guess you have more in common with the UFO buffs you routinely trash than you realize. >And it wasn't I who >somewhat recklessly made predictions and then failed to qualify >or amplify them! What reckless prediction? As usual, I have no idea what you're talking about. I simply said that at some point, most likely in the coming century after the current generation of UFO-neglecting scientists is gone, a future generation will probably take up the question. There's an old saying in science, apparently unfamiliar to you, that I was alluding to, namely: "Science progresses one death at a time." I also quoted psychologist Stuart Appelle, whose view of the potential of ufology to enter mainstream science in the future is the same as mine. If that's "reckless," then so be it. If we've learned nothing else, Andy, it's that you use words (e.g., "radical misperception," "solved") differently from the rest of us. >I'd recommend you got out there in the field >and did some _real_ investigation Jerry, read some more books >about misperception and we'll play this game again in a year or >two. But thanks for the illuminating insight into the darkest >recesses of the Clark cranium. Interesting and desperate argument. Rather than take up the challenge of documenting your - as far as the rest of us can tell - baseless assertion that radical misperception plays a large role in UFO-reporting, you simply declare your superior knowledge and authority and expect us to be wowed. We aren't, Andy. I've done my field investigations over the years, and I've certainly read my share of books and papers about misperception. American psychologist and ufologist Richard Haines even wrote a book on the latter, which comes to conclusions markedly different from yours. In common with many others who have also investigated, read, and reflected, I find your arguments self-serving and unconvincing. I hate to say it, for all the self-congratulatory twaddle we hear from the British neoskeptics about how much smarter you are than we are, but I fear that you guys could learn a few things from us on this side of the pond. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:02:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:30:54 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Kaeser >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: updates@sympatico.ca <mailto:updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Gentlemen and EBK, >NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the >underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it >imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally >destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It >cannot be started again. >FYI >Jim Mortellaro, Inspector, NY State Police Auxiliary Jim- Do you have a specific name for this device, so that one could look at the specifications. A magnetic pulse will normally disrupt the flow of electrons, which would cause a system to crash. But the physical destruction of a chip would require either a voltage surge generated by the pulse, or damage caused by heat. Scaling this up just a bit, what would prevent one from connecting a larger version of this device to the metal ductwork in a building and then sending out a pulse to destroy the buiness computers of a competitior (or the Government computers of the enemy). There's also the issue of EM effects and their possible use in psychological warfare. This is discussed briefly in the Air Force 2025 Report.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:45:04 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:32:29 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Rudiak >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:20:40 -0400 >Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >Just a quick line of interest, I recently heard a radio program >(BBC Radio 4) which was based on computer hacking and cyber-war >across countries. >During this program they talked to one chap from the U.S. who >went on to mention, that the U.S. as had been using >Electromagnetic attacks which were tested on Automobiles from >500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. >The russians have also been using this, according to this >program' but on different use's, like pointing into buildings >and disabling the internal computer systems inside it. >Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? I don't know of any connection. The important point, however, is that reports linking UFO interference with internal combustion engines go back over 50 years and are therefore unrelated to recently-developed human weapons that do the same thing. One such early report was in Leonard Stringfield's "Situation Red," in which he wrote of his own such encounter right after the surrender of Japan in 1945. Stringfield (as I remember then a military intelligence officer) was enroute to Japan in a transport plane, accompanied by another plane. They encountered a UFO and both planes lost their engines. According to Stringfield, the pilot finally managed to get their engines going again, but the other plane crashed. Stringfield said he was extremely traumatized by the near-death experience. It was the beginning of his intense interest in the subject, but also something he didn't get back into for another 10 years when as a civilian he began collecting UFO reports for the Air Force in the mid '50's. In my opinion, car stoppages (and similar cases of EM interference) are among the strongest pieces of evidence for UFO physical reality. I also think there is an obvious connection between the military developing such weapons and these earlier UFO cases (such as the flurry of car-stoppages that occurred in the U.S. in Nov. 1957, starting with Levelland, Texas). I suspect what happened is that the military recognized that UFOs were capable of doing such things, it was related to EM interference, and set about to duplicate the effect, which they eventually did with high-energy microwave beams. There was a report on the Net about 2 or 3 years ago from the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board which briefly mentioned these weapons as being part of the AF's 21st Century arsenal of weapons. The main purpose of these weapons was pretty mundane. They were to stop vehicles so that they could be more easily bombed. In addition, they mentioned that these weapons could be used to scramble enemy communications and navigation equipment, another feature sometimes mentioned in older UFO reports. The Iran 1976 UFO encounter with jet interceptors immediately comes to mind. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Felder From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 15:01:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:38:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Felder >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >Is it time to discuss everyone pulling together and amassing any >credible evidence for dissemination by the scientific community? >Terry It is wwwwaaaayyyyy overdue, in my opinion. And on a personal note, if EBK will allow me, I have had to change email addys. Any off-list mail sent to my old nokomis.com address in the last three or four days did not get to me. Please resend to this new addy. Thanks Bobbie Bobbie "Jilain" Felder --->backwoods of Mississippi --->USA --->planet Earth --->somewhere in the cosmos http://www.jilain.com http://www.ufohoax.com http://www.dragoncrest.net ICQ #7524076 ~~~Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers And things are not what they seem~~~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:18:21 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:14:36 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:59:15 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>I'm not specifically talking about Rendlesham here, but in >>certain close encounter situations where witnesses describe >>alterations to their state of awareness, discontinuities in >>recall, changes to the rate of flow of time and visual >>hallucinations, I think those are pretty big clues that they are >>not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. >In truth, I am actually more surprised that such alterations >are not more common in UFO reports. >Let me give you some mundane examples. >I was leading a rock climbing route on a one-hundred plus foot >cliff when I slipped and took a fall. My closest protection was >ten feet below my waist at the time, and it wasn't a very solid >placement. As I fell, it seemed to take minutes. I could see >every element of the cliff, I reasoned about what I would have >to do if my closest protection failed, how much longer I would >fall, how I would need to place my body. >And then suddenly, time resumed its normal pace. >Was this some "transdimensional experience"? Some alteration >of the laws of time? Of course not. >Similar alterations in the function of the brain are normal in >all sorts of accounts of traumatic experiences. Reinhold Messner >discusses how he hallucinated the presence of his brother and >many other "presences" during his solo attempts on high >mountains. Survivors of war and disasters recount altered >perceptions and hallucinations, usually attributed to the stress >of challenging situations or disorienting perceptions, or fear. >Thus, to me it is not surprising that many witnesses report >these changes in perception, strangely low levels of apparent >fear, or major physical and psychological aftereffects.... >I'm not sure why anyone would expect the close encounter witness >to experience "normal, everyday, waking consciousness", given >the fear and surprise that attends such situations. <snip> >This certainly isn't the last word on this issue, but I think it >is much more profitable to first seek explanations of the state >of the witness in their own physical, perceptual and >psychological makeup. I agree with Mark Cashman's comments here. The altered states of consciousness (or "Oz Effect" as Jenny Randles has called it) sometimes described by UFO witnesses sounds very much like symptoms of psychological shock brought on by highly fearful or stressful situations, rather than something necessarily inherent to the presence of a UFO. I have experienced this a few times myself. E.g., about 25 years ago I came home late at night only to find burglars climbing in through my bedroom window. Without thinking, I foolishly went charging in through the same window after them (very uncharacteristic of me). I was instantly transported to the Land of Oz. I had no fear, my sense of time changed, everything seemed very quiet and distant, and I felt very detached from the world. This, of course, had nothing to do with UFOs. (If you want to know the end of the story, the burglars ran out the back door.) These dissociative states brought on suddenly by extremely stressful situations are very common and long documented in the medical literature. Everybody may be prone to them. They are probably a very ancient psychological defense mechanism to help us cope with dangerous situations. As is Mark, I would be much more inclined to first attribute altered consciousness in UFO witnesses to innate psychological and physiological defense mechanisms than to some unknown interaction between the witnesses and the UFOs. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:41:33 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:19:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 05:55:37 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >You know I just hate it when people rush into blind alleys and >get their facts wrong! >Firstly, The Lost Haven >http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Chrismart.htm >is my web site, I am not sure how you are reading your UpDates >but I didn't think anyone could have missed the posts on UpDates >informing people of such detail. I'm glad you've admitted to running the site, how long does one have to wait for the footage to download? I waited for 10 minutes with no indicator to tell me whether the download had even strated. So I didn't rush into a blind alley I tried and it simply didn't work! >Secondly, you seem to have personally attacked Chris Martin for >no apparent reason, that makes no sense to myself and possibly >to others on this List. It seems that in your writing your >"Video Footage of Aliens Withheld?" mail, you have not entirely >got your facts correct. Personally attacked Chris? I was going to quote your site where it stated that Chris had footage of the aliens but you seemed to have ammended your wording pretty sharpish, you'd best have a look at your hasty editing as you've left a few errors! >I wonder, before you wrote your attack on Chris' did you ask >yourself if you have ever had the chance to even whisper a word >in Chris's ear? As I mentioned before, if he has footage of aliens then why is it only available by appointment and why can't I see it on the national news? I think the answer lies somewhere with an emblishment of the facts and there was never any footage of aliens, am I correct? >Thirdly, the link to the film works perfectly well - I know as >I have had people checking it for me. Surely one person checking would have been fine, or are you embellishing the truth to make your point again? >Also you have clearly thrown this out of proportion. Not really, I think you have. >Here are some simple facts in which you should know. The rest of your reply doesn't warrant any retort. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:47:12 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:22:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:10:13 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Chris, is one of the most placid chaps you could wish to meet, >and he has even had people in his house checking out his video >footage, the reason he does not hawk around the www, is the >reason demonstrated in Terry's mail. As far as I am aware Chris >has never refused anyone to view his footage, and he welcomes >feedback and contact on his video footage. If you actually had the courtesy to read my original message you would realise that I was referring to your embellishment that the footage was of aliens rather than UFOs. Obviously I was correct in pointing out your error as you have now changed the wording on your webpage promoting the footage. Please don't thank meg you a favour. BTW, the link to the footage now works, perhaps you updated your site in more than one way. It's okay, we are adults if you've made a mistake you can admit it. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 18:16:13 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:29:01 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >'damaged' after the object departed. There have been a few, mostly where the engine or battery seemed to have suffered excessive heating. Here's one of the best known: http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/report/671106.htm Here are some others: The car driven by a bricklayer, Mr. Fillonnau, stopped as a large ball of fire flew near it. A violent air displacement was felt. "The battery was dead and the headlights were burned out. " Thorough police investigation failed to identify the cause of the phenomenon. BUFORA VI CAT gives location as Criteuil-La-Madeleine - (79). Criteuilla Madeleine (France). 10/21/1954 Musician Andy Florio was driving on Highway 80 when he observed a 'disc-machine', gold or bronze in colour. The object had circular openings around its rim from which amber-coloured lights protruded, while bluish-green lights were shining upwards from its root. There was a sound of electrical humming with stronger and softer volume. The object swayed back and forth, turned. over on its axis and shot a brilliant white beam of light at a the witness as he stood out of the car. The beam burned his elbow and bubbled the paint on the car. The witness also described a tingling sensation and felt heat all over his body. The car radio stopped, the lights dimmed and the engine seemed about to stall. Inspection of the car on the following day revealed that half of the acid was gone from the battery, the engine was running on three plugs and the radio was burned out completely - Modern People October 27,1974. Physical Trace Catalogue NO 790. NEAR TUSCON, ARIZONA, U.S.A 3/30/1955 The driver of a car which suddenly stopped noticed A glowing orange object hovering very low overhead, The object seemed to be spinning slowly and reminded the witness of a child's top. When the object moved away it made a sound like a 'whistling swish', the Car's lights came back on and the radio began to play. The car was restarted with some difficulty and the next morning the battery was found to be dead. The car clock,which had boon reset on the morning Of the incident and bad always kept good time was found to be about two minutes slow. - Flying Saucers are Hostile. P 41. KENT, WASHINGTON, U.S.A 7/2/1965 While driving alone a man noted his car radio died. Pressing the station button had no effect and the radio remained dead. Seconds later an intense white light enveloped the car and he could not see beyond the bonnet. The car's lights and motor failed in the same instant. Beyond this events are vague and the next thing he knew he was being stopped by police for driving his car without lights. He was taken to hospital and examined where he was found to be in a state of shock. His vehicle, a Ford Cortina 71TC, was inspected and found to have a flat battery and the oil level was low. The cut-off switch on the alternator needed replacing, as did wiring, especially the headlights. Radiator water was also low. The reporter did not want further investigations conducted. - TUFOIC Lawitta TAS 5 Feb 1979 A 55 year old woman travelling by car saw a bright light above and in front of her car. The car developed a "miss" in the engine and stopped. The battery went dead with a new battery needing to be fitted. The event re-occurred 12 months later at the same place. - INUFOR Digest Vol 2 No 1.)Independent Network of UFO Researchers PO Box 783 WAGGA NSW 1990 "The driver of a car which suddenly stopped noticed a glowing orange object hovering very low overhead. The object seemed to be spinning slowly and reminded the witness of a child's top. When the object moved away it made a sound like a 'whistling swish' the car's lights came back on and the radio began to play. The car was restarted with some difficulty and the next morning the battery was found to be dead. The car clock, which had been reset on the morning of the incident and had always kept good time was found to be about 2 mins slow." (note sound similar to 9 Aug 1959, Tierra del Fuego Isl. ID 2524) - Flying Saucers are Hostile, p 41 Kent, Washington, USA 7/2/1965 A sixteen year girl and her friend said they were terrified as an object hovered 20m from them. It was cylindrical in shape, about 10m long by 5m high, with a window on top and at each end. It issued a bluish/silver-grey light, and hovered in mid-air. A loud drumming noise had been noted at first. It was reported that Miss Brown's watch had stopped at 6.23 p.m.; that the battery of her torch was drained and that her hand bag and belt clasps were magnetised, as was an iron fence over which the object hovered. A Victorian mines geologist indicated that the fence was no more magnetised than a control fence some distance away. - Melbourne "Argus" Jun 9, Jun 16, Jun 26 1954. Melbourne "Herald" Jul 31 195 Dandenong VIC 6/5/1954 Two young men saw a red light 2300 north of the highway at a point 30 miles west of Hobbs. They watched for 9 to 10 minutes, thinking it was an oil-flare, when the light suddenly rose straight up. After pacing the car for a few minutes, the light turned toward the car, passed over it, and hovered over the Permian Basin Pipe Line Plant. As it passed overhead, the car engine sputtered, then died, and the lights went out. After the men coasted the car down the road, the motor restarted and they drove away. The battery was found to be dead the following morning and the dashboard clock was stopped. - Schopick
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 18:18:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:31:07 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:47:01 -0400 > at: http://www.lawinfo.com/biz/blinder/exposing.html Very useful, Serge! Thanks. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:34:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Dear All Hi Terry, welcome to UpDates, >Having been interested by the news that Chris Martin has put >some of his footage on his Lost Haven website I decided to have >a look. >Firstly the link to the footage seems to be faulty. I certainly >couldn't get to download the footage anyway. I tried it, the link works fine, I suggest you check your computer setup, this is quite often the problem. >Secondly we hear that he has more footage, but of the alien >visitors themselves! Is this footage on the website? No, we're >asked to talk to Chris at the Leeds conference if we want to see >it. Nice plug Chris. Footage of alien visitors? Terry, I respectfully ask where on Earth did you hear of such a thing? Please reply to this question as I am always interested in how these fantasies are started. >So there you have it folks, someone's sitting on some real >evidence of aliens piloting UFOs but no press conference, the >footage is only available by appointment. Aliens piloting UFO's? there you go again...when was that ever mentioned?? That is some strange World you live in, I can't wait for the book. Meanwhile, in the real World... research first press conference later, what do you think? >Is it time to discuss everyone pulling together and amassing any >credible evidence for dissemination by the scientific community? Absolutely, that's why I sent the mails in the first place... all I've had so far is support from Roy Hale, nothing from the others and of course the inevitable silly mail from the likes of yourself. Brushing all the silliness aside I say again: Anyone interested in seeing high res images of the Chris Martin footage please mail me and I will send you the .JPG images or check Roy Hale's site at: http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Chrismart.htm All the best, Dave Bowden.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Frightening Technology - Cecchini From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 19:56:24 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:39:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Frightening Technology - Cecchini >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Frightening Technology >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:18:49 -0400 >If the truth is out there, it may be in the verge of >disappearing. >http://www.britannica.com/bcom/original/article/0,5744,9806,00.html I guess you didn't see the post I made on 8-7-00 titled: "Now you can't believe what you _don't_ see!" (of course, if that were true, Hoagland would be out of a job, as the guy continues to espouse "reading between the lines" and extracting meaning from what isn't heard or said -- I tried to take him to task two nights ago on Mike Siegel, but I couldn't get through.) Excerpt from the July/August issue of "MIT Tech", pg. 61 "In the fraction of a second between video frames, any person or object moving in the foreground can be edited out, and objects that aren't there can be edited in and made to look real. 'Pixel plasticity,' Livingston calls it. The implication for those at the satellite imagery conference was sobering: pictures from orbit may not necessarily be what the satellite's electronic camera actually recorded." ... I didn't include the following with the post, but I find it an interesting reread when you keep the above in mind. The NASA people are adamant that they don't have their fingers on any "censor buttons"... _but_ (to get all Hoagland-like for a minute) they _don't_ say that they don't have any software that might be modifying the pictures. But, look at what they do in fact say: the images _are_ filtered through some image processing software. Hmmmm. "You have to learn to read the code!" -- Hoagland http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/shuttle_tv_991227.html Shuttle TV: Is What We See What NASA Gets? By Jim Oberg <snip> The images are cooked! Calvin Avery is a television specialist who used to work in the control room in Houston that processed the incoming pictures, and he agreed they were practically instantaneous. But, he revealed to space.com, the images are manipulated by specialists there. "Flight crews used to review our recorded video and told us the scenes were not as vivid as seen in space," Avery told space.com. "So in the control room we'd push up the blue, push up the red to greater levels than in the downlink." <snip> Both officials and workers agreed that "what NASA gets is what the public sees."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:11:49 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:42:05 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:19:43 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. >><snip> >>>500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >>>inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >>>ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed. >>>Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >>>incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >>>areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? >>Roy... >>Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >>when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >>re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >>'damaged' after the object departed. >The Minnesota Val Johnson case and the late 70's case involving >a local policeman's car in Elmwood, WI were both cases of >permanent damage to cars and their electrical systems. >Joel Henry >Minnesota MUFON Listers... This thread brings to mind a question I would like to discuss with all the physicists and mad-scientist wannabes like me. I've always wondered what would happen (in theory, anyway) if one attempted the following: Take your typical accelerator and gets some electrons spinning really fast around the ring. I don't know exactly how many EV we're talking here, let's just say a whole lot of them. No substituting microwaves. That's cheating. What we want is a big, slow, fat pulse, just one. Modify the ring so that, at the push of a button, you can have it break open and pull apart, allowing the contents of the ring to fly out of the open end at a target placed a few hundred feet down range. The target could be anything, a car in this case, with the engine running. Assuming this is remotely possible, what do you think you would see? a) the accelerated particles would behave like lightning; zapping and frying everything between it and it's quickest route to ground, dissipating long before the car was affected... b) a great glowing glob of plasma flies out the barrel at lightspeed and totally trashes the car, big explosion, all that. maybe it keeps right on going... c) you wouldn't see or hear a thing but the car stalling out... d) can't be done, not even with duct tape. I would like to think (b) is the correct answer but I have a feeling it would be (a) or something similiar to that. Maybe nothing would happen, I dunno. I was surprised to find that noone on KeelyNet has tried this yet :) Cheers, Rick Goldsmith
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:32:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:47:02 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:32:41 +0100 >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:41:54 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' <snip> >On the question of the lighthouse and colouration. Firstly, I >never saw the lighthouse emit the coloured lights referred to by >Peter Brookesmith. This make sense of the colored beams point away from land. > The lighthouse was a fairly modest white >light - that's all. I did see it dulled to a yellowish hue >through sea mist once (that will of course have the water >droplets Bruce suggests are needed to create a mirage effect). Dulling and a slight color shift maybe, However, I think your use of the term mirage here is not correct,. A mirage is a shift in direction to the light source caused by light ray bending in the atmosphere. Usually only detectable over _long_ light paths except when the ground is quite hot as compared to the air above (the inferior... below... mirage of teh sky as seen in a hot road or over the hot sands or a desert or beach) <snip> >The mirage effect was suggested by me for three primary reasons. >But it is - I admit - a theory. Nothing more. >(1) There are suggestions of mist from the available weather >data (and I have seen mist in this area myself). Against that I >have to raise Halt's insistence to me that he took his >dictaphone out there to produce the infamous Halt tape because >the second night - 28 December - was windy and would have made >note taking difficult. Wind and mist are relatively >inconsistent. "Suggestions of mist" as opposed to outraight statements of mist/fog imply that any mist was very "thin"... Also as you point out, windy weather does not "promote" mist (however there can be wind and fog as a cloud at ground level can be blowing past). >(2) I have a painting on my bedroom wall of the incident >(based on access to a sketch by one of the primary witnesses ). >I wish I could scan this - but I don't have a scanner. But it is >very easy to see this as a lighthouse beam that is spread by >refraction. It never occurred to me until fairly recently but >its like that vase that can look two ways according to your mind >set when you look at it (classic optical illusion). Once you see >o see it any other way. Lighthouse beam spread by refraction... I doubt it. Noticeable refraction... which also causes mirage... is so weak that it requires many miles of distance though the atmosphere to be visible unless there is a considerable temperature gradient near the ground. Anyway, the "spreading" you mention might be caused by mist/fog... which, however wuld also reduce the intensity. Perhaps the drawing itself is not perfectly accurate. Or you are ascribing the UFO in the drawing to the lighthouse and arguing that therefore the lighthouse beam must have been spread. (Actually the beam going outward away from the light house does spread. What we are really talking about here is the appearance of the beacon when viewed by a person looking at it. The apparent size of a few foot sized beacon light seen from a distance of, say, 4 miles is determined more by the optics of a person's eye... inability to form a perfect image of a small or "point" source... than by atmospheric effects.) >(3) I have seen a mirage created by a bright star shining >through mist as it rose above a reservoir at Weir in Rossendale. >This was during a UFO investigation chasing a classic IFO case >that turned out to be a gliding commercial cargo plane (another >bizarre story that was recently dramatised from my report in >'The Pennine UFO Mystery' in the drama series 'Heartbeat' BTW!) >The way the star became slightly yellow/orange and enlarged as a >consequence of shining through the mist was stunning. Once you >have seen this you realise that an effect on the (certainly >brighter) lighthouse is more than feasible.> This is a classic mirage event with color change due to the atmosphere. But note that in this case the water was a nearly horizontal surface probably warmer than the air above so there was a considerable temperature gradient. The color change is a result of te star light passing through several _hundred_ miles of atmosphere (sunlight is redenned by passage through perhaps 200 miles of atmosphere of varying density.) thus, although there may have been a mist on the lake, most of the color change had already taken place as the light rays from the star traveled through the atmosphere before reaching the mist.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 05:03:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:56:11 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hale >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:49:36 +0100 >>Regarding: James, Sean & All It seems that this thread has made me do some digging, deep into my library of UFO videos dating back about 10-15yrs. I found some very interesting lectures on this case that were given nearer the time. As I write I am compiling questions from these lectures, which I feel need answering. I should have these ready within days. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 CNN.Com On New Randle & Estes Book From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 05:49:22 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:24:25 -0400 Subject: CNN.Com On New Randle & Estes Book Source: CNN.Com http://www.cnn.com/2000/books/reviews/08/25/review.spaceship/index.html CNN's generally negative line regarding the reality of the alien visitation at at variance with that of its public. According to the network's own quick vote, 65% "believe we have been visited by UFOs." 35% say no. If you would like to participate, follow the link! Stig *** Review: Waiting for the UFOs August 25, 2000 Web posted at: 11:58 AM EDT (1558 GMT) 'Spaceships of the Visitors' By Kevin Randle and Russ Estes Touchstone Books Non-fiction/Science 352 pages By L.D. Meagher Special to CNN.com (CNN) -- Books about unidentified flying objects generally fall into two categories. The first, and by far the larger, category is books written by UFO believers -- people convinced that there are unidentified craft whizzing around our planet carrying emissaries of alien civilizations. The second category of books is by UFO debunkers, who believe the reports of alien craft are either mistakes or hoaxes. Kevin Randle and Russ Estes try to fit both categories -- debunking some UFO sightings, yet concluding that there are alien spacecraft visiting us. The title of their second collaboration tips the reader to their predisposition. "Spaceships of the Visitors: An Illustrated Guide to Alien Spacecraft" is not the name of a detached analysis of the UFO phenomenon. Randle has written eight other books about alien visitations and Estes produces documentaries that promote the extraterrestrial hypothesis. They are true believers. POSTWAR EXPLOSION The book begins with an overview of the earliest purported UFO sightings, dating from biblical times through World War II. That sets the stage for the postwar explosion in UFO reports, beginning with the two seminal accounts, just days apart, in the middle of 1947. The first was a sighting by a civilian pilot over the Cascade Mountains, which gave rise to the term "flying saucer." The second was the purported crash of a UFO outside Roswell, New Mexico. These incidents, and a spate of others that year, prompted the first military investigation of the UFO phenomenon, later to be known as Project Blue Book. "Spaceships of the Visitors" quotes liberally from military documents growing out of that investigation. Unlike many UFO believers, however, Randle and Estes don't issue a blanket condemnation of Project Blue Book as a government cover-up. Instead, they seem to understand that the Air Force wasn't interested in UFOs per se, but in assessing whether they presented a Cold War threat to the United States. The investigators "would mention this aspect again and again," the authors tell us. "Each of the investigations ... had national security as its main concern. If national security wasn't threatened, then the question of reality became unimportant. And, as time passed, it became more likely to all those military investigators that no threat to the nation was posed." Such background information fills less than a third of the book. The bulk of it is devoted to thumbnail sketches of UFO reports. Each offers some of the details of the sighting and -- in most cases -- photographs offered as evidence of an alien encounter. FUZZY AND INDISTINCT Many of the pictures described as "sharp and clear" are, in fact, fuzzy and indistinct. The authors give each report a "reliability" ranking from zero (unreliable) to ten (unimpeachable). Only one account ranks at the top of the scale. None hits the bottom (though a couple score a reliability of "one"). Those that the authors consider obvious fakes are given their own section. At first glance, Randle and Estes seem to be going out of their way to be fair in assessing these reports. But a closer look raises questions. The analysis of the odd lights that appeared over Phoenix in 1997, for example, contains no photograph, only a sketch -- one used to illustrate an earlier report from Belgium. Yet the Phoenix lights were widely photographed. While the authors conclude that the lights were "a case of mistaken identity," they give the sighting a reliability rating of five, implying there's a 50 percent chance that it was a real UFO. Even more telling is the analysis of the now-infamous 1978 Gulf Breeze sightings in Florida. The photograph offered as "evidence" is patently doctored. The photographer all but admitted he fabricated it. The authors conclude, "his story, from the very beginning, was a hoax." And yet they rate his reliability at two -- not zero. "Spaceships of the Visitors" tries to have it both ways. It claims to offer a clear-eyed perspective on the UFO phenomenon. But the judgment of the authors remains clouded by their belief that UFOs are real, and alien in origin. In a perverse way, their book may make their case even weaker. A determined prankster could learn from the mistakes of the hoax perpetrators identified in the book, as well as from the obvious hoaxes that the authors don't dismiss out of hand, to fabricate ever more elaborate "evidence" of alien visitation. That would give authors like Randle and Estes -- who are so generous in assessing the reliability of "witnesses" -- ever more fodder for future books. ** � 2000 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved. *Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our *privacy guidelines.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 00:26:48 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:27:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:41:21 -0400 >>From: The Duke Peter of Mendoza Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:20:33 -0400 >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> >>>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >>>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>--- while waiting for Greg or anyone else to level the playing >>field a bit, eh what, chaps, and show us all some indisputable >>facts about alleged abductions before they whinge about skeptics >>playing fast and loose with any other purported facts. Or being >>derisive, or ironic, as the number of hypotheses may be. ><snip> >Hello Peter, >I'll take you to the task and raise the game. >Snip >In many cases, the alleged victims suffer from symptoms of Post >Traumatic Stress Disorder. Literature has it that PTSD is a >mental illness caused by traumatic EVENTS in one's life. <snip> >Carry on: "Other causes can also include: Witnessing someone >being killed, maimed, or seriously injured. Being in a military >combat or war zone Being imprisoned or held captive. Being >tormented, terrified, stalked, or humiliated by someone >repeatedly and intentionally. Being physically tortured by >someone Accidentally causing serious injury or death to another >person. Females in the Medical helping professions whom are >unable to relieve the emotional stress of their workload." >Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Dear Serge, Listers and lurkers lurking, You forgot one important cause of post traumatic stress (or abduction) stress disorder, marriage*. Jim Mortellaro * My wife, in the name of humor and pity, allowed me to write that. She did insist that I tell everyone that she was a child bride and has had to put up with me for 32 years. I am instructed to tell you that she doesn't look a day over 24. Years. Finally, the truth reviled.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 00:33:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:31:01 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Maccabee >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. ><snip> >>>500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >>>inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >>>ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed.> >>>Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >>>incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >>>areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? >>Roy... >>Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >>when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >>re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >>'damaged' after the object departed. >Gentlemen and EBK, >NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the >underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it >imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally >destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It >cannot be started again. Many of the classic car-stopping events happend BC (before computer). For example the classic Levelland, TX series of events. I investigated a case in Virginia some 29 years ago. It involved a Triumph sports car, if I recall correctly. Object hovered over the car and car stopped, lights went out, radio died. After it departed in some seconds or so the car was started again (turning the ignition key did nothing until the object left). Lights came back on, etc. But the radio didn't. Turned out the radio had suffered permanent damage. Another investigator got to the case before I did. He told me he had to replace a transistor in order to get the radio to work. Unfortunately he replaced one transistor after another until the radio wrked again and didn't keep track of which tansistor (or transistors) had been damaged.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 'The Edwards Air Force Base Encounter'? From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 03:00:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:34:49 -0400 Subject: 'The Edwards Air Force Base Encounter'? How reliable is 'The Edwards Air Force Base Encounter'? see: http://www.edwardsufo.com/ I ask because, after reading the background of how the tapes were acquired and the 54 minute audio tape made, I've become skeptical. Sure, something seemingly strange happened there, something outside the realm of what's considered normal for the home of exotic aircraft. However, given how the tape (the one that's for sale) was made, I can't in good conscience give it (the tape) any credence. http://www.edwardsufo.com/edwards3.html <snip> Out of the possible 40 hours of these tape recordings only 6 hours were declassified by the Department of the Air Force. These six hours of recordings were made available in a declassified form known as "Scrambled Release" - chopped up to make no sense to the listener. The six hours were deliberately cut up out of sequence with additional noise overlayed and much key material deleted. Those historians hearing the six hours of tape as declassified could make no sense out of them at all. <snip> He felt there was a story buried in the audio jumble. For eight months he analyzed the tapes, <snip> With the help of Filer, Sorrels and research from 12 military agencies, the actual story of this event was pieced together, just as Sherman pieced the tapes back together in chronological order. Choosing the most important materials in the tapes and removing the sections of loud background noise, <snip> What emerged is a final 54 minute Audio Documentary - 'The Edwards Air Force Base Encounter' -
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Frghtening Technology - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 03:44:12 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:36:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Frghtening Technology - Hatch >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Frghtening Technology >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:18:49 -0400 >Hello List, >Worth reading. >If the truth is out there, it may be in the verge of >disappearing. >http://www.britannica.com/bcom/original/article/0,5744,9806,00.html Hello Serge! Yes, this is frightening, but only for those who are not forewarned, so its good you mention this. "Virtual (non) Reality", via technology, has been creeping up on us for years. We have all long heard of doctored photos etc., but I first sat up and took notice when I found a mix of artificial and real instruments mixed on the same pop music tunes. Now I listen for real instruments, craftily woven into otherwise all-electronic music tracks. I wonder what clever demon thought that up? Decades ago, a fellow musician amazed his compadres with what was then a new toy, a simple cassette tape recorder. He recorded the guys talking and played it back. It sounded as good as reel-to-reel tape for all we could tell. Then he pulled the plug out of the wall so everyone could talk on the level. Next, he rewound the tape and voila', all the _real_ dirt played back. It had C-cell batteries inside! Surprise! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, the lasagna is on me. In short, frightening technology, even when applied to satellites and football games, is only going to fool those not in the know. If that's 95% of the public, well 95% of everything is less than exceptional. [Except perhaps Lake Woebegone, where the children are all above average.] Best wishes [burp!] - 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kaeser From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 11:07:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:39:50 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Kaeser >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:59:10 -0400 >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition <snip> >Hi Serge, >I know that you are responding to Katherine Hubbell's posting >but I just want to set the record straight once and for all. >Before I tackle the points you raised above, you also asked: >>John Carpenter sold 140 abductees' files to the NIDS. 139 were >>redacted. 1 was not: his ex-wife's file. >We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. I 'think' MUFON >is conducting an internal investigation into the whole matter so >I am waiting along with everybody else to see what they find out. >The problem all along has been that no one knows 'how many' of >the files were properly sanitized or not. Until that is >established (by someone other than Carpenter) it remains an open >and _valid_ question. Unfortunately, the only reference to an investigation thus far has been Walt's comment to you before he realized that he was speaking "for the record". I've attempted to contact MUFON, and I think others have as well, and there's no indication of any kind of current probe into this situation. Part of the problem may be that while news of this sale has just reached the "lists", it has apparently been known to a number of people at MUFON Headquarters (and apparently elsewhere) since shortly after the transfer (in 1997). I believe they probably felt that this was a transfer of information from one researcher to a research group. This is done fairly often by researchers, but this is the first time that abductee files have been focused on (that I'm aware of). In my opinion, the question of whether or not the files were redacted must be dealt with by someone, and I think that the Bigalow group is the only entity that can help to resolve the question. But I doubt that many who are upset with this are going to accept a statement by Bigalow, any more than they'll accept a statement from Carpenter. Even if a group is shown the redacted files, there are others who will say that they weren't show the real files, but a special set designed to defuse this situation. This may be a no win situation, for everyone involved. >"False assumption?" Have you been following this thread Serge? >The sale was _confirmed_ by Walt Andrus, Robert Bigelow, John >Carpenter, and Dr.Alexander of NIDS. What "assumptions?" >>3. With all the efforts to contact the other 139 persons, the >>detractors of John Carpenter presume that he sold 140 un- >>redacted files. >Serge all I and a few others were asking for all along was that >he (John Carpenter) notify his own clients that; a. he sold >their files, and b. that he provide them with a brief written >and signed statement that he in fact properly sanitized _all_ of >their files for _any_ personally identifying information. I agree that would be the honorable thing to do, but if Carpenter has wronged his patients by selling his case files with patient information this should be brought to the attention of the Missouri State Board of Social Workers. Throughout this "net" debate, many of us have pleaded with the abductees to file a complaint with the State of Missouri so that this matter can be investigated properly and resolved. If he has improperly sold patient information, that will come out and future patients will be spared the pain that some have gone through. The State, if evidence is shown to support the contentions, will likely follow through with their own probe and contact his former patients to let them know of the improper activity. But Carpenter has contended that he did not see these individuals as patients, but rather as research subjects. While this is a fine line that the State Board of Social Workers will have to define, I don't know how this has been handled previously in Missouri State (or Federal) Court. One former abductee has anonymously posted a statement that she had gone to Carpenter because he was a medical professional, but it would be interesting to see if there is any written agreement between them prior to any investigative sessions. A friend in this area had to sign a research agreement before he could undergo a hypnosis session, and that defined what the researcher was able to do with the information. That agreement wouldn't have any impact on State regulations, unless allowed by those regulations, but this quickly becomes a legal matter that has many facets and too many unknowns to properly discuss in an open forum (as we make guesses and assumptions to fill the void left by our lack of facts). My thoughts for this Saturday morning. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Anthony From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 16:28:25 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:41:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Anthony >From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:51:49 EDT >Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:53:47 -0400 >Subject: Latest Comments From BUFOSC <snip> >So we contact the media at every opportunity and new cases come >in - some of which are really exciting! >Effective tactics! With regards UFO investigation and gaining any better understanding of the phenomenon; this remark is quite worrying Tim, if you are serious?? These tactics may be flawed. Recently, I contacted a reporter of at the Grimsby Evening Telegraph in connection with some reports that came in, March and April this year from Lincolnshire. To cut to the chase the reporter told me of his complete disinterest in any serious study or follow up of any UFO reports, because of an earlier incident which he had inadvertently generated by using gutter press type tactics. However, he was quite willing to report inaccurate stories about UFO's to sell his paper and admitted this was sometimes part of his job. This issue is illustrative of many important points that need to be continually raised and considered by researchers, not least of which are a spectrum of sociological aspects and the kind of negative impressions this kind of attitude and reporting leaves on the rest of the topic and the people involved with it. In 1998 there was an article in the Grimsby Evening Telegraph from the Scartho area, which the reporter told me was, in fact, a complete 'fiction' which he had written to fill space in the paper. Also, the reporter told me the newspaper subsequently received over thirty telephone calls, from people claiming they had witnessed the self-same UFO mentioned in the fictitious newspaper report, at the same time. I have spoken with other reporters, who verified these telephone calls. The recent Lincolnshire cases also suffered from similar large numbers of people ringing the newspaper to report both authentic and invented UFOs, so much so that the editor told all the reporters (four of them) to kill the story before it spiralled any further out of control. I had the daunting task of trying to sift through a lot of this information and see if I could determine what merited further follow-up - very difficult job. A problem associated with using the media; which some researchers are all too aware of. Food for thought! Worrying, the media has such power and generates this kind of response and that people are willing to be swept along or use it for dubious purposes; and emphatically more importantly that accuracy and truth are ultimately sacrificed... Usually for a fast buck! (Doesn't 'ufology' want to have any of these noble tenets? Do we all want to believe a lie? What of those people who have had inexplicable experiences and who deserve better?) Tim, how do you decide which media generated reports are true or not? After all, if there are people out there willing to admit to seeing phantom UFO's, what investigation techniques at your disposal will reveal this or that person is telling the truth or a lie? (Seeing how we seldom use polygraph or like testing methods here in England; and especially when there are people who are not only willing to invent and accept but perpetuate untruth, unrelenting and often good liars or worse, those who say nothing at dalliance!). All best regards Gary Anthony
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Pulsar Communications From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 11:49:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:42:35 -0400 Subject: Pulsar Communications Dr. Paul A. LaViolette has a new book which describes what he believes is a communications network using pulsars. See: http://www.etheric.com/LaViolettebooks/Book-Talk.html "Talk of the Galaxy" provides first time proof that astronomers have been receiving radio signals of intelligent origin, according to the web page. Dr. LaViolette was recently in the news because he is fighting to get his job back at the US Patent Office. He was released because of his belief in the reality of Cold Fusion. A controversial article about his fight appeared in the Washington Post this week: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8364-2000Aug23.html Paul disputes some of the issues in the Post at his web page: http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/newserror.html Dr. LaVoilette most recent book has received support from Dr. Eugene Mallove, former MIT associate professor who exposed fraud at that institution about its denial of excess energy in their own experiments soon after the Fleischmann & Pons' 1989 announcement on CF. (See Dr. Mallove's book "Fire From Ice") Regards, Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:09:05 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:47:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Lushman >From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:51:49 EDT >Subject: Latest Comments From BUFOSC >To: updates@sympatico.ca >When bringing the intriguing Cheshire UFO video to media >attention, as is standard procedure within BUFOSC, What is LUFOS's policy on this, the group you head Tim? There is nothing wrong with trying to gain publicity to see if anyone else may have seen something but to declare as Tim did on a message to Updates on Mon 17th July : >>"Best Ever UFO Video" Captured By Cheshire Man! Surely this is premature before even any analysis has taken place. Phrases like the "best ever" before anyone has lifted a finger to do any research shows the level of investigation here. Also in the same message we had, >>This may become the most famous UFO footage of all time. Yes probably but for all the wrong reasons. But wait, this is not the first time this has happened. Way back on Tues 2nd March 99, Tim posted to Updates an account of an alleged landing in which he quoted Eric Morris as saying >>Eric Morris believes that this incident is of the greatest >>potential significance and has already given detailed interviews >>and information to local newspapers. Once again another case where the hype and publicity trail go into overdrive before the case has been researched. Days later and sheepishly they had to admit it was a hoax. But nevertheless we go back to the same old tactics. >So we contact the media at every opportunity and new cases >come in - some of which are really exciting! >Effective tactics! Really. On two occasions at least you have declared major incidents only to weeks later declare them as hoaxes or throw your teddy down as you are no longer trusted to be involved in the case. Hype first, facts; well they can wait. >We've been over the business of trained observers before: >Police, Army, Navy, Man with Dog We all know that there >are no experts where anomalous phenomena are concerned. Maybe not but then how can you also claim that this is something significant before any research or analysis has taken place. If you can't tell what an object is from just looking at it, surely the opposite is true, you can't claim it is something when you have no data to back it up. >His friend Mike, the pushy one Meeeoowww. >Nevertheless, video analysis expert Russ Callaghan, who, by all >accounts, learned his trade driving the buses in Bradford, has >"cleaned the images up" and shed absolutely no light on the >mystery at all... So by that analogy being a bus driver in a previous life means you are not capable of moving onwards or upwards. Sorry but all those researchers on this list with mundane jobs, please be advised you are not qualified to be in ufology. How many people would that leave on this list..... very few. So Russell having shed no light on the case still means its a mystery does it or just that he is incompetent; which is it? >having previously told three witnesses that he has passed >copyright onto BUFOSC and wanted to "stay in the background". And who would these three witnesses be and they had it all in writing I assume? >There were no "legal notices" sent to either Eric Morris or >myself although we considered asking our own solicitors to write >to Woods after he claimed that we were "making hundreds of >pounds" from the Daily Post newspaper. So how were you privy to comment on >as noted in replies to his very expensive Manchester-based >Solicitors Mace-Jones. How many times have we heard the phrase or similar statements claiming that Tim and crew would be considering or taking legal advice/action but never do. I've lost count on the times Tim is going to take action via the police or his legal team. >People choose to believe who they want to believe and most >skeptics choose to believe Russ Callaghan, tactically and >ironically, when dealing with the "thorny issue" of whether our >video analysis expert actually mentioned the words "best ever" Yes but you used the phrase in a post to Updates on Monday, 17th July >>"Best Ever UFO Video" Captured By Cheshire Man! You and your team have claimed this as the best footage ever but when it all goes pear shaped, start crying about how unfair it all is. Eric did indeed tell me that the footage was some of the best he has ever seen and this was going to be one of the best cases ever. He told me this in person, face to face and you weren't there. Of course you will deny this and say its my word against his..... and Russell's. The problem is we always hear through you what Eric believes/states but never hear it from the horses mouth. If Eric has time to run around promoting video footage, surely he has enough time to spare this list a few minutes of his own time, so he can tell us what he thinks and not what Tim Matthew thinks he thinks. If this is a BUFOSC statement, let's hear it from their founder, Eric Morris. >This means that she cannot be a witness although we find >ourselves impressed by her family loyalty. >I suspect that Russ had to back track but then we all do >especially when faced with, shall we say, economic pressures. >He's a good man at heart... How patronising. >hands and we suspect that the Woods video will die a death >after its fleeting appearance at the forthcoming Birdsall Fest. What you really mean is that you are sore losers and that you are obviously upset that your chance of "fame" has been taken from under your noses but then there's Eric's new claim to some more footage (see later.) Would this case have died a death if you were still investigating it? I think not but now its in the hands of others its clear that you would rather it did die. >as I said in my first "skilfully worded" Press Release, had a >"minor involvement" with us. So all the rest were not skilfully worded:-) >This appears to be a new rule of pigeon-hole Ufology; don't >change your mind based on new evidence and if you do you're >"suspect"... Tim your opinion on every sphere of ufology has changed so many times over the years. Not through research but through what you see as popular ufology and to keep your name in the papers. In a message posted Tuesday 18th July, Tim writes, >>What interested us was when various journalists and TV people >>told us that other UFO "research" groups had shown little or no >>interest in either this or other sightings investigated by >>BUFOSC and Steve Mera's MAPIT group. Was it so hard to predict the outcome of this fiasco; not really. This is an interesting statement as Tim had complained on a number of lists that anyone who takes an interest in what they were up to were acting as the ufological police, investigating the investigators. You can't have it both ways, do you want people to take an interest or not? In the same message Tim continues, >>Russ Callaghan of UFO Magazine (UK) was invited to see the >>footage on Sunday and it was subsequently offered to Graham >>Birdsall but they don't pay fees for footage these Yorkshiremen >>and so our intrepid video analyser returned empty-handed, >>more's the pity. The fact that UFO Magazine (UK) has now got the right to show the footage has spoilt your plans. They go to Russell asking for help with analysis and because he comes up with nothing attack him and his methods. Whatever happened to this great statement from Eric Morris about abductions. Remember Eric has stated in his old magazine "Intelligence" that he has met people who "have" been abducted by aliens. Now he claims he never said this but I will quote from his own writings if need be. Having claimed he does not now believe in abductions but still used regression, he then said he would put a statement out on all his findings... four years on we are still waiting. You just can't hope people will go away and forget about it. What is Eric's stance on abductions. >Neither does it mean that aliens are 'abducting' people. Opppss, you need to make sure your team are all claiming the same thing. >No doubt Rob Rickard will allow Andy Roberts and co >full access, without right to reply, But Tim, you have a right to reply right here but choose Updates to make grand statements but refuse to answer direct questions. Looking back through Updates archives just shows how many questions Tim and friends avoid. Very rarely do we get an answer to a direct question, instead he changes the subject, avoids the issues and claims the world is attacking him. As I have said many times, why is it we never hear from BUFOSC. Eric Morris was its founder but yet we hear only from Tim who never signs his statements on behalf of LUFOS or the newly renamed NUFORL, whatever happened to them. Listers have still not had a reply to Terry Rhodes questions posted to this list on 13th August. Terry quotes Eric Morris from CompuServe's UFO Forum. >>I found an interesting message on compuserve's UFO >>Forum from Eric Morris which was entitled 'Best Ever UFO >>Footage'. >>Eric Says.... "We will carry on investigating cases, infact >>BUFOSC have better footage than this Cheshire case only >>we are not making it public as yet." Once again a wall of silence from the BUFOSC camp. Care to comment on this claim. Its getting like the Sky TV programmes, "The Best Ever Footage part 2".....until part 3 comes along. Interestingly enough on Sunday 3rd May 1998 Tim posted the following to Updates >>On a final note - do we really need a national group? What does BUFOSC and NUFORL stand for. "British" and "National" as part of their headers, need I say more. Cheers Rory Lushman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:09:16 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:49:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:10:13 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Chris actually put an ad in UFO magazine some time ago, >informing their readers what he had been filming in London. Is this the same Chris who whilst we were out filming with a crew from London Weekend Television last year pointed to the sky and told the TV crew to film a UFO passing overhead. I was at this rather embarrassing episode and he pointed out this object as a real UFO. I could see it was a plane as could the location driver who I was talking to at the time. He was convinced it was a UFO in full sight of hundreds of people. No one else was blinking an eye lid as they were not so obviously fooled. The film crew got nothing on tape but it was quite clear that they knew it was a plane also. I don't know much about Chris but if this is the kind of thing he wants us to fall for then I can't say I'm too impressed. Cheers Rory Lushman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:24:05 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:54:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Serge Salvaille wrote: <snip> >Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Please state in the >literature a case of PTSD based on fantasy. <snip> B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley, 'Stolen Valor: How The Vietnam Generation Was Robbed Of Its Heros And Its Hiistory'. Dallas, TX: Verity Press, Inc., 1998: 254-295 Landy Sparr, M.D., and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., 'Factitious Posttraumatic Stess Disorder', American Journal Of Psychiatry, 1990, 140:8, August 1983, 1016-1019 L. Kofoed and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., Letter, 'Continued Appearance of Factitious Posttraumatic Stress Disorder', American Journal Of Psychiatry, 1990, 147: 811-812 J. DeVance Hamilton, M.D., 'Pseudo-Posttraumatic Stress Disorder', Military Medicine, 150, July, 1984: 353-356.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:36:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:57:16 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Salvaille >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:59:10 -0400 >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:30:31 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hello John, and Jim also BTW, and List, <snip> >We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. I 'think' MUFON >is conducting an internal investigation into the whole matter so >I am waiting along with everbody else to see what they find out. >The probelm all along has been that no one knows 'how many' of >the files were properly sanitized or not. Until that is >established (by someone other than Carpenter) it remains an open >and _valid_ question. I am glad this sets the record straight. Glad also we live in a justice system where you are innocent until proven guilty. I respect the fact that you blew the whistle on this one. Good thing also that we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. <snip> >Serge all I and a few others were asking for all along was that >he (John Carpenter) notify his own clients that; a. he sold >their files, and b. that he provide them with a brief written >and signed statement that he in fact properly sanitized _all_ of >their files for _any_ personally identifying information. <snip> Is there a necessity to notify the clients if the files where properly redacted? I am not sure. And that brings us back to the first point: were the files redacted or not? Let's hope we find the answer soon. >>This is what Jim Mortellaro said. ><LOL> Well, all I stated was my understanding of what Mortellaro said. Regarding his post, I believe I got the picture. Please don't shoot the messenger <snip> >>If I understand the man correctly (Jim Mortellaro), he simply >>stated that: >I give you much credit for "understanding" any portion of what >he says! And,... he rarely if ever states anything "simply." ><LOL> <snip> Mortellaro is often hard to follow as he has chosen, IMO, to play the part of the King's fool. The confusion should not be confused with confusion. Sometimes, he drops the mask and becomes more explicit. He then goes from hard to follow to hard to swallow. Gripple then comes in handy. <snip> >*Titles bestowed on me by Mr. Mortellaro in 'off list' postings >to others - who then thoughtfully shared his 'behind my back' >mutterings with me. Yep, the docca is a real man of character >all right. He's proven that time and again. <snip> I regard any off-list communications with other people as what they are: _personal_. I usually re-read them a couple of times for memory, answer them, then delete the original message. What is said in confidence must remain in confidence. Respect 101. On the other hand, to know who's a stool pigeon and who ain't may be priceless information. Be grateful for the knowledge. Hope they're not friends. You just lost some. If you still think they are, you need no enemies. All that being said, I don't know you personally; I don't know Jim personally either. Bet you a buck that if we all go take a beer some day we'll have a big laugh about all of this and more. My best, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 CPR-Canada News: Saskatchewan Large Circle From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:39:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:00:25 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Saskatchewan Large Circle CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 26, 2000 _____________________________ Large 'Dumbell' Crop Circle Formation In Saskatchewan Preliminary Report - August 26, 2000 Moosomin, Saskatchewan August 20, 2000 Report received yesterday of a new crop formation near Moosomin, Saskatchewan. Initially discovered by a crop duster pilot on August 20. Fomation is a large classic 'dumbell' formation, one large circle and one smaller circle connected by a straight pathway, in wheat. Larger circle is approximately 120' diametre, the smaller 60'. Pathway is about 40' long and 5' wide. Total length is approximately 220'. Crop in pathway is flattened in opposite directions, running from each circle, towards centre of the pathway. Formation will be sampled today by Dennis Eklund from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, for The BLT Research Team (Dr. W. C. Levengood). Ground report, photos to follow. Farmer's name and specific location being kept confidential as word of the formation has already made the local media, with around 200 visitors to the site and the farmer does not want further publicity, but is open to a ground investigation by researchers. This is the fifth formation reported for 2000. If you hear of or find any new crop formations, please do let us know: Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca I am also running an ad in The Western Producer, Canada's primary farming and agricultural newspaper, with hotline / contact info for CPR-Canada. WP has run some excellent articles on us and the phenomenon in general the past couple years now, helping to make farmers and the public more aware of what is happening. The ad will run through September, (typically) the month when we get the most reports when farmers are harvesting. Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:05:56 EDT Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:03:24 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:02:58 -0400 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <mailto:updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>Gentlemen and EBK, >>NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the >>underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it >>imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally >>destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It >>cannot be started again. >>FYI >>Jim Mortellaro, Inspector, NY State Police Auxiliary >Jim- >Do you have a specific name for this device, so that one could >look at the specifications. A magnetic pulse will normally >disrupt the flow of electrons, which would cause a system to >crash. But the physical destruction of a chip would require >either a voltage surge generated by the pulse, or damage caused >by heat. I shall respond to your request after seeking the information you require. However I shall do that offlist, if you guys do not mind. I am not certain I can solicit the name of the manufacturer, I shall try to obtain it. The principal is simple enough. The device is a rolling robot, able to travel rather rapidly along and behind the subject's vehicle after launch. It rides behind, catches up and travels under the vehicle. A small antennae like device then connects with the metal and zaps the perp's ignition system and chips. >Scaling this up just a bit, what would prevent one from >connecting a larger version of this device to the metal ductwork >in a building and then sending out a pulse to destroy the >buiness computers of a competitior (or the Government computers >of the enemy). What makes you think this has not been done already? There are now devices in the repertoire of our goobermint as well as the military and certain law enforcement agencies, which are capable of doing just that. However they'll never admit it to the citizens. The time is nigh for a showdown. But I think we are all being buttered and fattened up so that when and if the time comes for that showdown, we'll be unwilling to lose the lush life. >There's also the issue of EM effects and their possible use in >psychological warfare. This is discussed briefly in the Air >Force 2025 Report. And so it goes, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Frightening Technology - Salvaille From: Serges Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 14:34:40 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:05:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Frightening Technology - Salvaille >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 19:56:24 -0400 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> >Subject: Re: Frightening Technology >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Frightening Technology >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:18:49 -0400 Hello Ron and List, <snip> >I guess you didn't see the post I made on 8-7-00 titled: >"Now you can't believe what you _don't_ see!" <snip> I missed this one Ron. Sorry about that. I have edited your post to fit my needs... <snip> >The images are cooked! >Calvin Avery is a television specialist who used to work in the >control room in Houston that processed the incoming pictures, >and he agreed they were practically instantaneous. But, he >revealed to space.com, the images are manipulated by specialists >there. >"Flight crews used to review our recorded video and told us the >scenes were not as vivid as seen in space," Avery told >space.com. "So in the control room we'd push up the blue, push >up the red to greater levels than in the downlink." <snip> No big deal there. On-the-fly image adjustment has been common practice for years. <snip> >Excerpt from the July/August issue of "MIT Tech", pg. 61 >"In the fraction of a second between video frames, any person or >object moving in the foreground can be edited out, and objects >that aren't there can be edited in and made to look real. >'Pixel plasticity,' Livingston calls it. The implication for >those at the satellite imagery conference was sobering: pictures >from orbit may not necessarily be what the satellite's >electronic camera actually recorded." >I didn't include the following with the post, but I find it an >interesting reread when you keep the above in mind. >The NASA people are adamant that they don't have their fingers >on any "censor buttons"... _but_ (to get all Hoagland-like for a >minute) they _don't_ say that they don't have any software that >might be modifying the pictures. But, look at what they do in >fact say: the images _are_ filtered through some image >processing software. Hmmmm. <snip> This explains Tiger Woods! ;) Am I imagining things or as there always been a 5 minute transmission delay (during the NASA missions) between the reception of the images by NASA and the actual broadcast of the images? Where will the technology be in 50 years? In 100 years? We are not far from projecting images within the human brain and finally editing reality. One has to wonder what a hypothetical advanced alien civilization can do in similar domains... fake reality... simulate an abduction... test the mind with role-playing... explore the human persona. <Gasp!> Another grab at the Gripple bottle. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 LUFOS Lecture - London, England From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:51:27 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:08:19 -0400 Subject: LUFOS Lecture - London, England London UFO Studies Presents UFOs Over London An illustrated lecture by Christopher Martin plus extra-special guest speaker Meeting to be held at: The Unity Hall Bramley Close Walthamstow. E17 on: Friday 8th September Doors Open 7-30Pm Admission: �4 On the door Enquiries to Roy Lake at LUFOS: 0208 270 9919 Thanks, John Hayes ufoinfo@ukgateway.net webmaster@ufoinfo.com UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives for UFO Roundup, UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:29:36 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 20:46:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - Sandow >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:25:10 -0700 >Hmmm. "An interesting toy that you may find fun." And on the >basis of that, we're told that Corso has now been proved correct >beyond any shadow of doubt. >Ed, maybe you're putting too much weight on what this very >preliminary analysis tells you. Greg, I agree that Voice Stress Analysis is only a tool, and should be combined it with other investigatorial techniques. But once used, the results VSA generate should be given serious examination. I have long argued that there has never been any reason to consider Col. Corso a liar. But others on this list have turned a few seemingly innocent mistakes into bald faced lies and have insisted that we should disregard all else the Col. Corso has written about his mind blowing experiences. Col. Corso had very little hard evidence to document his memories. He relied on his reputation and good name. Since that reputation has been smeared across the web by folks who wish to discredit Col. Corso's version of events, many readers no longer feel that he's believable. While I knew that VSA might be considered a toy, I also knew it could be a useful tool in the right person's hands. I've have previous experience with Mike's work, and know we can trust his judgment that Col. Corso believed he was telling the truth about his experiences: he saw an alien in gel; he transferred alien technology from the crashed Roswell craft to US corporations; he had knowledge of a secret working group that controlled the dissemination of UFO information. We should seriously reconsider what Col. Corso has written. "The Day After Roswell" is an important book , by an insider who knew what he was talking about, and his many import reminiscences deserve more discussion than they've gotten so 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 26 UK Ch. 5 Probes Alien Enigma This Weekend From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:37:27 +0200 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 20:49:35 -0400 Subject: UK Ch. 5 Probes Alien Enigma This Weekend Source: The (London) Times, August 26, 2000. Stig *** Computer Games and Pastimes BY TIM WAPSHOTT UFO - or fun with frisbees? ** THIS weekend via its website, Channel 5 is probing the mysterious world of UFOs and publishing a series of short films, viewed online. As part of the station's Sci-Fi Weekend theme, the "Alien Diaries" films will focus on seven people who claim to have witnessed extraterrestrial life. Among those interviewed is Tony Dodd, a retired police officer who came "face to face with a huge disc-shaped object" while pounding the beat in 1978. Kerry Blower, with her husband, apparently had a not so brief encounter of the third kind in Abergavenny. Each of the Alien Diaries films will last about two minutes, so most PCs should be able to run them. At the site (www.channel5.co.uk/scifi) you can also put your UFO knowledge to the test in the Alien Abduction Quiz. To brush up your knowledge, you can read a history of alien sightings and crop circles - and search for answers at the Alien Abduction Helpdesk. For a little further reading, you might want to check out Alien UK http://www.cwd.co.uk/alien-uk/ This is a comprehensive site with a random listing of alien sightings on these shores. It also has a fascinating archive of British Government records relating to aliens and "UFO contact" over the past 55 years. If you are interested in crop circles, then head to The Crop Circular http://www.lovely.clara.net/homepg.html which looks at crop circles from the past two decades and has several photographs. If you want to catch the funny Alien Song video, featured in this column several months ago, then go to Amused.Com http://amused.com/alien.html ** Copyright 2000 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Ufology Loses A Treasure From: Jeff Rense <jr@rense.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:30:14 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:44:47 -0400 Subject: Ufology Loses A Treasure Errol, With sadness and regret, I am passing along the news that extraordinary South African UFO researcher Cynthia Hind has passed on after a lengthy illness. UFO*BC President Graham Conway related the surprising news to me last night, Friday. Few knew Cynthia was not well. I had the great honor of having her as a guest on my April 25th program... which can be heard in my program Archives. It was her final major interview and she was, as always, totally marvelous. She presented herself and her remarkable African UFO casebook material with her usual boundless dignity, grace and rock-solid intellect. In this time of tawdry, cheap hucksters, ego-tripping plagiarists, phonies, and hustlers who populate much of Ufology, Cynthia Hind set the highest standards of professional acumen...and common sense... in her reporting and investigations. She will be missed and is simply not replaceable.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Cynthia Hind From: Bill Oliver <oliver2849@home.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:56:35 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:44:31 -0400 Subject: Cynthia Hind It is with great sadness that UFO*BC has learned that Cynthia Hind passed away in Harare, Zimbabwe after losing her struggle with cancer. The UFO world has lost a great woman and without doubt one of the great researchers. Cynthia was author of 'UFOs Over Africa', editor of UFO AFRINEWS African Continent Director for MUFON. We pass our regrets to her family and hope all on the List will do the same. Bill Oliver 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:45:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:48:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:24:05 EDT >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Please state in the >>literature a case of PTSD based on fantasy. ><snip> >B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley, 'Stolen Valor: >How The Vietnam Generation Was Robbed Of >Its Heros And Its Hiistory'. Dallas, TX: Verity >Press, Inc., 1998: 254-295 >Landy Sparr, M.D., and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., >'Factitious Posttraumatic Stess Disorder', American >Journal Of Psychiatry, 1990, 140:8, August 1983, >1016-1019 >L. Kofoed and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., Letter, >'Continued Appearance of Factitious Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', American Journal Of Psychiatry, >1990, 147: 811-812 >J. DeVance Hamilton, M.D., 'Pseudo-Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', Military Medicine, 150, July, >1984: 353-356. <snip> Dear Kevin, (See, not that hard to just say hello). When you defended your doctoral thesis, did you just throw the references at the panel? Guess not as, correct me if I am wrong (please state in the literature a case to justify your attitude), I guess references are used to _support_ a point, because they are used as _references_ (is my English OK?). ... Now, the choice is yours: 1. We start a ping pong game that will get us nowhere. You know: mine's bigger than yours: a club with 6 inch nails, an ego, or academic credentials without manners. Take your pick, it will always be some kind of compensation caused by no self- depreciation. 2. We have an open discussion about the value of PTSD as an indication of the reality of the abduction experience. We are looking for some kind of truth here aren't we? If you have something else to defend it's your problem. If you want to play games, the joke (and the shame) is on you. What will it be? Regards, Serge Salvaille (See, not that hard to just say goodbye).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:35:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:52:05 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:18:21 EDT >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:59:15 -0400 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>I think those are pretty big clues that they are >>>not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. >I agree with Mark Cashman's comments here. The altered states of >consciousness (or "Oz Effect" as Jenny Randles has called it) >sometimes described by UFO witnesses sounds very much like >symptoms of psychological shock brought on by highly fearful or >stressful situations, rather than something necessarily inherent >to the presence of a UFO. >These dissociative states brought on suddenly by extremely >stressful situations are very common and long documented in the >medical literature. Everybody may be prone to them. They are >probably a very ancient psychological defense mechanism to help >us cope with dangerous situations. As is Mark, I would be much >more inclined to first attribute altered consciousness in UFO >witnesses to innate psychological and physiological defense >mechanisms than to some unknown interaction between the >witnesses and the UFOs. Hi, With respect, I don't think we are disagreeing very much here. I am not attributing the Oz Factor state to some alien mind probe. In fact, as I note above, they are collectively and repeatedly offering clues to an 'altered state of consciousness' - during which some of the stranger aspects of the alleged close encounter occur (or seem to occur). It is obvious that they are not caused by some other worldly attack because they cross boundaries and get reported from a wide range of phenomena, as I noted. This has to infer that they are - exactly as you say - psychological and physiological sensations occurring within the body that are precipitated by the UFO experience / or many other experiences too. In fact this is the very point that I was making - and have made often - when writing about the Oz Factor across the years. They delineate an ASC and emphasise the role this plays in the subsequent encounter. They are warning signs that we should not treat as literal physical reality what many Ufologists often do treat as such. Thats's's why I always look out for the Oz Factor at work. It serves as a sign on the door saying beware. Many of the symptoms clearly do result from dissociation and hormonal changes within the body resulting from the phenomenon being experienced. And - as I noted - I have NDE cases where the same effect happened despite the witness never being in physical danger. If you can have a vision of heaven when you fall off a cliff onto soft snow and get up unscathed and walk away then the NDE phenomenon is hard to square with a literal trip to heaven as it is often interpreted as being. Because here only fear of imminent death was occurring. This lesson takes us into the realms of alien contact where the Oz Factor has to be seen as a prelude to the ASC in which the experience occurs. But, of course, that same ASC could occur simply from the fear of an alien contact - or the belief that one is happening. So many not even require a real UFO encounter. Just a perceived one. In Rendlesham, as with most cases of the Oz Factor, it is likely that some of the feelings described by the witnesses do indeed occur because of these psychological and physiological sensations within the body. The one caveat we have to apply here is that there are countless cases where the presence of genuine EM energy fields are seemingly related in connection with UFOs. They cause actual physical effects - from car stops to tingling skins. Some of these were present in the Rendlesham case. Note the effects on the light alls. The radio reception static reported. And the primary witnesses do not simply report psychological states such as dissociation. They very specifically report a curtain of electrostatic charge that caused their skins to tingle and hair to stand on end. This implies more than stress at work to me. We also know that such fields can produce psychological and physiological symptoms (eg thanks to Michael Persinger). So we do have to take note of situations where what appear to be EM fields are being described because they can also induce symptoms very much like the Oz Factor. My feeling is that both stress/psychological pressures and (less often) real EM fields that trigger physiological reactions do happen. Its not yet clear which of these effects are purely psychological and which are physiological (or indeed which may be both - such as psychological stress inducing hormonal changes to provoke physiological sensations). It is work we maybe ought to do. But its not really relevant to the basic conclusion that the Oz Factor reveals. That these cases happen during an ASC. Thats's the most vital thing we need to build upon. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:43:03 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:57:26 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:32:12 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >This is a classic mirage event with color change due to the >atmosphere. But note that in this case the water was a nearly >horizontal surface probably warmer than the air above so there >was a considerable temperature gradient. The color change is a >result of te star light passing through several _hundred_ miles >of atmosphere (sunlight is redenned by passage through perhaps >200 miles of atmosphere of varying density.) thus, although >there may have been a mist on the lake, most of the color change >had already taken place as the light rays from the star traveled >through the atmosphere before reaching the mist. Hi, Thanks for your expert comments on the optics involved here, Bruce. Its very useful to know all of this and what may or may not be feasible. What I meant to say about the painting is that this - based as it is (quite closely) on a witness sketch since the artist had this to go on - gives a lighthouse beam like impression seen head on. And you can see that in it once you think around the idea of a lighthouse. But you probably would never consider a lighthouse if that suggestion had not been raised. It is, absolutely, just a subjective impression. No argument about that. I wasnt seeking to imply otherwise. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:07:11 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 00:59:04 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:13:40 -0500 >What reckless prediction? As usual, I have no idea what you're >talking about. I simply said that at some point, most likely in >the coming century after the current generation of >UFO-neglecting scientists is gone, a future generation will >probably take up the question. There's an old saying in science, >apparently unfamiliar to you, that I was alluding to, namely: >"Science progresses one death at a time." I also quoted >psychologist Stuart Appelle, whose view of the potential of >ufology to enter mainstream science in the future is the same as >mine. If that's "reckless," then so be it. If we've learned >nothing else, Andy, it's that you use words (e.g., "radical >misperception," "solved") differently from the rest of us. The only way in which "ufology" can even attempt enter mainstream science is in the same semi-detached way that "psychical research" has done: as a hundred-year-long succession of scholarly-looking papers, which are batted backwards and forwards in a sort of tennis match of pedantry, without ever actually proving anything. How can you have a science which is concerned with complete unknowns? It _is_ possible to examine scientifically the proposition that UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft. If that's what you mean, Jerry, please say so rather more clearly than you have up to now. I've seen no evidence to convince me so far, but at least it's a proposition which can be put into scientific terms, and is amenable to some extent to scientific study (so long as people don't start invoking magical aliens that can do whatever they want in defiance of known physical principles). Is this what you mean, Jerry, or are we going to be treated to another of your virtuoso fence-sitting displays, where you announce that UFOs are not misperceptions, not alien spacecraft, not atmospheric phenomena, not psychosocial manifestations, they're just, well, unidentified flying objects. True enough, but hardly the basis for scientific progress. Or do we just get the vague "objectively existing" blather, without any hint of what the existing object might actually be: "it looks like a spacecraft, it walks like a spacecraft, but hey, show me where I said it _was_ a spacecraft!" Quite a few "UFO neglecting" scientists have died off in the last fifty- odd years, and lots of new ones come along. But I don't think many of them are more "UFO friendly" than the last lot. How long, Jerry, how long? -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:30:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:00:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC - Rimmer >From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Latest Comments From BUFOSC >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:09:05 +0100 >>From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:51:49 EDT >>Subject: Latest Comments From BUFOSC >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >>Nevertheless, video analysis expert Russ Callaghan, who, by all >>accounts, learned his trade driving the buses in Bradford, has >>"cleaned the images up" and shed absolutely no light on the >>mystery at all... >So by that analogy being a bus driver in a previous life means >you are not capable of moving onwards or upwards. Sorry but all >those researchers on this list with mundane jobs, please be >advised you are not qualified to be in ufology. How many people >would that leave on this List..... <snip> I'd have though Tim Matthews was the last person to want to start turning the spotlight on the previous careers of ufologists. -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Injury/Death/Healing Database From: Geoff Dittman <gdittman@autobahn.mb.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:00:12 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:02:38 -0400 Subject: Injury/Death/Healing Database Hi UpDates List: For several years now I have been collecting all accounts I could find involving injury, death, or the healing of the witness to a UFO. To date I have found approximately 330 such cases. The preliminary findings of my study can be found at: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/2653/sixthkind.html Right now, the raw data is not available on-line. I will however in the near future post both the raw data in table format as well as a brief summary for each case. I would appreciate any comments or suggestions you might have on my report and my site. Thanks, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:06:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:08:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:24:05 EDT >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >>Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Please state in the >>literature a case of PTSD based on fantasy. ><snip> >B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley, 'Stolen Valor: >How The Vietnam Generation Was Robbed Of >Its Heros And Its Hiistory'. Dallas, TX: Verity >Press, Inc., 1998: 254-295 >Landy Sparr, M.D., and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., >'Factitious Posttraumatic Stess Disorder', American >Journal Of Psychiatry, 1990, 140:8, August 1983, >1016-1019 >L. Kofoed and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., Letter, >'Continued Appearance of Factitious Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', American Journal Of Psychiatry, >1990, 147: 811-812 >J. DeVance Hamilton, M.D., 'Pseudo-Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', Military Medicine, 150, July, >1984: 353-356. Dear Kevin, I thought the following would be food for the soul. You seem to have misunderstood my statement and consequently got your response in the wrong ball park. I might even add that you got the wrong sport. I did a little research on your references. I stopped short at DeVance Hamilton. Give me a break, you're the expert here. Me, I'm just me. Your references falsely imply that it is possible for an individual experiencing Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD) to have this syndrome based on fantasy. This is not quite the case. This is explicated in _your_ references properly exposed in the bottom of my post. In a nutshell: _your_ references, _your_ authors, relate to cases where people _fake_ PTSD. It is _not_ PTSD based on fantasy. I hope "references by proclamation" does not become a nasty hobby. All is not lost: http://www.smith-lawfirm.com/Sutherland_article.html Start quote: [...] For example, almost all the symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BPD) (DSM-IV �301.83) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (DSM-IV �309.81) are the same with the exception of the predicating event. For BPD, the predicating event is an underlying personality disorder beginning in early adulthood; for PTSD, the predicating event is the exposure to a traumatic event. Thus, the BPD diagnosis assumes that the witness has had a personality disorder since early adulthood (and therefore damages arguably are mitigated as well), and the PTSD diagnosis assumes that the trauma actually occurred. Assuming that the plaintiff does not have a personality disorder, for example, the plaintiff's symptoms are consistent with the alternate diagnosis of PTSD. Emphasize that the expert did not examine the plaintiff years ago in young adulthood and was not present at the traumatic event. [...] End Quote Which brings us to the conclusion: an alleged abductee presenting PTSD symptoms should be evaluated for BPD, i.e. underlying personality disorder beginning in early adulthood. And if we got PTSD, we got game: something, an EVENT, took place. Is your stomach starting to stir a bit? I understand this may not suit your belief system. Do you think it suits mine? What can I say, life sucks eh? Regards, Serge Salvaille Explicated Randel References ---------------------------------------------------------------- >B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley, 'Stolen Valor: >How The Vietnam Generation Was Robbed Of >Its Heros And Its Hiistory'. Dallas, TX: Verity >Press, Inc., 1998: 254-295 http://www.ptsdmanual.com/abc.htm ABC 20/20 Program on the PTSD Disability Sham!, 24 November 1999 by Jay Schadler Start quote: We're going to begin tonight with an unsettling question: are thousands of veterans ripping off the country by collecting undeserved benefits? Now, you've heard of post-traumatic stress disorder. It can be a crippling illness whose sufferers relive the horrible trauma of war. But it also has become a coveted diagnosis of disability that can mean a lot of money to a veteran. [...] And tonight, a 20/20 INVESTIGATION reveals that in a shocking number of cases, the war stories some veterans tell to get government benefits appear to be greatly exaggerated or even faked. [...] B. G. Burkett should know. He is a Vietnam vet and the author of the book, "Stolen Valor." He has spent ten years comparing veterans' actual service records with their war stories. [...] SAWYER: It's important to say here that no one doubts that PTSD is a serious psychological condition affecting thousands of veterans. But critics say the Veterans Administration is failing to distinguish between the genuine claims and the false ones. In a moment, a veteran tries to use PTSD as an excuse for killing. Will it work? Stay with us. End quote ---------------------------------------------------------------- >Landy Sparr, M.D., and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., >'Factitious Posttraumatic Stess Disorder', American >Journal Of Psychiatry, 1990, 140:8, August 1983, >1016-1019 >L. Kofoed and Loren D. Pankratz, Ph.D., Letter, >'Continued Appearance of Factitious Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', American Journal Of Psychiatry, >1990, 147: 811-812 http://www.priory.com/psych/factitious.htm Factitious Disorder with Psychological Signs and Symptoms Andrei Szoke & Didier Boillet Start quote: [...] The first probable cases of factitious disorder were reported in 1843 by Gavin (cited in Bhugra 1988). However, we could consider that Asher's article (Asher 1951), in which he introduced the term of Munchausen syndrome, is the origin of the ongoing medical interest in this specific pathology. It entered the DSM classification for the first time as factitious disorder in 1980 (Hiler and Spitzer 1978, American Psychiatric Association 1980). [...] Thus this condition is underdiagnosed (Pope et al 1982) and often cases of factitious PTSD and factitious bereavement are reported (Sparr and Pankratz 1983, Snowdon et al 1978, Chaine et al 1994, Meagher and Bell 1998). In these conditions the diagnosis relies more on detection of feigned causes (e. g. traumatic events or death of a parent) than on recognition of factitious symptoms. [...] Most important, ten years ago he told a nurse he was not mentally ill, but he "knew what one must say for being admitted to a hospital". Our diagnosis was factitious disorder with predominantly psychological signs and symptoms, although factitious disorder with both psychological and physical signs and symptoms could be considered. [...] End quote ---------------------------------------------------------------- >J. DeVance Hamilton, M.D., 'Pseudo-Posttraumatic >Stress Disorder', Military Medicine, 150, July, >1984: 353-356.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:39:20 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:36:13 -0400 Subject: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary Dear Listless-Listers, Energetic Maligners and EBK, Whilst there are many others who contribute to this wonderful List, I shall leave them out. Mainly because they are not the butt of this rant. Serge was right about me. I play the fool. I make light of many a situation by virtue of my right as king of Gripple and other silly associations. For example, my stalled wart nemesis is also king. King of the Abductees. Lookit what happened to the last Guy what made a similar claim. But I make a particularly stupid mistake. And it's an ongoing one. I go along fat dumb and happy not realizing that most of you have short memories. It seems like just yesterday when Errol posted my note to him about the List sometimes needing a little levity, that it got too damned serious around these here parts and for too long a period. And that some people (this was not in my post but it was implied) sometimes, people just get carried away with their pair or silly dimes and make damned fools of themselves in the attempt to make damned fools out of others. Then, the King of Gripple arises from the dark places in the mind of Morty and rears his ugly and inebriated head and prepares to expose the guilty parties and make loads of fun at them. Yes, I have been a fool. But not a gool. Never. But yet again, Serge got it dead nuts on the money. I act the funny man but inside, and when it counts, out comes the real me. The one who supports justice. It's why I resigned from IF. I thought justice was not being served. It was. I made a mistake. I support fair play as well. Anyone who can say with a straight face and mean it, that Carpenter is a man who has been treated fairly in this mess, is a bigger fool than I could ever be. And I can be one hell of a fool and play the part well. Anyone who can stand tall and say that Carpenter is guilty and say it _now_, is a damned fool. Maybe he is, but there is no proof except that which Velez mentioned in the last post I read from him. I shall repeat it here because it really exposes the difference between my logic and the logic of some others in this matter. Referring to whether the files were redacted or not, Velez wrote >We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. In another breath he says that he has only Elizabeth Carpenter's word on the fact that _all_ the files were not redacted. Excuse me but, _Duh!_ Hey, wasn't my words. Now, given the situation in hand and basing it on that evidence only, would you proceed to hang Carpenter or wait for a fair hearing? And have you all noticed that ANYONE or any org which is in a position to either investigate or refute what Carpenter said, is anathema? Has anyone said anything about MUFON, NIDS, or Bigelow which may be construed as wearing a white hat? I find that fascinating. "Agree with me or you are instantly wrong - and it's personal too." As for another post regarding MUFON, I posted John Carpenter's comments regarding the events surrounding his troubles right here for all of you to read, and in which he proclaimed his innocence and indeed, told us who the guilty party was - his former main squeeze. OK, so now we have Carpenter's version and Elizabeth's (and therefore all of John Velez' and others' version - ipso facto!) also posted for all to see. Not to bash Elizabeth, but as for reputation, who has more Mott's this week? Hands? As for his comments about my running interference, horse crap. In fairness to me, I merely stated my objection to too many people harassing Carpenter without due process, without all the information in, without even giving the poor bastard a shot at explaining himself. And since the amount of noise generated by his detractors was so loud and demonstrated _no_ patience with anyone who said that he _may_ be innocent, who the hell could blame him for not entering into a pissing contest? Hands? Guilty or not, time will tell. I suspect from what I've looked at, that he is innocent. However I do not know for sure. I have always tried to point only the this one fact... John Carpenter should not be treated as the guilty party as it has not been proved as yet. I get carried away sometimes, at the goading of Velez's nonsense, but I shall try to understand where he is coming from... most likely a place which I perceive is dark in which there is little truth but his own truth. I commend him for exposing a possible problem. Then, it got too damned far along. All of a sudden, Carpenter was guilty as sin itself. But is he? I for one, don't know. And I think that all of us should expunge anyone who claims otherwise without proof. Anything and everything I've read here is purely conjecture. And you just don't hang people on conjecture. Even worse, there appear to be one or more people on this list who cannot take it whenever anyone is counter to their personal belief system. Velez is one such. He takes it personal. Too bad. Under other less stressful situations he has a good mind. Maybe it's the stress. One thing is clear or should be damned well made CLEAR. There are many people who made negative comments about the issue of Carpenter. Why does Velez think they are all directed at him? Some comments I've made are indeed directed at him. But unless you are John Velez, you wouldn't (better, "shouldn't") think anything was directed at him. I call that paranoia. Serge asked a good question which I perceive is at the bottom of this conundrum, and it is a conundrum. He asked if it were proper for Carpenter to notify the people whose files were sent to NIDS and answered with (I believe) "I'm not sure." I am sure. No one has told me any good reason for these people to be notified as yet. Why? Because it is not known if their case histories were compromised. Now somebody give me a really good reason to refute this process verbal. Please. Consider that if some of you are wrong and the case histories were protected from disclosure, that these people are being led to believe that they were not so protected. If you are correct, then notifying them is important so that they may make the appropriate decisions relative to justice being served. But not now. Too much damage will have been done to the abductees whose files were sold if you guys are wrong! Unnastan? But that is not the case. There is no proof other than the word of the accused Vs the word of the accused' former wife. And truth be told, I am hard to take. Because I wish to make clear that those who work hard at the destruction of a man and his ability to earn a living, those who would bring him down for their own purposes, are infinitely more culpable than they claim Carpenter is. You people who insist on roasting Carpenter are premature in doing so. And if you are wrong, you will look like the royal ass to all of us. If you are right, you will still never be vindicated. Because you broke the one law both written and unwritten, which we must all live by. Innocent until proven guilty. That makes all of you who continue this bashing, wrong. That kind listers, is my two cents. In factoid, let it be known that of all the posts I wrote, only one was similar to John's concerning me. And that one, Thank God and Errol Bruce-Knapp, was not posted. It went directly to Velez where it was marked, "Take this off list, guys..." or something similar. Correct me if I am mistookan Errol. And thank you. Ever since I began this quest of my own, you and Rense have been extremely kind, generous and helpful. Specially Rense. Thank you publically. As for the posts on this subject, Velez alone wrote about 60. I have not had the opportunity to count the rest. But there were more than several hundred I believe. In not one did anyone except me state that since the evidence is not in, Carpenter may _not_ be guilty. I personally find that quite acceptable and in fact, it points to the fact that such a voice is needed. And that voice need not be funny. James S. Mortellaro, Ph.D.'s too numerous to mention And Gripple Meister of the best darned fresh wine this side of the streets of Canal.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-26-00 From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:27:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:43:21 -0400 Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 8-26-00 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Week Ahead 8-27-00 thru 9-2-00 Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories From rense.com Jeff Rense E-News is distributed exclusively by Free Subscription. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * READER'S CORNER * Editors note: It is not usually our policy to reprint rebuttals or comments on particular articles. This one, however, deserved to be shared. In response to last week's Guest Corner: "EM/RF Weather Control and Western Fires" by John Quinn/NewsHawk(r) Inc., Wes Gordon wrote: John Quinn, I have read your letter. You did fine until you went to the global warming and using range fires for resettlement. Let me try to explain things the way as I see them for what ever that is worth. >Other sources have suggested to News Hawk that, contrary to a >supposition we noted in an earlier article on this ever-more- >crucial subject, one of the probable hidden agendas behind >burning up vast tracts of forest lands is, in fact, to make >these regions EASIER to develop for mass human habitation in the >future. Are you familiar with the UN program under UNESCO called Man and Biosphere (MAB)? I am as I am under the gun of this program in Northern Arkansas. I am in a designated "CORE AREA". It is a "resettlement" program all right. After they take your land in the "Core areas" (rural) then they ship you to the "sustainable cities". You may say that "THEY" can't do that, well ask Wayne Hoge in his "disagreement" with the National Park patrol in Utah That threw him off his land, seized his cattle and threw him in jail for 3 months with out any trial, notice and habeus corpus. In Ark. They come in as a married couple or some "business" person and start buying property. At first it is just environmental critical property like the Diamond Cave in Jasper. They permanently closed that cave which was surveyed 20 ago to 27 miles and under 3 states before the surveying team ran out of money Then they buy "everything" at a price you just can't turn down. If you hold out you find that you are lone land owner in a sea of tree huggers. They are the authorities now because they have voted themselves into all offices that matter, city/county councilmen, sheriff, police. Then they take your land under public domain and you may get a fair price, then you may not, after all they are the jury also! The Goreitts and tree huggers are all Maltusians (look that up on a web search) They believe that you are a parasite on the earth "Gaia". They want you DEAD. Period! They have stated on their own documents that they wanted the world population to be reduced by 90% by the year 2000. Well they are little off, but the plan is still on going. Note: This not any of my made up fantasies. This can all be documented on THEIR web sites. Man and Biosphere & Heritage River Project are two big projects. Also the big land grab by the Nation Park Service in the west is all under the direction of the UN; see Nation Geographic. I can't remember the issue but I have seen an original copy on that item. >The supposed reasoning behind this, is that rising sea levels >from the now-irrefutable and steadily-intensifying global >warming will within several years destroy the habitat of a huge >percentage of humanity-by submerging the coastal plains of North >America and the rest of the world, whereupon such large >percentages of the human race now reside. >These western forest lands are at an elevation and inland >location which makes them relatively safe from the rising sea >levels engendered by global warming, and once "cleared" of >forests will be vastly easier to develop for mass human >habitation. 1st Very simple test of the so-call raising water from melting ice theory. Take a "Glass" glass. Fill half way with water. Put a ice cube in the water. Mark the outside of the glass where the water level is. Wait till ice melts. Then mark where the water level is now. ...Guess what? It hasn't moved! Why? Water expands when it freezes. Ever had water pipes burst when the water freezes? Here is why. Ice is 10% lighter by weight and 10% BIGGER by volume that water. That is why it floats. However it is the SAME MASS! When ice melts it will take up no more volume that water. 2nd There is ice in Antarctica that is on land. However the ice pack is so dense that the reason it is on land is that it has pushed the water out from under it and is resting on the bottom. However the amount of ice in volume is very small in relationship to the volume of water in the seas. When it melts the volume of the ice will be very close to the volume of water. 3rd The mean temp in the poles is 40 degrees BELOW zero F. For the ice in the in poles to melt the mean temp of the poles would have to go up to 32 degrees ABOVE zeroF. A 70 degree jump!!!!! It that happened the last thing that humans would be worrying About is rising water levels!! 4th If the temp of the poles went up say..10 degrees the net result would be more snow fall and less water in the rest of the planet. Why? Air relative humidity goes up with a increase in temp. That means that the air can hold more water vapor and the increase in humidity in the poles would be a greater snow fall, NOT LESS! Wes Gordon Editor�s note: In replying to my request to reprint his letter, Wes sent even more excellent information: There is supporting evidence in the local paper on the continuing land grab, The Madison County Record, Huntsville Ark., Aug 17 issue on page 8, there is a long article written by John Sutcliffe of Kingston Ark. "Denial of Access to Public Lands". This a report of the Aug 12 public hearing in Hot Springs Ark. of the Congressional Sub Committee on Forest and Forest Health; Subject matter of the hearing; The Recent Presidential EO authorizing a US Forest Service Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that proposes setting aside 4 million acres for Roadless Management and Requires the US Forest to access the remaining 148 million acres of USFS land for possible inclusion in this program and the impact of this on Arkansas. Northwest/Southwest Arkansas has one of the highest proportional ratios of national land to private land. In fact the Buffalo River basin is the only full river bed in the US that is a national park under the US Forest Service. This has been the target area for the enviromentalist in the last 5 years to include the entire WATERSHED of the Buffalo River into a wilderness area. Their immediate agenda is to turn Newton County into a widerness area with no....REPEAT.... NO HUMAN INTRUSION except for caretakers and scientist. Quoting from the article..."At this hearing Congresswoman Chenoweth-Hage...( son of Wayne Hage of Utah, http://www.ashevilletribune.com/hage1.htm, that is how they met. my note Wes)... challenged Washington insider environmentalist organization's attempt to bypass Congress to dictate national government policy on use of public lands, an authority specifically assigned to Congress under Article 4, sect.3, of the US Const. Congressman Chenoweth said in her opinion, "this state (Arkansas) is now GROUND ZERO in the nationwide power struggle between citizens defending reasonable access to public lands....(Including access to their own private land. If "they" have blocked your access to your land by surrounding it with roadless federal wilderness then they have "taken" your land. See "Hage" [my emphasis]) ....as against those environmental purist who would have all our national forest set aside as wilderness areas with access limited to a privilege few." Jim Couch, Chairmen of the non-governmental Federal Timber Purchasers Committee and current Executive Director of the non- governmental Ozark-St Frances Renewable Resource Council spoke in unqualified support of Chairpersons Chenoweth opening statement. " My Note: In Northwest Arkansas logging is a mom and pop business. In fact I have my own Woodmizer saw mill. If the environmentalist have their way I will have to add getting a federal permit to cut and mill MY own trees to build MY own house to the EPA list of permits I have to get to move gravel out of MY own creek bed to put on MY own drive way! Again quoting from the article..."Many suspect the real authors of This misguided DEIS proposal have an hidden agenda. One consequence of eliminating harvesting of timber from millions of acres of public lands will eliminate many of the remaining small timber operations, leaving the major corporations like Weyhouser with access to their timber, in a virtual monopoly of wood products." ...end of article quote. Weyhouser virtually owns the entire Ouachita Mountain Range in Southwest Arkansas where they have turned virile hardwood forest into sterile pine plantations. Something you have to see to fully understand. See http://www.ashevilletribune.com/forest_plan.htm for US Forest plans. Web page for the UN Man and Biophere http://cons-dev.univ-lyon1.fr/madagascar/MANANARA/mananet/TEXTE/annexes/mab/stry _1.htm Web page for those concerned about the MAB in Arkansas http://www.users.nwark.com/~tbark/mab/newinfo.html Sincerely, Wes Gordon ------------------- Opinions presented in Jeff Rense E-News are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent those of Jeff Rense, Sightings, sightings.com, rense.com or the newsletter editors. Past and present guests: to be showcased in "The Guest Corner", please email mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=Guest_Corner --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- "The early bird catches the worm, but it's the second mouse that gets the cheese!" Sent in by Anthony James ------ Got a favorite quote? Feel free to send it: mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=quote --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- The Fenton Bible The Complete Bible in Modern English, as translated by Ferrar Fenton, is a rare translation and very hard to locate. This reprint is taken from the original plates, an is extraordinarily good quality considering the age of the plates and process of the printing. http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index104.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * TOP STORIES * Just a few of last week's most intriguing! http://rense.com * Daily Spoonful Of Cinnamon May Help Diabetics * 41 Current And Former LAPD Officers Sue Their Own Department * Antiques Dealer To Dig For Loot Buried In 'Past Life' * Dolphins Talk To Each Other In Whistles * Actual Patents Of Mind Control And Behavior Modification Technology * Vietnam May Have Herbal Answer For AIDS * On The Verge Of WWIII - And You Weren't Even Told * West Nile Virus Culprit Found? * Mad Cow And Alzheimer's Proteins Are Similar * China Declares Temporary Peace With Taiwan * Israeli Banks And Institutions Kept Nazi Jewish Victims' Assets * Remote Viewing - What Is It? What Is It Not * Fourth Graders Flunk Simple, Basic Writing Exam In Droves * Mysteries And Contradictions Surround Kursk Disaster * 3 Arrested In First Internet Bank Robbery * Scientists Discover Key To Invisibility * R.I. Pilot's Near Miss With UFO - More Strange Aircraft Stories * Montana Crop Circle Found * 5 Inches Of Snow In August In England! * 50 Tons Of Depleted Uranium Lying Around Britain On Scrap Heaps * Water Flows At North Pole First Time In 50 Million Years * Mycoplasma Infection - From GWI To Chemtrail Illness - Extremely Important * Glowing Meat Baffles SA Scientists * Millennium Madness At The United Nations Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- NEW BOOKS have been posted on the - FREE BOOKS - page at Hidden Mysteries. Click the FreeBooksOnline button on the side panel at: http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/redir/index1.html Webtvers, aoler's - do this one: http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index0.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS * 8-27-00 thru 9-1-00 (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can change due to late breaking stories, etc). SUN 8-27 Patty Doyle: West Nile Virus Update Gus Frederick: Living In Martian Caves? MON 8-28 Jim Marrs: The Great Texas UFO Crash Of 1897 TUE 8-29 Dr. Len Horowitz: WNV And Emerging Diseases WED 8-30 Dr. Robert Wood/Ryan Wood: New Roswell Eyewitness THU 8-31 Dr. Roger Leir: Alien Implants FRI 9-1 Andy Blatt: Remembering Jack Benny Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Learn Remote Viewing Discover the real paranormal!! Developed by the U.S.Military for espionage. Ascertain information with no distance, space or time limitations. See if you've got what it takes to become a "remote viewer". History, articles, examples, resources, training. http://www.rvsystems.inuk.com/enter1.htm --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- * PROGRAM INFORMATION * Program Show Times Live Coast-To-Coast-now broadcast nationally over the Talk Radio Network a total of over 200 hours a month. Monday-Friday 7-10 pm Live 10-1 am Immediate Rebroadcast 1-3 am First 2 hours of prior night's show Saturday 9p-3 am Best Of Rense - 2 shows Sunday 8-11 pm Live Call in Line: 800 TRN 4123 Sightings Artwork/Digital Illustration & Webdesign http://www.anc.net/~neff/ Program Audio Tapes 888 456-4340 Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives http://www.sightings.com Advertising-Over 3 MILLION visitors to sightings.com each month Cost effective exposure for YOUR product or service http://www.sightings.com/adv.htm Sightings.com info/email center http://www.sightings.com/1.mail/infocenter.html Free Greeting Cards featuring the artwork of James Neff: http://www.immunotex.com/rense/cards/cards.html --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>-- Share with your friends! Please feel free to forward this issue of the Jeff Rense Weekly E-News to any and all who are interested... but please forward in its entirety and do not modify it in any fashion without permission. Thank you! Past issues are archived at http://www.egroups.com ------------------------- To subscribe: Visit: http://www.immunotex.com Or mailto:rense_e-news-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe: mailto:rense_e-news-unsubscribe@egroups.com -------------------------- Jeff Rense Weekly E-News is independently produced by TGS in cooperation with Jeff Rense. The material and views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Jeff Rense, sightings.com, or the Jeff Rense - Sightings Radio Program, except for the *Jeff's Desk* segment. --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:48:02 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith Compliments of the Duke to Bruce & all: >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:42 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I note Duke's claim that the light house beams out toward the >sea (no need to shine inland) with, he claims, three colors. I >don't recall anyone reporting 3 colors being visible to someone >in the woods near Rendlsham forest,. It has been my impression >that the references to the witnesses seeing the lighthouse >refer to observing a flashing white light. If this is true then >the lighthouse did shine inland. But were there any other >colors? There's no question it beams out to sea. This is what I found out in May 1998 from the Lights List Officer at the Admiralty Hydrographics office at Taunton, Devon about the Orford Ness light, and from the Trinity House depot at Harwich about Shipwash. ORFORDNESS main light is white, flashing 0.1 sec, dark 4.9 sec, with a visibility of 25 miles (prob. nautical ones but I didn't think to ask this at the time). There are also two fixed (non-flashing lights), one green, and the other red. The green light has a range of 15 mi, and can be seen in an arc from the shore to 047 degrees bearing. The red light has a range of 14 miles, and is visible from 038 degrees to 047 degrees, and from shore to 210 degrees. ("Shore" here must mean the southern flank of the headland.) There are currently no blue lights marked in the landfall chart. It would take about 2 weeks for the Hydrographic Office to look through their records & find out if there were any in 1980. There are no warning lights, nor have there been, at Orford Ness for aircraft. Color combinations on lighthouses, vessels & buoys are purely to help ID the light & its location unambiguously: there is no coding system (e.g blue for sandbanks, green for rocks, or whatever). The pattern and range of the lights at Orford has changed since our boys went down to the woods. In February this year Trinity House warned mariners of the new spec, which should now have been in operation since May. For details see: http://www.cruising.org.uk/tmp_orfordness.htm Rather than clutter the List with a 220K JPEG, I am sending Bruce a map so he can see what these bearings mean on the ground/at sea. SHIPWASH is now a buoy. The guy I spoke to actually closed the former light vessel down in about 1993. He recalls the light being white, with a 360-degree arc. The only other light on any LV would be a red riding light at the bow; only if it dragged anchor would more lights come on (red ones on the mast). Nor is it necessary to be in the path of the beam to be aware of the light. As a lad, I saw loads of lighthouse beams shining from below the horizon, and identified them from their flash patterns (the old OS maps used to give these), from inland on cloudless nights. I don't know the technical name for the effect, which is presumably the same as those cones of light you can see coming out headlights. And having spent many months living a mile or so from one of the most powerful lights in the Cyclades (40-nm range) I can confirm that such a beam is visible in clear air and in fog, tho' the lens may not be. (The Serifos pharos operates with revolving shutters as I recall.) Possibly all this demonstrates the Irish physicist de Selby's thesis that "night" is merely an accretion of "black air"? Granted that fog would dim the light. I am assuming (from investigations on the case printed here & there) that said fog was around or beyond the lighthouse, not in the woods - coastal mist is nothing special, after all - and would be reflecting the colored lights. I take the point that white light is not refracted much. I don't know the azimuth of the beam from Orford but Trinity House offer these details, some of cultural interest: POSITION 52* 05'.0 N 01* 34'.6 E Location: Suffolk Coast between Aldeburgh and Felixstowe No. On Admiralty List of Lights: 2258 Present Tower Built: 1792 Tower Composition: Ashlar stone Height of tower: 99 ft (30.18 m) (to top of lantern) Focal height of light: 93 ft (28.35 m) above mean tide level Builders: Local Construction tradesmen for Lord Braybrooke of Audley End Designer: William Wilkins First Lit: August 1792 Automated: 6th July 1964 In 1888 major alterations took place at the great light or high light as it was now known. The light was made occulting and red and green shades were fitted to form sector lights. Further alterations were made in 1914 when a new revolving lens was installed, it is this lens which is still in operation. Three vertical circular lenses are mounted on a circular platform which floats on a trough of mercury. The lens revolves around the lamp at a speed which appears as a flash every five seconds. At the same time as this light was installed another light was brought into operation half way up the tower. This is the sector light which is a fixed light showing through red and green windows facing south east and a red window facing north east. These lenses and all other lenses fitted over the years were installed by the firm of Stone-Chance. ...on 6th July 1964 the station became fully automatic and under remote control from the Trinity House Depot at Harwich. On 20th September 1965 the keepers were withdrawn. At this time the main navigation light was a 3KW 100V filament lamp. Recently new equipment has been installed and the lamp is now a 1KW 240V Mercury Vapour Discharge lamp. Hope that helps with any calculations. And, er, purely from memory, perhaps a false one, isn't 22.25deg the critical angle for a rainbow? best wishes Pululation D. Mowerman Gardener By Moonlight
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 09:37:47 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith Compliments of the Duke, particularly to Jenny: >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:05:05 +0100 To my naughty suggestion that Penniston et al are telling whoppers (perhaps rather small ones to start with, to be fair) about landed UFOs in Suffolk forests, Jenny wrote: >Sorry, Peter, I don't think this will wash. Penniston first >spoke (covertly) to us when writing Sky Crash in l983/4. >Burroughs did at length to me in Phoenix in l989. This was >long before the l997 revelation of the original witness >statements. But (in one case) long after their original reports, however downplayed. So this doesn't make their stories prima facie any less likely to be fibs. But to be generous to them, let's say Penniston saw something he couldn't explain and by way of confabulation &c Burroughs decided he'd seen the same thing. Even more generously, suppose they both did. I saw elsewhere that a Land Rover with an oddly tilted headlight created very weird effects in the eyes and minds of some "UFO" witnesses. Er -- were the light-alls out in the woods that night? Or someone -- or several people -- lamping for rabbits or foxes? One might well not *ever* hear about the latter, even if one lived in the district for years, because the chances are high that anyone so doing wouldn't be doing it strictly legally. And just to be really cynical, does anyone know of Penniston's and Burroughs's acquaintance with mind-altering substances, habitual or otherwise? (And if they did, would they say so?) In principle these are testable objections to an exotic occurrence underlying the accounts. In practice, and perhaps more pertinently in *public*, they're more likely to remain speculative. ...and having now, undistracted by single-toed ungulates, read James Easton's response to this one of yours as well, I can only nod vigorously in assent to his points! best wishes Pinball D. Monopoly Green Gaming Table
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 09:40:47 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith Compliments of the Duke of Mendoza: and I hope this answers SEan Jones's query about the null hypothesis, too. >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:02:38 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >If this proportion is to be cited, it would be a good idea to >have a look at its source (and please note that no one in this >discussion ever suggests simply taking witness statements at >face value - but simply assert that witness statements have >reasonable accuracy). The "proportion" in question is that 19/20 UFO reports resolve into IFOs. My specific sources are Hendry's work, who on occasion managed to solve 100% of his weekly (or was it monthly?) caseload, and Jenny Randles no less credible claim that she cracks 95% of her caseload. These two generally respected investigators bear out the generally cited factoid. Condon's solved/unsolved stats aren't worth talking about. See Menzel & Taves, and their not infrequent irritation that some case reports contained too little information to form any judgement at all. Of course (and perhaps M&T sometimes illustrate the point) some "solved" cases may not be as solved as they seem. On the other hand belief-driven investigators have probably created more "unknowns" than IFOs. As for the Battelle study, what were their criteria for "witness reliability"? As I recall, they didn't publish them. Did they mean "those reporting in greatest detail" or were they basing credibility on occupation, lack of felony convictions, or what? Mark & I will have to differ over the Coyne incident. A bunch of guys in a panic who change their accounts over time do not impress me. Nor does TRans-en-Provence, for different reasons. But there's not much point in bandying about why not here. >This, frankly, is nonsense. Scientific methods only dictate >that any hypothesis that is offered be specific and, in some >fashion, testable. As we can see from sciences similar to >UFOlogy, such as ornithology, cosmology, and certain areas of >paleontology and physics, testability also frequently means >something other than taking samples into the lab. "This" is the null hypothesis. Ornithology, cosmology &c are sciences, but ufology is not one, let alone a "similar" science. For this reason: birds, stars, quanta &c exist, either in all their feathered or burning glory or are predicted by extremely rigorous mathematics. When Battelle tried to discern a common UFO from their most reliable & detailed reports, they couldn't. UFOs are seen in all shapes & sizes and no one's caught one to observe its feeding habits or carbon-date its skeleton. Its unknown-ness is its sine qua non. >Null hypotheses have a role to play in science, but they are >hardly the only sort of hypotheses. The Curies, for instance, >did not use the null hypothesis to determine the presence and >nature of radioactivity in radium. The null hypothesis was not >used as an important part of accounting for observations that >led to the determination of the existence of the nucleus of the >atom. Neither Newton nor Einstein based their work on the null >hypothesis that gravity did not exist. No of course not and it is, frankly, nonsense to suggest that I'd suggest they did. Like most scientists after Lavoisier they were building on the findings of their forebears (tho' I am not sure about how far Newton's original genius depended on that). They knew enough about what they were dealing with to explore the implications of existing knowledge. Ufologists do not know what they are dealing with, have no coherent theory, no first-hand data, and a dodgy witness/investigator base. Therefore the only sane position - better put by Bruce Maccabee in fact, than by me -- is to start with no exotic assumptions and find out what you can about what was seen or experienced. Since most UFOs resolve into IFOs one *can* stretch this into the extremely non-exotic assumption that witnesses are mistaken about details, whether the misperception is radical or run of the mill. When it's almost commonplace for witnesses to impute weird characteristics to the Moon, and when a would-be "British Roswell" collapses into a bunch of poachers, this edge of skepticism is hardly an outrage to reason or decorum. >Actually, it is scientific illiteracy to pretend that anyone >who advances a hypothesis, including the null hypothesis, is >exempt from offering methods and tests. Ufology is _not_ a science -- not just because UFOs are uncatchable, but because the data don't permit plausible predictions about the phenomenon, either: although they may offer the opportunity to make predictions about human beings. So it is, in a sense, a waste of breath to discuss ufology in terms of scientific principles beyond a certain point. However. My intention was less to defend skepticism than to emphasize that the onus is squarely on anyone claiming to have discovered an anomalous phenomenon to stitch up their proof very tight. Objections generally have implicit methods and tests embedded in them. The MHH hypothesis is testable, but few ufologists have the time or wherewithal or inclination to perform the tests, whatever seat they've booked on the spectrum of belief. As a generality, eminently testable, I once suggested to Mark that UFO reporters may well be nested within that portion of the population prone to chronic misperception, and got a resounding silence by way of acknowledgement. (Have to repeat here that hallucination does not imply madness, as any neurologist will tell you.) So forgive me if I am somewhat pissed off, in that Mark seems to be suggesting I am scientifically illiterate. I don't dispute some UFO cases may well resolve into the observation of some objective phenomenon. I agree there is no point in leaping to ETH-type conclusions from that (indeed every point in not doing so, as I explained recently in "Fortean Times"). I don't have a problem about pelicans at Mt Rainier, since pelicans at least have the good grace to exist, and fit Arnold's description rather well, which somewhat reduces the nonsense quotient from that explanation. If Arnold's is one of Mark's cases that purportedly fail to support the null hypothesis, then the "negativity" I represent begins to look remarkably like indifferent insouciance in the face of obsession. best wishes Pericles D. Micklegate Yorkshire Boatman
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:41:54 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments: >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:31:53 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >For fifty plus years now there have been many UFO reports. Over >this fifty some years a small percentage remains unresolved. >Now correct me if I am wrong but using Occam's Razor you are >saying that: >Because 95 percent are resolvable the other 5 percent must also >be resolvable. The logic doesn't require Occam's Razor per se. It's simply based on the scientific convention of 0.05 probability &c. Some have pointed out that this is itself an arbitrary if pragmatic cutoff point (Polanyi discusses it in an essay in "Knowing & Being", for instance.) >Could it not also be said: >Because 5 percent remain unresolved, there _must_ be something >to this phenomenon. Occam would then say it is simpler to assume the other 5 per cent is noise. Especially when the other 5 per cent exhibits random effects. Take the sub-GCSE-level chemical formula: acid+base=salt+water If out of 500 experiments this doesn't happen in 25 instances you may well feel inclined to look at the results in those 25 experiments (and of course at your equipment, temperatures of the environment, &c &c &c) -- *if* all 25 experiments produced the equation acid+base=fish+chips. Then the consistency of the anomaly would suggest you'd make a useful contribution to knowledge if you could find out why. Perhaps in those 25 cases you inadvertently held your oversized test tube under a fish tank, or stood too near the college kitchens, or whatever. In other words some consistent variable produced the "odd" result. Then you can say there is something to that phenomenon. But ufology's odd 5 per cent is random, chaotic, contradictory, and second hand. Like acid+base=egg+chips then =treacle+vinegar then =gin+mallard, and so on, and all of it told you in the pub by someone who had it from a friend or well no it was her cousin actually. If that were chemistry you'd put it down to artefacts -- dust in the test tube, mismeasurements, lightning strikes, the lab technician's pet mouse turds in the copper sulphate crystals, all filtered through somebody's cousin's imaginative talent. (And let's say that cousin works at McDonald's. This is the cultural bias.) When UFOs look, behave, and smell consistent I'll give them a break. Actually, some do, which is why some UFO reports probably describe something objective. And I've long argued that UFOs are not a monolithic entity, but may have many causes. Occam's Razor would keep it simple and *suggest* the causes aren't ET. In practical terms this means testing all other available hypotheses (including the case for ET life) before concluding that UFOs come from outer space. best wishes P. Dukem M. You Know Who
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:11:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:44:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith Compliments of the Duke: >Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >In many cases, the alleged victims suffer from symptoms >of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Literature has it that >PTSD is a mental illness caused by traumatic EVENTS in >one's life. Frankly, the literature is a pile of crap generated by a therapy industry (part of victim culture at large) trying to turn a perfectly ordinary reaction into an illness in order to hoover up bucks from a gullible health insurance industry. Of course people react "badly" to traumatic events. That is normal. Post-traumatic stress is just that -- not a "disorder". It's part of the process of recovery. Is grief a mental illness, or a normal reaction to loss? Give me a break. >Is you stomach starting to stir a bit? Please state in >the literature a case of PTSD based on fantasy. 1. Stomach fine. 2. Have no references consistent with your request to hand. (But would like to thank Kevin Randle for filling the gap, now I've seen his post. And if you, Serge, want to find out how "alien abductions" and consequent stress are created by yet more mental events flitting between investigator and investigated, go read Kevin's book, which -- despite an irritating lack of references -- ought to be an embarrassment and a salutary experience to anyone who takes "abduction" at face value!) 3. There is however a huge literature on psychomatic symptoms. Keith Thompson has some fascinating cases in his "Angels and Aliens" (is it?), including one of a man suffering from a phantom pregnancy if I recall aright. He's one of the few people to have addressed this question from a ufological/abduction point of view. In other words, since mental events can create physical reactions, I see no reason to suppose they may not create further mental reactions as well. Like everyone else in the world, I imagine, I've been utterly terrified by nightmares on occasion, and I certainly know people who've developed phobias to real-life items that first distressed them in such dreams -- pickled gherkins, in one instance. If the above is not sane in your eyes... Hmmmmmmm. best wishes Pataphysic D. Milkwort Magic Flower
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 02:49:08 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:46:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:09:16 +0100 >Is this the same Chris who whilst we were out filming with a >crew from London Weekend Television last year pointed to the sky >and told the TV crew to film a UFO passing overhead. I was at >this rather embarrassing episode and he pointed out this object >as a real UFO. I could see it was a plane as could the location >driver who I was talking to at the time. He was convinced it was >a UFO in full sight of hundreds of people. No one else was >blinking an eye lid as they were not so obviously fooled. >The film crew got nothing on tape but it was quite clear that >they knew it was a plane also. I don't know much about Chris but >if this is the kind of thing he wants us to fall for then I >can't say I'm too impressed. >Cheers >Rory Lushman. Hi Rory, Thank you for enlightening us all with your thorough and deep' as well as very constructive dissemination of the film footage which Chris has shot over the last couple of years. I am glad, you had taken time out of your busy schedule to sit down and view most of his film footage. I am also glad that you to the time to travel to London over some period to have meetings with Chris at his place of filming, this has obviously gave you a far greater insight into the case, of his film footage. One question I think we would all like an answer to is, after sifting through what was probably hours of video tape, what was the clip that gave you the answer to the years of filming he has been carrying out? I think we can say safely, thanks for the insight into what we can expect from UFOIN investigations? A full and totally explored investigation of the data (film) and of course Chris (the person). Kind 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:53:45 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:50:17 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Mortellaro >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 00:33:02 -0400 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:28 -0400 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:45:23 -0700 >>>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: ElectroMagnetic Attack?. >><snip> >>>>500 meters onwards. These attacks would render the car >>>>inoperable, in fact they found out that the car's electronic >>>>ignition system had been totally disabled and harmed.> >>>>Could the above, be one reason for just some car stoppage >>>>incidents that seem to happen in the States and in certain >>>>areas, rather than a UFO having been blamed? >>>Roy... >>>Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >>>when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >>>re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >>>'damaged' after the object departed. >>Gentlemen and EBK, >>NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the >>underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it >>imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally >>destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It >>cannot be started again. >Many of the classic car-stopping events happend BC (before >computer). >For example the classic Levelland, TX series of events. >I investigated a case in Virginia some 29 years ago. It involved >a Triumph sports car, if I recall correctly. Object hovered >over the car and car stopped, lights went out, radio died. After >it departed in some seconds or so the car was started again >(turning the ignition key did nothing until the object left). >Lights came back on, etc. But the radio didn't. Turned out the >radio had suffered permanent damage. >Another investigator got to the case before I did. He told me he >had to replace a transistor in order to get the radio to work. >Unfortunately he replaced one transistor after another until the >radio wrked again and didn't keep track of which tansistor (or >transistors) had been damaged. Dear Bruce, Listers and EBK, In my post I quite forgot to mention that which you brought up, Bruce. The system now in use by some (not many) law enforcement agencies is relatively new. I must assume that it has been in use less than a dozen years and that is generous. It's probably much less than that. I also neglected to mention that while there are such devices extant, they are not commonly used, nor has the packaging technology been around long enough to make this product anything but an albatross to package.... read: Huge, Cumbersom and quite impractical for such use as disabling vehicles on public roads just to test the efficacy of the thing. Such logic is lost on me. But it likely has a lot to do not with Gripple, but mood altering drugs. Like the very first and the very last time I tried Marijuana. I smoked it with a guy who got paranoid whenever he was high. He refused to go outside of his apartment whenever he had smoked a joint. He imagined that the police would discover his high state of mind and arrest him. This was back in 1972. Anyway, I started inhaling once, twice... then up to about a half dozen times and I felt nothing. Except when I looked for my pulse and could not find it. Then I found it and it was running about 125 or so. I became freightened to death that I was gonna have a heart attack and die right there in Teddy's apartment on Broadway and the 70's in Manhattan. So I told Ted, "I gotta go out and get some fresh air! Come with me!" And he started screaming that he couldn't do that or the cops would come and arrest him. There we were, two macho guys, both paranoid as hell, each one screaming at the top of our lungs, one saying he needs air or he'll die of a heart attack. The other screaming about not going outside even if I had a heart attack. My dying was better than his going to the pokey. He gave me a ten milligram Valium (mood altering drug again, now nobody's gonna berieve me) and felt much better in a half hour. How anyone can smoke that stuff is beyond me. I only hope those who do don't get paranoid. And for the record, this is something I already posted on AIC many months ago. Just in case someone gets paranoid. Love and kisses from the Mood King, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:07:21 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:52:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:41:33 EDT >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >I'm glad you've admitted to running the site, how long does one >have to wait for the footage to download? I waited for 10 >minutes with no indicator to tell me whether the download had >even strated. So I didn't rush into a blind alley I tried and it >simply didn't work! > Hi Torry, I am glad to hear that you have managed to download the film. Now can you carry on your investigation without any interuption from anyone. I am not here to fall out with you or anyone on this List. You now have the footage please conduct your own investigation into it. Wishing you well with your research. Kind 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:12:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:54:41 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton Regarding: >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 17:15:42 +0100 Jenny, Thank you for the detailed response, it's been of immense help and there are several issues therein which I believe we can make meaningful progress with. >So we either have to accept that they did have such an episode >and simply did not report it as they say. Or they didn't - >what's in their statements are all that ever happened - and they >have lied and made up the close encounter. >That's the stark choice here. Precisely so and we can expand on this to include the evidence Penniston has produced more recently, particularly the sketches claimed to have come from his notebook and drawn at the time he was examining the small craft. Either these are profound verification of an aerial vehicle which is difficult to equate with known, contemporary (or even since) technology, or, the story has grown to encompass fabricated evidence. Which is an even starker choice! There might now be sufficient witness testimonies available to reach a firm conclusion. Central to this are enlightening answers which Penniston provided during the 1997 'Project Watchfire' interviews and on-line conference. I highlighted some of this little-known material in 'Resolving Rendlesham'. I need to re-evaluate it in the light of current discussions - your reply contains some interesting data I wasn't familiar with - and we'll see what can definitely be determined. One anomaly is that Penniston claims Ed Cabansag did not participate in the forest adventures, instead he was left stationed at their vehicle to act as a radio relay due to the poor communications experienced. Of course, we're now aware that's not true and it was Chandler who acted as a relay, whilst Cabansag was very much part of later proceedings. Nonetheless, by relegating Cabansag to another location, Penniston effectively 'takes out' Cabansag from the start. Either this is a gross error in recollection or Cabansag is thoughtfully being 'protected' as a reluctant witness, or, it's maybe deemed advantageous to 'discard' Cabansag. If he's included in Burroughs and Penniston's story, then his involvement - or perhaps more of a concern, non-involvement - with the 'close encounter' and aftermath has to somehow be explained. Anyway, I'll come back to this, plus some issues raised by Peter. >IMO they are not lying. They did experience the close encounter >effects, did agree between themselves to undersell the story for >the record to protect themselves and that's why there is a >discrepancy. In which case, Penniston's account and those crucial drawings of the craft and its 'insignia' are amongst the foremost evidence in UFO research. This is pretty much what I was highlighting in the 'Unopened Files' article, when I had rather more confidence that might conceivably be the situation. >>in 'UFO Crash Landing?', you wrote: >>"Burroughs (who had lived locally for 18 months and was >>familiar with the woods) said he saw the lighthouse as well as >>the UFO that night but never mentioned it because it was, 'just >>sitting there as always'." >>Given what we've learned since, how can this be anything other >>than untrue! >There are ways. For instance, if John saw the lightship and >thought that it was the lighthouse he could be telling the >truth. I'm not sure I follow this reasoning. As Burroughs confirmed in his statement that he eventually realised the beacon light was coming from "a lighthouse", he presumably didn't think the source was anything else. If he subsequently claimed the lighthouse was never a factor because it was 'just sitting there as always', there's no escaping that many would conclude he's either re-written events in his own mind or this is intentional deception. Or, looked at another way; Burroughs claimed he was entirely familiar with Orford Ness lighthouse, which was clearly visible and 'just sitting there as always'. Allegedly, it played no part in the UFO proceedings that first night. However, when his original testimony was discovered, we find a different story emerging, best revealed in Burroughs own words: "Once we reached the farmer's house we could see a beacon going around so we went towards it. We followed it for about 2 miles before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse". Burroughs, evidently, has been caught out. Whether he subsequently claimed the lighthouse was a well known landmark and should be dismissed as such, knowing this wasn't true, or whether he has largely forgotten about the abortive two mile chase and retrospectively believes the lighthouse didn't feature that night, we can't say. However, in either respect we surely have proof that his later accounts must be regarded with considerable caution. At best, he's altered the facts concerning a significant aspect which relates to both night's events. >From the site the Shipwash lightship looked exactly like what >you would expect a lighthouse to look like - a distant flashing >light. It was nowhere near the UFO and I doubt you would have >reason to mention its presence in your report. >So Burroughs doesn't necessarily have to be lying here. He could >simply have been mistaken - thought he saw the lighthouse and so >didn't mention it (but in fact what he thought was the >lighthouse was the lightship). Although I might be mistaken and due apologies if I am, have you perhaps overlooked that Burroughs did say the beacon was from "a lighthouse"? Your reasoning seems to be that he might have seen the Shipwash lightship beacon and thought this was the lighthouse, therefore the 'lighthouse' [although in fact the lightship], was 'sitting there'. Obviously, this isn't sustainable if, as confirmed in his statement, he later knew the beacon was from a lighthouse, however, until they went in search of an explanation they didn't realise what it was at all. Something you may not have seen and which seems relevant is a statement Chris Armold released in July, 1997. As you may recall, Armold was the security policeman who contacted local police about the initial incident. Some further, brief background from 'Rendlesham Unravelled': Also, a letter dated 27 October 1988 to UK researcher Nick Redfern from the Suffolk Constabulary confirms that "shortly after 4 a.m. on 26th December 1980", they received a call about "unusual lights being seen in the sky near R.A.F. Woodbridge". In 'Above Top Secret', by Timothy Good, he wrote: "Chuck de Caro of Cable News Network was shown the logbook at Woodbridge Police Station which shows that on the night of 25/26 December, Airman Armald from the Woodbridge base law enforcement desk called the Woodbridge police concerning 'lights in the woods'". It appears that the person who made the call was in fact Airman Chris Armold, who has recently provided me with a statement in which he confirms: "In fact I then called the Martlesham Heath branch of the Suffolk Constabulary and asked if they had any info about downed aircraft. There is a book which references my call but they butchered my last name". [End] Although Armold claims he met up with Burroughs that night, it's not immediately clear if this was before or after Burroughs had ventured in search of the lights. Armold states: In any case here is some information regarding that wonderful goat rope outside the RAF Woodbridge East Gate that December morning. I was a member of the 81st Security Police Squadron on "B" Flight Law Enforcement. If I remember correctly (and you must forgive me for some memory lapse as you must realize that at the time this was not a significant event, consequently it really hasn't been burned into my mind, obviously had I seen flying saucers, and little green men I doubt I would have any problems retaining the information) those of us working were having some fun as we actually were playing music over one of the Police Frequencies. It was very quiet and since it was the holiday season, not much was happening. Things were pretty laid back. In any case, we were playing Music on the Security Frequency and the Law Enforcement freq was being used in case someone had an emergency or actual work related transmission to make. After midnight, John Burroughs radioed the LE desk and reported he had seen strange lights in the outside the East Gate on RAF Woodbridge. I was actually on RAF Lakenheath hanging out at the Law Enforcement Desk at the time. Burroughs, who liked to draw attention to himself, often over-reacted to situations and was considered very unreliable, wanted to know if there were any reports of downed aircraft. We called the Control Tower and I even called the local Constabulary (I can't remember the town the constabulary was in , but I do know it was outside of Ipswich and I think it used to be an air base during WWII, I believe the control tower was restored in the 80's) In any case, after getting a negative reply from the British Cops, My flight chief asked me if I wanted to head out to Woodbridge to meet up with Burroughs and see what was up. I grabbed the back gate keys, and took the back way to RAF W/B. I met Burroughs at the East Gate of WB. We left our guns with the guy riding with Burroughs and drove to the end of the long access road. We left our vehicle and walked out there. There was absolutely nothing in the woods. We could see lights in the distance and it appeared unusual as it was a sweeping light, (we did not know about the lighthouse on the coast at the time). We also saw some strange colored lights in the distance but were unable to determine what they were. [End] As Armold's call was apparently logged after 4.00 a.m., this must have been subsequent to Burroughs having any 'close encounter'. In Buran's statement, he wrote: "They continued to look further, to no avail. At approximately 0354 hours, I terminated the investigation and ordered all units back to their normal duties". [End] According to this timeline, Armold must have driven to see Burroughs after Burroughs had returned to duty and was back at 'east gate'. Apparently, Burroughs returned to the logging/access road with Armold and all they could see was the sweeping beam (not the beacon) from Orford Ness. There is of course one other thing which Armold claims they observed - "some strange colored lights in the distance". What could they have been? Surely not the same lights which Burroughs and Penniston had their 'close encounter with. I thought the 'craft' which was the source of those lights had, you know... 'taken off'... There's more in Armold's recollections which may now be relevant given our greater understanding of events and I'll come back to this also. James Easton. E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk www.ufoworld.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:09:06 +0200 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:56:45 -0400 Subject: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox Source: The Irish Times, http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/science/2000/0821/sci3.htm Stig *** Monday, August 21, 2000 We are alone - to date ---------------------------------------------------------------- The idea that we are not alone in the universe took strong root in the imaginations of philosophers and scientists in 1543. In that year Copernicus demoted the status of the Earth from its position at the centre of the universe to that of a mere satellite of an ordinary star. The thinking was, and remains, that since there are probably very many Earth-like planets in our galaxy, why should Earth be unique in harbouring intelligent life? Now that we have developed the capacity to actively search for life elsewhere in the universe, we are seeking evidence of simple life on Mars and there is also a programme called the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) that scans the cosmos for radio transmissions from alien civilisations. No radio messages have been received to date. The more experience we get under our belts the more critically we can think about this matter. Our lack of success to date in detecting the presence of alien civilisations is causing some scientists to re-visit the question first posed by the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi (1901-1954). If alien civilisations are common should this not be obvious to us? SETI is based on the idea that civilisations elsewhere in the universe, at or beyond our level of development, will try to communicate with the rest of the cosmos. It is believed that the preferred mode of communication would be radio broadcast, so SETI scans the sky hoping to pick up a message. So far a search of the cosmos extending 4,000 light years outwards from Earth has failed to detect any signals that a civilisation at our level of development might be capable of transmitting. Also, a search extending 40,000 light years outwards has failed to detect stronger signals that might come from more advanced civilisations. Despite the fact that SETI is at an early stage (our galaxy is 100,000 light years in diameter), the silence to date is beginning to trouble scientists who had predicted that advanced life is common in the cosmos. A typical SETI estimation is that our galaxy contains 1,000 radio-transmitting civilisations. If so, making conservative estimates of the rate at which civilisations rise and fall, and knowing the age of the galaxy (12 billion years) it can be calculated that billions of technological civilisations must have existed over the history of the galaxy. We have listened in vain for sounds from current alien civilisations since 1960 and we have no evidence that any advanced civilisations existed in the past. Why, as Fermi asked, is this? It seems very likely that some very advanced civilisations, if they existed, would attempt to colonise the galaxy. Calculations show that a civilisation capable of interstellar travel at one tenth the speed of light - which should be readily attainable - could colonise the entire galaxy in five million years. This period represents only 0.05 per cent of the entire age of the galaxy, but there is no scientific evidence that Earth was ever visited by extraterrestrials. There is, of course, the fascinating speculation that life was seeded on Earth four billion years ago by visiting aliens. If this is the case, we have no evidence that they bothered with us in the meantime. The alternative scenario to the more usual optimistic one of a galaxy studded with advanced civilisations is that, whereas life may be common in the galaxy we are the only example of intelligent life. This position can be supported by considering the evolution of life on Earth. The Earth was formed about 4.6 billion years ago and there is evidence that a simple unicellular form of life existed as long as four billion years ago. In other words, life began as soon as conditions on the Earth moderated enough to be compatible with life. Many scientists have concluded that given the right conditions nature finds it easy to start up life, and of course this will happen in the universe everywhere the conditions are right. But how much complex development might we expect from such simple life. Again consider the evolution of life on Earth. For over three billion years life did not evolve beyond the unicellular stage. Multicellular animal life did not appear until 700 million years ago. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the development of multicellular life is very difficult and therefore improbable. Although life could arise on a planet it might never evolve beyond a unicellular form. We know that chance played a prominent part in determining how life evolved on Earth. The reign of the dinosaurs on Earth was ended by some catastrophic change - the favourite current theory is that this was a catastrophic collision of an asteroid with Earth. The dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 140 million years, but never produced a civilisation. Neither was there anything in their general biological logic - which leaned on brawn rather than brain - to suggest that they would ever evolve significant cleverness. Their chance demise allowed the mammals to develop which eventually allowed human civilisation to arise. So life could begin on a planet, might evolve to a multicellular animal stage but might never go on to evolve selfconscious intelligence. I still think it is improbable, but we humans may well be the only intelligent life in the galaxy. This possibility is awesome to contemplate. If we are alone in the galaxy, we have inherited the most precious gift imaginable and have an unavoidable responsibility to nurture and to spread our light. The possibility that we are alone should make it unthinkable for us to foul our nest on Earth or to behave badly towards each other. The topic of alien civilisation in our galaxy is discussed in detail in a fascinating article by Ian Crawford in the July 2000 issue of Scientific American. ** William Reville is a Senior Lecturer in Biochemistry and Director of Microscopy at UCC. � 2000 ireland.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:21:43 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:58:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Mortellaro Respectfully snipped >Explicated Randel References >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Respectfully snipped Serge, You show excellent and wonderful debating skills. Can I rent you out for a day next time I need someone with better political skills than I could ever have? All I can pay is a case of my freshest Gripple. And a meal cooked up by the best in Westchester County. I drink to your abilities sir. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Cydonian Imperative Update 8-27-00 From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:59:38 -0400 Subject: Cydonian Imperative Update 8-27-00 8-27-00 Additional Anomalies Noted by Efrain Palermo http://www.geocities.com/macbot/imperative7.html Keywords: Phobos, possible artificial structures
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Jacques Vallee? From: David Hancock <sftree@flash.net> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:36:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:02:01 -0400 Subject: Jacques Vallee? I had always been a big fan of Jacques Vallee and had the good fortune to see him speak. I of course have every book he has written. I haven't heard anything about him recently, does anyone know how he's doing and if he's up to anything more in ufology? Thanks, Dave H. in Yacolt, WA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:20:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:04:22 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hatch >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:02:58 -0400 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:17:13 EDT >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>To: updates@sympatico.ca <mailto:updates@sympatico.ca> ><snip> >>Gentlemen and EBK, >>NY State Police have a device which makes contact with the >>underside of the vehicle. Once making contact with the metal, it >>imparts a very substantial EM pulse. This pulse will literally >>destroy the vehicle's computer chip(s) rendering it useless. It >>cannot be started again. >>FYI >>Jim Mortellaro, Inspector, NY State Police Auxiliary >Jim- >Do you have a specific name for this device, so that one could >look at the specifications. A magnetic pulse will normally >disrupt the flow of electrons, which would cause a system to >crash. But the physical destruction of a chip would require >either a voltage surge generated by the pulse, or damage caused >by heat. >Scaling this up just a bit, what would prevent one from >connecting a larger version of this device to the metal ductwork >in a building and then sending out a pulse to destroy the >buiness computers of a competitior (or the Government computers >of the enemy). >There's also the issue of EM effects and their possible use in >psychological warfare. This is discussed briefly in the Air >Force 2025 Report. Hello Jim, Steve and others: There was a Russian saying, "the way to catch a bird is to pour salt on its tail." The moral is that its probably harder to get the disabling device onto the fleeing car than it is to operate it. I'd like to know the name of the NY gimmick, and any technical details. I presume its some massive electrical discharge like a miniature bolt of lightning. What's curious is how they store the charge just prior to the discharge. If its a capacitor, its gotta be awfully large. As for ductwork, I would expect that to be grounded. Otherwise the air currents would build up large static charges and zap people. A nasty instantaneous jolt could be injected into the regular 120 VAC power circuits I suppose, enough to take out computers. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Cynthia Hind - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:43:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:07:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Cynthia Hind - Hatch >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:56:35 -0700 >From: Bill Oliver <oliver2849@home.com> >To: updates@sympatico.ca >Subject: Cynthia Hind >It is with great sadness that UFO*BC has learned that Cynthia >Hind passed away in Harare, Zimbabwe after losing her struggle >with cancer. >The UFO world has lost a great woman and without doubt one of >the great researchers. Cynthia was author of 'UFOs Over Africa', >editor of UFO AFRINEWS African Continent Director for MUFON. >We pass our regrets to her family and hope all on the List will >do the same. >Bill Oliver >UFO*BC Thanks for passing on the news, Bill, tragic as this is. I didn't even know she was ill. Cynthia Hind was the major player in Southern Africa. Reports from South Africa, Zimbabwe - Rhodesia and neighboring countries almost invariably filtered through her network and publications. UFO Maps of that region would be about as empty as the rest of Africa without her good work. She will be sorely missed. Sadly - 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:52:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:09:37 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:35:58 +0100 >>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 >>>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:59:15 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>I think those are pretty big clues that they are >>>>not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. >>I agree with Mark Cashman's comments here. The altered states of >>consciousness (or "Oz Effect" as Jenny Randles has called it) >>sometimes described by UFO witnesses sounds very much like >>symptoms of psychological shock brought on by highly fearful or >>stressful situations, rather than something necessarily inherent >>to the presence of a UFO. >>These dissociative states brought on suddenly by extremely >>stressful situations are very common and long documented in the >>medical literature. Everybody may be prone to them. They are >>probably a very ancient psychological defense mechanism to help >>us cope with dangerous situations. As is Mark, I would be much >>more inclined to first attribute altered consciousness in UFO >>witnesses to innate psychological and physiological defense >>mechanisms than to some unknown interaction between the >>witnesses and the UFOs. >Hi, >With respect, I don't think we are disagreeing very much here. >I am not attributing the Oz Factor state to some alien mind >probe. In fact, as I note above, they are collectively and >repeatedly offering clues to an 'altered state of consciousness' >- during which some of the stranger aspects of the alleged close >encounter occur (or seem to occur). >It is obvious that they are not caused by some other worldly >attack because they cross boundaries and get reported from a >wide range of phenomena, as I noted. This has to infer that they >are - exactly as you say - psychological and physiological >sensations occurring within the body that are precipitated by >the UFO experience / or many other experiences too. Jenny does seem to be de-escalation the significance of the "Oz Factor" here, suggesting it is the result of internal psychological and physiological processes. In some of her earlier writing on the topic she seems to make it clear that "Oz" is caused by the intervention of an external force on the percipients. In the case of Rendlesham she suggests "Oz Factor" events may have been caused by over-the-horizon radar. Elsewhere ("UFO Reality", Hale, 1983) she suggests that the "Oz Factor" is "almost suggestive of the witness being transported temporarily from our world to another, where reality is similar but slightly different... this effect is so common and important that I have adopted a name for it, on the basis that if you name something you are at least on the way to finding out what it is". The problem with indiscriminate use of a term like "Oz Factor" is that by putting a novel, made-up name onto a number of reasonably well- understood physiological and psychological phenomena you are well on the way to obscuring their individual natures. >In fact this is the very point that I was making - and have made >often - when writing about the Oz Factor across the years. They >delineate an ASC and emphasise the role this plays in the >subsequent encounter. They are warning signs that we should not >treat as literal physical reality what many Ufologists often do >treat as such. Thats's's why I always look out for the Oz Factor at >work. It serves as a sign on the door saying beware. I can agree with Jenny here, as many "Oz Factor" incidents appear to be describing "radical misperceptions" (where did this phrase originate, incidentaly?). One in particular seems relevant to the discussion between Andy Roberts and Jerome Clark on another UpDates thread. In Jenny's influential "Science and the UFO" (Blackwell, 1985, p.132) she reports a case from Cheshire, NW England. A couple driving home at night reported an object swoop over the car ahead of them, then travelling alongside the car: "There followed a protracted, harrowing, close encounter with this UFO lasting from about midnight until 12.50 am." The UFO "beamed light into their car, but it cast no shadow" After the incident the woman involved became very ill. The UFO was a "classic UFO shape with assorted lights - red, green and amber." Jenny links the Oz Factor to this case, pointing out that: "the witnesses felt it strange that they were alone on a road which was usually busy. There was no other traffic at all... They also heard a humming/buzzing noise and smelt a peculiar odour." The couple were so disturbed by the incident that the husband reported it to the Jodrell Bank radio astronomy observatory, who referred it to the UFO research group that Jenny was associated with at the time. After carefully considering the incident and talking further to the witnesses, the originating stimulus for the observation was determined to be the Moon. This seems as good an example of the type of Radical Misperception that Andy Roberts is talking about that I can think of. There is no way this could be a misinterpretation of a relatively straightforward observation of the Moon, an object which is familiar to everyone; it is clearly a radical *misperception* of an everyday object. <snip> >In Rendlesham, as with most cases of the Oz Factor, it is likely >that some of the feelings described by the witnesses do indeed >occur because of these psychological and physiological >sensations within the body. >The one caveat we have to apply here is that there are countless >cases where the presence of genuine EM energy fields are >seemingly related in connection with UFOs. They cause actual >physical effects - from car stops to tingling skins. >Some of these were present in the Rendlesham case. Note the >effects on the light alls. The radio reception static reported. >And the primary witnesses do not simply report psychological >states such as dissociation. They very specifically report a >curtain of electrostatic charge that caused their skins to >tingle and hair to stand on end. This implies more than stress >at work to me. The suggestion here is clearly that some form of electromagnetic phenomenon caused the Oz effects at Rendlesham, elsewhere it's down to the Moon, fear or anticipation. A word which covers all eventualities ceases to have any meaning. It's like describing any strange phenomenon as a "Dunno" or a "Wotizzit" and saying that because we have given it a name we are "at least on the way to finding out what it is". >We also know that such fields can produce psychological and >physiological symptoms (eg thanks to Michael Persinger). So we >do have to take note of situations where what appear to be EM >fields are being described because they can also induce symptoms >very much like the Oz Factor. >My feeling is that both stress/psychological pressures and (less >often) real EM fields that trigger physiological reactions do >happen. It is clear from these comments, and the paragraph below, that the "Oz Factor" is such a vague term and covers such a range of phenomena, that its use has little value, and we would be better off describing each experience with the terminology that best suits it, rather than inventing a phrase which - and someone here has already mentioned Humpty Dumpty - means just what we say it means. >Its not yet clear which of these effects are purely >psychological and which are physiological (or indeed which may >be both - such as psychological stress inducing hormonal changes >to provoke physiological sensations). It is work we maybe ought >to do. >But its not really relevant to the basic conclusion that the Oz >Factor reveals. That these cases happen during an ASC. In some cases yes, but far from proven for all cases. Maybe sometimes there just *were* no cars on the road! >Thats's the >most vital thing we need to build upon. Jenny and I have already discussed this matter at some length on the UFOIN list, and I apologise to those subscribers who may be getting a sense of deja-vu (presumably another manifestation of the Oz Factor). -- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 07:12:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:15:11 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:08 +0100 >>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:00:08 +0100 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>With regards to the FT reports in East Anglia, of course I am >>aware of them. What I said was that I had not personally >>investigated these reports so could not comment from that >>perspective. Thats all. Hi, Jenny, Reading your various responses, I can see that you have altered your intial assertion that the Bacup - Todmorden area (Lancs) "was the busiest area for *UFO* activity in the entire UK (possibly in Europe)" by drawing attention to the many claimed abduction cases (and claimed close encounters) from that area...In my mind, a diifferent matter entirely. You also wrote: >Whatever may or may not be being seen over Essex I cannot >comment on because I havent investigated them. I have heard >reports. Why single out Essex? The FT activity to which I refer primarily concerns Suffolk, Essex and Kent. Though similar 'sensitive sites' in other parts of the UK are also involved.. I think it was fair comment on my part to suggest that you have little or no knowledge of this FT activity, Jenny... which comes as a surprise to me since you were D. of I. at BUFORA some time ago. You are in good company as Nick Pope admitted to me during an 'on-line' conference a couple of years back that he also had no knowledge of FT overflights of these sites during his tenure at the MOD. So what was the point of mentioning the reports you saw as BUFORA D of I. of "aircraft travelling to Europe... or climbing out of Stanstead...(Airport)? You replied: >This may - or may not - be relevant to your own cases.<< Completely non-relevant to the FT activity refered to above. You also wrote: >Well, unless there is a league table of window areas I am >unaware of my criteria are the sheer number of cases >(especially close encounters - not just LITS - although there >are plenty of these too) within a confined area. To add an interesting element to this discussion why not tells us what you mean by "a sheer number of cases"... Tens, hundreds, thousands? (An approximation will suffice.) >I havent seen evidence of anywhere else in the UK that matches >and - whilst my knowledge of Europe is less complete and there >are interesting locales such as the area north of Marseilles in >France that could qualify - my assessment of the Pennines is >one based on direct observation and experience. << Again, I am refering to 'UFO sighting reports' as per your initial assertion whilst you are now including a mixed bag of "alien encounters, claimed abductions, etc, etc, etc" Best wishes, Victor J.Kean Project FT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Cynthia Hind From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:03:47 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:17:18 -0400 Subject: Cynthia Hind It is with great sadness I have read the reports of Cynthia's death. She was a lovely lady who was tireless in her efforts to investigate and report on the UFO events in Africa - one of the least well understood regions of the world. Her contribution is impossible to put into words and we would be much less knowledgable about this phenomenon without her work or her delight in travelling the world to bring the results to the attention of others. I always found her kind, respectful, extremely UFO aware and keen to state her case without rhetoric. Even if you did not agree with her (as sometimes I did not) it was possible to be friendly and to debate the evidence. I very much enjoyed the meetings and contacts I had with her and I am sure many other people did too. This is one of the truly sad days in UFO history. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hart From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 09:12:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:19:00 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Hart >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 18:16:13 -0400 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >>>Typical car stoppage events involve an objected within view and >>>when it leaves the car can be restarted... sometimes it >>>re-starts itself. I don't recall a case of a car that was still >>>'damaged' after the object departed. >>There have been a few, mostly where the engine or battery seemed >>to have suffered excessive heating. Friends, My research colleague has had some unusual experience with seeming EM pulses before and during anomalous events. On one occasion, the strongest, the pulse occurred thirty seconds after a light appeared and had the characteristics of an EM pulse being applied to her car's electrical system: the CD player ejected and the car doors locked. Her nearby videocamera was physically damaged-would not operate until repaired-and the fully charged battery attached to it was discharged in seconds as were four other batteries in the area. The rechargeable battery now holds no more than 1/3 charge when "fully" charged. We use Sony batteries that read out battery charge in minutes so we can see anomalies in battery behavior easily. Operation characteristics suggest there was a momentary short between the battery plates that left a dielectric breakdown low-resistance discharge path after the pulse passed so the battery was permanently damaged. On other occasions we see pulsed herringbone patterns in video recorded shortly before anomalous lights are seen. We have not fully analyzed the video signal using an oscilloscope or vectorscope to see the signal frequencies and phases present, but we will at some time in the future. Using AC or larger car battery power sources for cameras seems to minimize or eliminate the supply voltage bounce a pulse causes so this is a work-around for the characteristics we see present during sightings. These characteristics do not seem in any way to be "attacks", just present as a normal consequence of the presence of anomalous discharges so these characteristics_must_be pro-actively protected against for a research observation session to be successful. We believe typical UFO sightings exhibit the same characteristics and limitations. ~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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Alternative 3 - Redux From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:33:01 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:20:16 -0400 Subject: Alternative 3 - Redux For anyone still interested in the Alternative 3 saga, the following website is featuring the actual TV documentary that caused all the fuss back in the seventies. It was interesting to see this after all these years. When I spoke to Anglia TV back in the early nineties they told me the reel of film was missing from their files. I later learnt that it was in the hands of researchers. Anyway, for fans of Alt 3 it's a gem of a site. http://www.thule.org/alt3.html If you want the up to date story please read my feature on http://www.ufocity.com/f-bruni/gb-05.cfm I investigated this case many years ago, but updated it in the early nineties and later for this feature. Details of the book are also available on this site. It's amazing that after all this time I still receive several enquiries a year about this case. Leslie Watkins, who wrote the book "Alternative 3", which was a follow-up to the programme, is apparently writing another book on the subject revealing the harassment he received and the countless enquiries from people who believed it was for real. Enjoy Georgina Bruni
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 09:51:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:23:17 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:07:11 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:13:40 -0500 >>What reckless prediction? As usual, I have no idea what you're >>talking about. I simply said that at some point, most likely in >>the coming century after the current generation of >>UFO-neglecting scientists is gone, a future generation will >>probably take up the question. There's an old saying in science, >>apparently unfamiliar to you, that I was alluding to, namely: >>"Science progresses one death at a time." I also quoted >>psychologist Stuart Appelle, whose view of the potential of >>ufology to enter mainstream science in the future is the same as >>mine. If that's "reckless," then so be it. If we've learned >>nothing else, Andy, it's that you use words (e.g., "radical >>misperception," "solved") differently from the rest of us. >The only way in which "ufology" can even attempt enter >mainstream science is in the same semi-detached way that >"psychical research" has done: as a hundred-year-long succession >of scholarly-looking papers, which are batted backwards and >forwards in a sort of tennis match of pedantry, without ever >actually proving anything. >How can you have a science which is concerned with complete >unknowns? It _is_ possible to examine scientifically the >proposition that UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft. If that's >what you mean, Jerry, please say so rather more clearly than you >have up to now. >I've seen no evidence to convince me so far, but at least it's a >proposition which can be put into scientific terms, and is >amenable to some extent to scientific study (so long as people >don't start invoking magical aliens that can do whatever they >want in defiance of known physical principles). Is this what you >mean, Jerry, or are we going to be treated to another of your >virtuoso fence-sitting displays, where you announce that UFOs >are not misperceptions, not alien spacecraft, not atmospheric >phenomena, not psychosocial manifestations, they're just, well, >unidentified flying objects. True enough, but hardly the basis >for scientific progress. >Or do we just get the vague "objectively existing" blather, >without any hint of what the existing object might actually be: >"it looks like a spacecraft, it walks like a spacecraft, but >hey, show me where I said it _was_ a spacecraft!" >Quite a few "UFO neglecting" scientists have died off in the >last fifty- odd years, and lots of new ones come along. But I >don't think many of them are more "UFO friendly" than the last >lot. >How long, Jerry, how long? Hi, John, Well, I guess we get the usual from you, don't we? Why is it that, ever the hopeful soul, I keep expecting better from you? You also suffer the same cognitive dissonance that afflicts Andy: in one breath you attack my positions, and in the next you charge that I have no positions. Yet another reason I plan not to follow you into blind skepticism. Essentially, your argument seems to be that since science has neglected UFOs, that neglect justifies continued neglect. For the rest of us, a splendid example of how science can be usefully applied to UFO research is in the work of James McDonald. Three years ago this month Jan Aldrich, Mike Swords, Loren Gross, and I spent a week at the University of Arizona gong through the McDonald archives, which document McDonald's extraordinarily thorough investigations of a large number of puzzling UFO cases. He would have eaten guys like today's neoskeptics for breakfast. Incidentally, John, I note that you never did get around to answering my question about what, if anything, separates you from the more traditional debunking gang. All you did in response was to whine about my alleged unfairness to your pal Ian Ridpath. Now that you've gotten that out of your system, maybe we can get a straight answer out of you. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:06:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:28:18 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Goldsmith >From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:11:49 -0400 <snip> >Listers... >This thread brings to mind a question I would like to discuss >with all the physicists and mad-scientist wannabes like me. I've >always wondered what would happen (in theory, anyway) if one >attempted the following: >Take your typical accelerator and gets some electrons spinning >really fast around the ring. I don't know exactly how many EV >we're talking here, let's just say a whole lot of them. No >substituting microwaves. That's cheating. What we want is a big, >slow, fat pulse, just one. >Modify the ring so that, at the push of a button, you can have >it break open and pull apart, allowing the contents of the ring >to fly out of the open end at a target placed a few hundred feet >down range. The target could be anything, a car in this case, >with the engine running. >Assuming this is remotely possible, what do you think you would >see?> >a) the accelerated particles would behave like lightning; >zapping and frying everything between it and it's quickest route t>o ground, dissipating long before the car was affected...> >b) a great glowing glob of plasma flies out the barrel at >lightspeed and totally trashes the car, big explosion, all that. >maybe it keeps right on going...>> >c) you wouldn't see or hear a thing but the car stalling out...>> >d) can't be done, not even with duct tape. >I would like to think (b) is the correct answer but I have a >feeling it would be (a) or something similiar to that. Maybe >nothing would happen, I dunno. I was surprised to find that >noone on KeelyNet has tried this yet :) The instant you open the accelerator it loses vacuum and the particles crash into air and you get a big spark that might extend a few feet from the opening. There is an accelerator designed to emit a beam whic extends 10 or 20 feet, as I recall. The atmosphere is a toughy!. If it hit a car it might melt a hole through the metal. Whether or not it would stop an engine running I do not know. The car body might sheild it from the engine. anyway, the accelerator would be more likely to affect the car driver by excessive radiation (X-rays, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and From: Debra Carpenter <Debra88207@aol.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:44:20 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:31:19 -0400 Subject: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and [Non-Subscriber Post] Please be advised that any further communications regarding the above subject matter should be addressed to the following: Attorney William E. Stoner 2743 South Meadowbrook Springfield, MO 65807 Telephone: (417) 889-9093 Thank you. cc: Attorney William E. Stoner
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Death of Cynthia Hind From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:11:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:07:30 -0400 Subject: Death of Cynthia Hind Dear Errol, The following message was received today from Maria Sullivan, Assistant Editor of UFO AFRINEWS. I have not included the e-mail address as Maria was using Cynthia's address. ----- Dear John Hayes, This is to advise you that sadly, Cynthia Hind died on August 21st, after a very short illness. Mercifully, she passed away peacefully in her sleep and did not linger on in pain or suffering. I'm sure you will miss this vibrant, caring, talented woman -- writer, raconteur, brilliant communicator and a UFO investigator respected world-wide. With her death, UFO AFRINEWS comes to an end, 12 years after it first saw the light in July 1988. I would appreciate it if you could put an item to that effect in UFOINFO. Many thanks. Sincerely, Maria Sullivan Asst Editor, UFO AFRINEWS Regards, John Hayes ufoinfo@ukgateway.net webmaster@ufoinfo.com UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com Official Archives for UFO Roundup, UK UFO Network Bulletin, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine plus archives of Filer's Files.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Cynthia Hind From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:35:22 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:12:58 -0400 Subject: Cynthia Hind The recent news of Cynthia's passing is very sad!! She was a lovely lady, always willing to help others. In memoriam, I must thank her for all her recent help, in my current research and send my heart felt condolences to her family. I never knew that she was so ill with cancer; and now that this sad event has occurred I am all the more appreciative for the little time she afforded me. Deep sympathy. Gary Anthony
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Cynthia Hind From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:06:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:17:25 -0400 Subject: Cynthia Hind >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Cynthia Hind >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:03:47 +0100 >It is with great sadness I have read the reports of Cynthia's >death. >She was a lovely lady who was tireless in her efforts to >investigate and report on the UFO events in Africa - one of the >least well understood regions of the world. Her contribution is >impossible to put into words and we would be much less >knowledgable about this phenomenon without her work or her >delight in travelling the world to bring the results to the >attention of others. Jenny & All, If I may, I would like to add, my sorrow and sadness on hearing of the passing of Cynthia. I had great respect for Cynthia and the work she had done for the field of UFO research - a true professional in the whole sense of the word. I began communication some years back with Cynthia, on the aspect of UFO cases in Africa. Her knowledge was formidable and I found her to be a very polite and sincere lady. I would like to extend my sympathies to Cynthia's family. I shall miss her. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 12:37:22 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:34:35 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Cashman >From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:11:49 -0400 >Take your typical accelerator and gets some electrons spinning >really fast around the ring. I don't know exactly how many EV >we're talking here, let's just say a whole lot of them. No >substituting microwaves. That's cheating. What we want is a big, >slow, fat pulse, just one. >Modify the ring so that, at the push of a button, you can have >it break open and pull apart, allowing the contents of the ring >to fly out of the open end at a target placed a few hundred feet >down range. The target could be anything, a car in this case, >with the engine running. >Assuming this is remotely possible, what do you think you would >see? Accelerated electrons travel a torturous path through normal matter. As they pass close to the nucleus of an atom, the Coulomb field causes them to lose energy; this, because of conservation of energy, manifests itself as an X ray called "bremssrahlung". Increased energy means increased bremssrahlung production. At 90-MeV, 90% of the energy is lost, while at 10, only 50% is lost. However, bremssrahlung is relatively unimportant in air and other low atomic number materials. It is very important in the interaction with materials such as tungsten. The loss is proportional to the atomic number squared of the atom. In the case of the primary constituent of air, which is N, (Z=7), the loss is proportional to 49. In iron (Z=26), the loss is proportional to 676, or about 13 times greater. If an electron is sufficiently accelerated so as to overcome the barrier presented by the orbital electrons, it will interact with the nucleus, such that it will combine with a neutron to produce a proton and a neutrino. This will alter the material at a fundamental level, which may be metastable (i.e. lasting for some time) or unstable (almost instantly rejected). This forms an isomer of the material, which may be subject to subsequent radioactive decay. Less accelerated electrons will excite the atom into any number of possible excited states, from which they will return to the normal state through the emission of a photon of a particular energy. At high energies this reaction causes the ejection of the target atom electron, which reaction absorbs some of the energy of the incident beam. In combination, this tends to disperse the energy of the beam into photons and lower energy electrons. For a highly accelerated beam, close to the beam source, the dominant processes would seem to be nuclear collisions and bremssrahlung, with some high excitation of electron shells, generating a soup of lower energy electrons that may interact with other atoms to form negatively ionized material, which then may undergo a number of chemical reactions with other ionized or non-ionized materials as they attempt to attain neutrality. In the middle range of the beam, the excitation and luminosity processes are probably dominant. When the beam reaches denser material (such as steel), there will probably be a bremssrahlung peak, which will result in the emission of X-rays, and there will also be a higher probability of excitation chemical reactions. This returns us to a hypothesis which I hold, which is that the luminosity of the UFO could be a consequence of the injection of energetic electrons into the near shell environment of the UFO. http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/analysis/luminosity/index.htm Indeed, in the presence of some force pushing air away from the surface of the UFO, which would rarify the atmosphere in that region, luminosity is an even liklier result. There are some cases where it seems possible to suggest that an electron beam may have been involved in interaction with a terrestrial vehicle. In one case, ionization chemistry or the formation of isomers might have been responsible for the reported color change of an automobile after a close encounter / stoppage. In other cases, the discharge of a battery through its positive terminal might have occurred due to the presence of the ejected secondary electrons and the resulting negative ionization of the atmosphere (however, there are other factors which might prevent that., and more research on this topic is needed). The generation of X-rays by the bremssrahlung process is not necessarily of concern in these cases. It is likely that this process would tend to occur within a fairly thin layer of material, and that the resulting X-rays would be damped by the material between the emission and the passengers. This part of the reaction would not be detectable to investigators because the X-rays do not cause durable nuclear reactions or decay. However, if the nuclear collision reactions were common at the skin of the automobile, there might be a residual radioactivity for a greater or lesser period as isomers departed the metastable state for a stable state. Modern cars are much less prone to bremssrahlung, since they are made of lighter materials such as aluminum. Thus, ionization reactions are probably the dominant effect of such a beam in recent cases. The absence of a luminous beam from the UFO in most car stop cases suggests strongly however that electron beams are not a viable alterative. In addition, it seems likely that ionization reactions would be strongly corrosive of automobile finishes, something which is not frequently reported. I hope this helps answer your question. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.temporaldoorway.com - Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research - UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more... http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:03:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:52:28 -0400 Subject: Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:39:20 EDT >Subject: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dear Listless-Listers, Energetic Maligners and EBK, Only because you have repeatedly mentioned my name in this rambling (8 page) posting (most of which I have snipped out of mercy) am I responding to it at all. I am also assuming that because it appears in the 'greeting' the term "energetic maligner" does not refer to yourself. ;) >Whilst there are many others who contribute to this wonderful >List, I shall leave them out. Mainly because they are not the >butt of this rant. A "rant". Yet you post it anyway. >Serge was right about me. I play the fool. I make light of many >a situation by virtue of my right as king of Gripple and other >silly associations. What you don't seem to realize is that 'sometimes' people are trying to be _serious_ or deal with something _seriously_ and your 'contributions' (if that's what they can be called) only serve to distract or divert attention away from the business at hand. Your "rants" and what you refer to as your "humor" are at times (especially when something serious or important is on the table) a most unwelcomed guest. <snip> > Anyone who can stand tall and say that Carpenter is guilty >and say it _now_, is a damned fool. John Caprpenter (by his own admission) sold off the reports and files of the people who confided in him to a "private" individual and without consulting the people who provided him with the material in the first place. Jim, if as an abductee you cannot see reason to 'question' such dealings on the part of amateur UFO/abduction researchers then you need a "tune-up". Ever since day one all I or any of the others have asked for is that Carpenter notify those clients whose files he sold to Bigelow (not NIDS!) and to provide them with a written and signed assurance (not 'verbal') that their files were _all_ properly redacted for _any_ identifying information. You _insist_ on painting that as a personal indictment and attack on the person of John Carpenter. If he did "no wrong" (although he himself has acknowledged it when he admitted that he should have notified them) then what's the problem with providing the abductees with a short written and signed assurance that all the files were properly sanitized? I have told you repeatedly that you are wrong that this is not a personal attack, and that you have been interfering with our efforts to get JC to do the right thing by those abductees. When all the other 'wrenches' that you threw into the works failed, you then resorted to using this thread to vent your spleen at me personally. Velez this, and Velez that. Post after post after post. Dude, get a new hobby or a life of your own. You mention my name in your postings more often than my wife does here at home for Keerists sake! >Maybe he is, but there is no proof except that which Velez >mentioned in the last post I read from him. I shall repeat it >here because it really exposes the difference between my logic >and the logic of some others in this matter. >Referring to whether the files were redacted or not, Velez wrote >We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. >In another breath he says that he has only Elizabeth Carpenter's >word on the fact that _all_ the files were not redacted. >Excuse me but, _Duh!_ Re: Elizabeth Carpenter, It was _Carpenter_ in a public response to me, that admitted that the "only file that went out un-sanitized belonged to my ex-wife" and that it was "ok, because it was her 'maiden name' that appeared and not her 'married' name." If a comment/admission like that is acceptable to you then fine. It is _not_ acceptable to me when it comes from a "professional" whose ethical standards are supposed to be 'on duty' 24 hours a day. I asked him to provide the other 139 clients with a written assurance that he properly sanitized all of their files. What in Heaven's name is your problem with that? I _never_ took Elizabeth's word on _anything_. _All_ of my information was obtained either from some of the other abductees involved or from Walt Andrus, John Carpenter, Robert Bigelow, and Dr. Alexander. All of which _confirmed_ the fact of the sale (Dr.Alexander himself was very careful to make it his number one comment that the files were sold to _Bigelow_ and not to NIDS. It is Carpenter who claims that he sold them to a "serious research organization" namely NIDS.) Yet none of those contradictions or the fact that abductee files were sold to a "private" individual seems to bother or upset you at all. Instead, and in spite of all the evidence and statements from the principles themselves, you attack the messenger (me) and defend Carpenter as if he was being wrongly "accused" of something or that he is being asked "unfair" questions. You have been the _only_ one to consistently oppose and try to derail any efforts to get some consideration for the abductees in this case. Not once have I launched or called for any kind of an "attack" against John Carpenter. To the contrary, every time it started to 'ugly' that way I spoke up "loudly" against trying the man in public. But... as far as what he did, _that_ is an established and confirmed (by all four principles involved) fact. Suppose that it was me that bought those files from Carpenter. I'll bet you the ranch that you would _then_ be able to see how wrong it all is. For some reason, you cannot see it now. I think the reason has more to do with your personal animosity towards me than any real caring over Carpenter or this issue. That's why I have referred to your efforts on this thread as "selfish" all along. This about how you feel about _me_ not Carpenter or the sale of abductee files to private individuals. That part of it all reveals what makes _you_ tick. For the last time: I have _never_ "attacked" Carpenter on this List or anywhere else. >OK, so now we have Carpenter's version and Elizabeth's (and >therefore all of John Velez' and others' version - ipso facto!) >also posted for all to see. J, Mary, & Joseph! What "versions?" Jim whether you 'like it or not' the confirmed fact is, that Carpenter sold 140 abductee files to a private individual. Whether you 'like it or not' I and others who care are going to question such dealings. My "version" as you put it, is based on the confirmations that were obtained from all the people I have mentioned over and over again. >Not to bash Elizabeth, but as for reputation, who has more >Mott's this week? Hands? Now it's a 'popularity' contest? You're unreal. >I get carried away sometimes, at the goading of >Velez's nonsense, but I shall try to understand where he is >coming from... most likely a place which I perceive is dark in >which there is little truth but his own truth. I never 'goaded' you Jim. I "responded' to your incessant BS'ing about your relationship to Budd and to IF. I responded to your insistance that I "implicated Budd" in this mess because of my past association with him. Then I responded to your attacks on me personally and AIC. Then I responded to your painting my exposure of JC's sale of abductee files as an "attack" on him personally. Then I responded to your name calling and flaming of a List member when you told him to go see a psychiatrist and eat Quaaludes. Then... well need I say more? In case you haven't noticed what I have been doing with you is turning a hose on you everytime you try to piss gripple on this thread. I refuse to allow you to paint this issue as a personal anything against Carpenter. It isn't true. ***** You have admonished me to take heed and keep quiet about this Carpenter mess or I may get sued. You can't sue anyone for telling the truth. John Carpenter, Walt Andrus, Bob Bigelow, and Dr.Alexander have all admitted that the transaction happened. That is all I ever said. If you (or anyone else) wants want to "sue me" then by all means go ahead. Just bear in mind that after the suit will come a counter-suit which I _will_ win. 'Whoever' sues me better be prepared to prove in court that I said _anything_ that was not true, unconfirmed, or unsubstantiated in regard to Carpenter's sale of client files to a private person. >I commend him for exposing a possible problem. Then, it got too >damned far along. All of a sudden, Carpenter was guilty as sin >itself. But is he? I for one, don't know. And I think that all >of us should expunge anyone who claims otherwise without proof. What are you proposing Jim, that I be "excommunicated" from the List? <ROFLMAO!> >Anything and everything I've read here is purely conjecture. I guess you didn't read Andrus's statements, Carpenters admissions that he did wrong by not notifying his clients, Dr. Alexander's insistance that the files were sold to Bigelow not to NIDS and Carpenters insistance that he did sell them to NIDS. Gee, I see how it can get 'confusing' for someone who hasn't read all the posts in the thread. You didn't miss any of mine though did you Jimbo? <LOL> (In fact,... you counted them! Hee-haw) >One thing is clear or should be damned well made CLEAR. >There are many people who made negative comments about the issue >of Carpenter. Why does Velez think they are all directed at him? I don't Jim. I have only objected to _you_ sending people private e-mails where you refer to me in the worst terms possible. I haven't responded to anyone else because no one else is engaging in such immature and childish behavior. If you can't understand why I object to you referring to me (to strangers who do not know me) as the "hateful, paranoiac, King of the Abductees" then there is a serious glitch in _your_ education somewhere. >Some comments I've made are indeed directed at him. But unless >you are John Velez, you wouldn't (better, "shouldn't") think >anything was directed at him. I call that paranoia. Thank you for your diagnosis docca. Are you going to prescribe Quaaludes? ;) >And truth be told, I am hard to take. Yep. :) >You people who insist on roasting Carpenter are premature in >doing so. And if you are wrong, you will look like the royal >ass to all of us. You are such a class act Jim. >In factoid, let it be known that >of all the posts I wrote, only one was similar to John's >concerning me. And that one, Thank God and Errol Bruce-Knapp, >was not posted. It went directly to Velez where it was marked, >"Take this off list, guys..." or something similar. Correct me >if I am mistookan Errol. And thank you. Ever since I began this >quest of my own, you and Rense have been extremely kind, >generous and helpful. Specially Rense. Thank you publically. I gotta have a talk with Jeff and Errol! <LOL> As evidenced by the fact that the 'flames' you tried to post about me to the list were not published but rather diverted to me privately by EBK doesn't seem to register on your synapses at all. Posting your self-defined "rants" does not necessarily constitute "support". It constitutes being "published." ;) >As for the posts on this subject, Velez alone wrote about 60. I >have not had the opportunity to count the rest. Why did you count only mine? Something "personal" maybe? <LOL> >In not one did anyone >except me state that since the evidence is not in, That's because everyone else read the posts where Carpenter admitted to selling the files and that he _should_ have notified his clients. >Carpenter may _not_ be guilty. Of what Jim? Not selling the files? Too late for that. And that's all that I have discussed here. His sale of abductee files to a private citizen. Just what is it that I have "accused" him of? What is it that he is not guilty of? >I personally find that quite acceptable and in >fact, it points to the fact that such a voice is needed. And >that voice need not be funny. Don't worry. I never thought you were funny to begin with. Stop trying to convince people that orange is really green. I have not "attacked" JC at any time. Jim if you don't think that people can't see how very hard you are working to hurt me personally, you really need to take the blinkers off. Take your tiny, erect sword and go attack some other windmill. I told you last time that I didn't wish to respond to anymore of these rants from you but you have done nothing but continue to mention my name and try to paint me as an evil agent that needs to be excommunicated from this List. You take time out of your life to write to people privately to make sure that they know how "hateful and paranoid the King of the abductees" (me) is, while "on" the List you complain about how _you_ are being flamed and defamed. How sad. John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:03:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:37:13 -0400 Subject: Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Velez >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:39:20 EDT >Subject: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Dear Listless-Listers, Energetic Maligners and EBK, Only because you have repeatedly mentioned my name in this rambling (8 page) posting (most of which I have snipped out of mercy) am I responding to it at all. I am also assuming that because it appears in the 'greeting' the term "energetic maligner" does not refer to yourself. ;) >Whilst there are many others who contribute to this wonderful >List, I shall leave them out. Mainly because they are not the >butt of this rant. A "rant". Yet you post it anyway. >Serge was right about me. I play the fool. I make light of many >a situation by virtue of my right as king of Gripple and other >silly associations. What you don't seem to realize is that 'sometimes' people are trying to be _serious_ or deal with something _seriously_ and your 'contributions' (if that's what they can be called) only serve to distract or divert attention away from the business at hand. Your "rants" and what you refer to as your "humor" are at times (especially when something serious or important is on the table) a most unwelcomed guest. <snip> > Anyone who can stand tall and say that Carpenter is guilty >and say it _now_, is a damned fool. John Caprpenter (by his own admission) sold off the reports and files of the people who confided in him to a "private" individual and without consulting the people who provided him with the material in the first place. Jim, if as an abductee you cannot see reason to 'question' such dealings on the part of amateur UFO/abduction researchers then you need a "tune-up". Ever since day one all I or any of the others have asked for is that Carpenter notify those clients whose files he sold to Bigelow (not NIDS!) and to provide them with a written and signed assurance (not 'verbal') that their files were _all_ properly redacted for _any_ identifying information. You _insist_ on painting that as a personal indictment and attack on the person of John Carpenter. If he did "no wrong" (although he himself has acknowledged it when he admitted that he should have notified them) then what's the problem with providing the abductees with a short written and signed assurance that all the files were properly sanitized? I have told you repeatedly that you are wrong that this is not a personal attack, and that you have been interfering with our efforts to get JC to do the right thing by those abductees. When all the other 'wrenches' that you threw into the works failed, you then resorted to using this thread to vent your spleen at me personally. Velez this, and Velez that. Post after post after post. Dude, get a new hobby or a life of your own. You mention my name in your postings more often than my wife does here at home for Keerists sake! >Maybe he is, but there is no proof except that which Velez >mentioned in the last post I read from him. I shall repeat it >here because it really exposes the difference between my logic >and the logic of some others in this matter. >Referring to whether the files were redacted or not, Velez wrote >We only have Carpenter's 'word' on that Serge. >In another breath he says that he has only Elizabeth Carpenter's >word on the fact that _all_ the files were not redacted. >Excuse me but, _Duh!_ Re: Elizabeth Carpenter, It was _Carpenter_ in a public response to me, that admitted that the "only file that went out un-sanitized belonged to my ex-wife" and that it was "ok, because it was her 'maiden name' that appeared and not her 'married' name." If a comment/admission like that is acceptable to you then fine. It is _not_ acceptable to me when it comes from a "professional" whose ethical standards are supposed to be 'on duty' 24 hours a day. I asked him to provide the other 139 clients with a written assurance that he properly sanitized all of their files. What in Heaven's name is your problem with that? I _never_ took Elizabeth's word on _anything_. _All_ of my information was obtained either from some of the other abductees involved or from Walt Andrus, John Carpenter, Robert Bigelow, and Dr. Alexander. All of which _confirmed_ the fact of the sale (Dr.Alexander himself was very careful to make it his number one comment that the files were sold to _Bigelow_ and not to NIDS. It is Carpenter who claims that he sold them to a "serious research organization" namely NIDS.) Yet none of those contradictions or the fact that abductee files were sold to a "private" individual seems to bother or upset you at all. Instead, and in spite of all the evidence and statements from the principles themselves, you attack the messenger (me) and defend Carpenter as if he was being wrongly "accused" of something or that he is being asked "unfair" questions. You have been the _only_ one to consistently oppose and try to derail any efforts to get some consideration for the abductees in this case. Not once have I launched or called for any kind of an "attack" against John Carpenter. To the contrary, every time it started to 'ugly' that way I spoke up "loudly" against trying the man in public. But... as far as what he did, _that_ is an established and confirmed (by all four principles involved) fact. Suppose that it was me that bought those files from Carpenter. I'll bet you the ranch that you would _then_ be able to see how wrong it all is. For some reason, you cannot see it now. I think the reason has more to do with your personal animosity towards me than any real caring over Carpenter or this issue. That's why I have referred to your efforts on this thread as "selfish" all along. This about how you feel about _me_ not Carpenter or the sale of abductee files to private individuals. That part of it all reveals what makes _you_ tick. For the last time: I have _never_ "attacked" Carpenter on this List or anywhere else. >OK, so now we have Carpenter's version and Elizabeth's (and >therefore all of John Velez' and others' version - ipso facto!) >also posted for all to see. J, Mary, & Joseph! What "versions?" Jim whether you 'like it or not' the confirmed fact is, that Carpenter sold 140 abductee files to a private individual. Whether you 'like it or not' I and others who care are going to question such dealings. My "version" as you put it, is based on the confirmations that were obtained from all the people I have mentioned over and over again. >Not to bash Elizabeth, but as for reputation, who has more >Mott's this week? Hands? Now it's a 'popularity' contest? You're unreal. >I get carried away sometimes, at the goading of >Velez's nonsense, but I shall try to understand where he is >coming from... most likely a place which I perceive is dark in >which there is little truth but his own truth. I never 'goaded' you Jim. I "responded' to your incessant BS'ing about your relationship to Budd and to IF. I responded to your insistance that I "implicated Budd" in this mess because of my past association with him. Then I responded to your attacks on me personally and AIC. Then I responded to your painting my exposure of JC's sale of abductee files as an "attack" on him personally. Then I responded to your name calling and flaming of a List member when you told him to go see a psychiatrist and eat Quaaludes. Then... well need I say more? In case you haven't noticed what I have been doing with you is turning a hose on you everytime you try to piss gripple on this thread. I refuse to allow you to paint this issue as a personal anything against Carpenter. It isn't true. ***** You have admonished me to take heed and keep quiet about this Carpenter mess or I may get sued. You can't sue anyone for telling the truth. John Carpenter, Walt Andrus, Bob Bigelow, and Dr.Alexander have all admitted that the transaction happened. That is all I ever said. If you (or anyone else) wants want to "sue me" then by all means go ahead. Just bear in mind that after the suit will come a counter-suit which I _will_ win. 'Whoever' sues me better be prepared to prove in court that I said _anything_ that was not true, unconfirmed, or unsubstantiated in regard to Carpenter's sale of client files to a private person. >I commend him for exposing a possible problem. Then, it got too >damned far along. All of a sudden, Carpenter was guilty as sin >itself. But is he? I for one, don't know. And I think that all >of us should expunge anyone who claims otherwise without proof. What are you proposing Jim, that I be "excommunicated" from the List? <ROFLMAO!> >Anything and everything I've read here is purely conjecture. I guess you didn't read Andrus's statements, Carpenters admissions that he did wrong by not notifying his clients, Dr. Alexander's insistance that the files were sold to Bigelow not to NIDS and Carpenters insistance that he did sell them to NIDS. Gee, I see how it can get 'confusing' for someone who hasn't read all the posts in the thread. You didn't miss any of mine though did you Jimbo? <LOL> (In fact,... you counted them! Hee-haw) >One thing is clear or should be damned well made CLEAR. >There are many people who made negative comments about the issue >of Carpenter. Why does Velez think they are all directed at him? I don't Jim. I have only objected to _you_ sending people private e-mails where you refer to me in the worst terms possible. I haven't responded to anyone else because no one else is engaging in such immature and childish behavior. If you can't understand why I object to you referring to me (to strangers who do not know me) as the "hateful, paranoiac, King of the Abductees" then there is a serious glitch in _your_ education somewhere. >Some comments I've made are indeed directed at him. But unless >you are John Velez, you wouldn't (better, "shouldn't") think >anything was directed at him. I call that paranoia. Thank you for your diagnosis docca. Are you going to prescribe Quaaludes? ;) >And truth be told, I am hard to take. Yep. :) >You people who insist on roasting Carpenter are premature in >doing so. And if you are wrong, you will look like the royal >ass to all of us. You are such a class act Jim. >In factoid, let it be known that >of all the posts I wrote, only one was similar to John's >concerning me. And that one, Thank God and Errol Bruce-Knapp, >was not posted. It went directly to Velez where it was marked, >"Take this off list, guys..." or something similar. Correct me >if I am mistookan Errol. And thank you. Ever since I began this >quest of my own, you and Rense have been extremely kind, >generous and helpful. Specially Rense. Thank you publically. I gotta have a talk with Jeff and Errol! <LOL> As evidenced by the fact that the 'flames' you tried to post about me to the list were not published but rather diverted to me privately by EBK doesn't seem to register on your synapses at all. Posting your self-defined "rants" does not necessarily constitute "support". It constitutes being "published." ;) >As for the posts on this subject, Velez alone wrote about 60. I >have not had the opportunity to count the rest. Why did you count only mine? Something "personal" maybe? <LOL> >In not one did anyone >except me state that since the evidence is not in, That's because everyone else read the posts where Carpenter admitted to selling the files and that he _should_ have notified his clients. >Carpenter may _not_ be guilty. Of what Jim? Not selling the files? Too late for that. And that's all that I have discussed here. His sale of abductee files to a private citizen. Just what is it that I have "accused" him of? What is it that he is not guilty of? >I personally find that quite acceptable and in >fact, it points to the fact that such a voice is needed. And >that voice need not be funny. Don't worry. I never thought you were funny to begin with. Stop trying to convince people that orange is really green. I have not "attacked" JC at any time. Jim if you don't think that people can't see how very hard you are working to hurt me personally, you really need to take the blinkers off. Take your tiny, erect sword and go attack some other windmill. I told you last time that I didn't wish to respond to anymore of these rants from you but you have done nothing but continue to mention my name and try to paint me as an evil agent that needs to be excommunicated from this List. You take time out of your life to write to people privately to make sure that they know how "hateful and paranoid the King of the abductees" (me) is, while "on" the List you complain about how _you_ are being flamed and defamed. How sad. John Velez
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:01:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:38:53 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Hale >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 07:12:52 -0400 >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Reading your various responses, I can see that you have altered >your intial assertion that the Bacup - Todmorden area (Lancs) >"was the busiest area for *UFO* activity in the entire UK >(possibly in Europe)" by drawing attention to the many claimed >abduction cases (and claimed close encounters) from that >area...In my mind, a diifferent matter entirely. Hi Victor, Is there any news on your Project FT web site being re-established on the www yet? Kind 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Hale's Web Update From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:49:51 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:40:15 -0400 Subject: Hale's Web Update Hi All, A slight update to my site. For my chat forum please go to: http://thelosthaven1.community.everyone.net/commun_v3/scripts/directory.pl or click on the ! symbol on my main page. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:49:04 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:44:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 02:49:08 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Thank you for enlightening us all with your thorough and deep' >as well as very constructive dissemination of the film footage >which Chris has shot over the last couple of years. But Roy I commented that if his identification of an every day object such as a plane was far out, we have to be sceptical of other claims. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when I see the footage at Leeds. I will be asking questions though. >I am glad, you had taken time out of your busy schedule to sit >down and view most of his film footage. Don't mention it, its not a problem, for you Roy, anything. >I am also glad that you to the time to travel to London over some >period to have meetings with Chris at his place of filming, this >has obviously gave you a far greater insight into the case, of his >film footage. No need to go to London, he's bringing the best footage for us all to see in Leeds and I'm even giving up a karate tournament for this film. >One question I think we would all like an answer to is, after >sifting through what was probably hours of video tape, what was >the clip that gave you the answer to the years of filming he has >been carrying out? And in English. After you have looked through all the video's etc what clip gave me the answer. To what? >I think we can say safely, thanks for the insight into what we >can expect from UFOIN investigations? A full and totally >explored investigation of the data (film) and of course Chris >(the person). You betcha. When did Chris have his first close encounter. Does he know anyone else with similar experiences or have I got to read that in the book. Nice plug of his book on your website. It was also interesting to see in another Update message, >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>Absolutely, that's why I sent the mails in the first place... >>all I've had so far is support from Roy Hale, nothing from the >>others and of course the inevitable silly mail from the likes of >>yourself. Of course all this has nothing to do with the fact you designed the front cover for Chris Martin's book would it. Cheers Rory Lushman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:54:50 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:47:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:06:01 -0400 Serge, >Your references falsely imply that it is possible for an >individual experiencing Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD) to >have this syndrome based on fantasy. This is not quite the case. >This is explicated in _your_ references properly exposed in the >bottom of my post. Point taken. >In a nutshell: _your_ references, _your_ authors, relate to >cases where people _fake_ PTSD. It is _not_ PTSD based on >fantasy. Again, point taken. However, this is one of the few arenas in which we can establish that the incidents cited by the subject are without merit. Documentation exists to prove that a person was either in Vietnam or was not. Burkett was writing from the point of view that these people were inventing their horrific combat experiences. The question that was not addressed by Burkett was how many actually believed the tales they told and their PTSD was an outgrowth of that belief. It can be said that all these examples fail because it is clear that all those involved had faked the PTSD. But if the person truly believed in his or her combat experiences, then don't we have an example of PTSD as an outgrowth of fantasy? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:56:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:48:58 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:09:06 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: The Irish Times On Fermi's Paradox >Source: The Irish Times, >http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/science/2000/0821/sci3.htm >Stig > >*** >Monday, August 21, 2000 >We are alone - to date <snip> >The dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 140 million years, but never >produced a civilisation. Neither was there anything in their >general biological logic - which leaned on brawn rather than >brain - to suggest that they would ever evolve significant >cleverness. The writer of the Irish Times article should have included a disclaimer: "the opinions expressed here are those of the author, and not necessarily those of experts in the field of paleontology who know what they're talking about." Paleontologists have, in fact, speculated that some of the smaller species of predatory dinosaurs were on the verge of the level of intelligence seen in lower primates at the time of their extinction. They are thought to have hunted in groups and coordinated their attacks. One dinosaur expert even constructed a speculative model of what a "dinosaur man" evolved from these predators might look like, had their evolution not been cut short by the Big One. Given the levels of intelligence seen in such unrelated creatures as dolphins, chimpanzees, and octopus, it may be that intelligence is not all that unlikely to evolve, once the first giant step is made from non-cellular to cellular life forms. Even that might not be as improbable as it is made out to be, if the mediocrity principal is applied. The mediocrity principal is that, with no evidence to go on, it's safest to assume that a given instance of a group is about average in any property that can be quantified. People use this principal all the time. For example, if you selected a person at random off the street, the chances are that he or she would be about average in mathematical abilities: neither a genius who understands advanced mathematics nor a dunce who can't count to ten. Even geniuses are usually unremarkable in most of their traits and only excel in a few areas: Einstein liked to play the violin, but was never considered a great violinist. Napoleon was said to have been a rather mediocre chess player, somewhat surprisingly. If you applied the mediocrity principal to the evolution of life on Earth, you'd have to assume that the 3.3 billion years between the time that life first evolved and the appearance of multicellular life forms is about average (or within one sigma of the average for all planets with multicellular life). Since we don't know what the range of time is that constitutes one sigma, the appearance of multicellular life a few hundred million years after a planet cools down from the molten state may be quite common or it may be extremely rare. You just can't tell from a population sample that so far has only one data point -- Earth. As for SETI, it's total reliance on reception of ET radio beacons really is reminiscent of the joke about the drunk looking for his car keys under a street lamp even though he knows he didn't lose them there. His rationale: "because that's where the light is."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:29:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:50:07 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Stacy >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:09:06 +0200 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: The Irish Times On Fermi's Paradox <snip> >The topic of alien civilisation in our galaxy is discussed in >detail in a fascinating article by Ian Crawford in the July 2000 >issue of Scientific American. Here's a link for the Crawford article: http://www.sciam.com/2000/0700issue/0700crawford.html Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:27:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:52:50 -0400 Subject: Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness Listfolk: Few people in the history of the UFO controversy have played so destructive or dishonorable a role as the late Harvard astronomer and obsessed UFO trasher Donald Howard Menzel (1901-1976). Through his power and position -- as well as a fierce personality which many found intimidating (he did not hesitate, according to astronomer Ian Seymour, to "blacken the reputations and damage the careers of scientific opponents") -- he discouraged his generation of scientists from looking into the UFO phenomenon. He wrote or co-wrote three books on the subject, classics of pseudoscience in which, as James McDonald documented, "well-known scientific principles" are cast aside "almost with abandon.... In 'explanation' after 'explanation' in his books, Menzel rides roughshod over elementary optical considerations governing such things as mirages and light reflections." In the recent collection from the University Press of Kansas (UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge), sociologist of science Ron Westrum remarks that Menzel's UFO books "represent quite shoddy science" and notes that even the UFOphobic Edward Condon deemed Menzel's explanations laughable. What brings Menzel's name to mind is the recent list discussion of witness reliability. Menzel made much of alleged witness unreliability (to the degree that he refused to investigate UFO cases from anywhere but the armchair, on the principle that witnesses didn't know what they were talking about and thus were unworthy of his time). Ironically, it turns out, that one of the most unreliable UFO witnesses ever was Menzel himself. The following appears on pages 633-34 of my UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition: On May 12, 1949, Menzel had a personal encounter with the UFO phenomenon. His private description of the event and his later public one differed markedly. His initial account of the incident did not come to light until the 1970s, when researcher Brad Sparks managed to uncover the report, sent to the Air Force and marked "CONFIDENTIAL." (Sparks, 1977). Menzel related that at 9:30 that evening he and a driver left Holloman Air Force Base on their way to Alamogordo, New Mexico. As they traveled along Highway 70, heading east-northeast, Menzel, in the backseat, admired the full moon ascending in the southeast and noted the presence of the reddish star Antares just below and to the left of the moon. A minute or two later he saw another object in the sky, this one nearer the horizon and farther to the left. As he told the Air Force, "The star had a fuzzy appearance, caused, I thought, by low-level atmospheric haze. As I watched, I noted, within half a minute, a second star about three degrees to the South of the first." Thinking at first that these were the stars Castor and Pollux, he watched them for another minute as they gradually became brighter. Suddenly he realized that "the two stars had to be something else." They were too big, and Castor and Pollux were in the western, not the east-southeastern sky. The objects, he related, were "very nearly identical in diameter, nearly one-half the size of the full moon." The drawing accompanying his report shows two small circles. Quickly determining that these were not reflections on his bifocals or on the car window, he continued to observe the "ghostly objects" for another four minutes. They were white, almost as bright as the brightest stars, and level with each other. Then the object on the right "suddenly disappeared." Convinced that what he was seeing was "exceptional," he ordered the driver to stop immediately, but the very moment he was speaking, the second object vanished instantly. Menzel calculated that if the objects were truly motionless, as they seemed to be, they were at least "180 miles away" and about "3/4 of a mile" in size. (If they were closer and in motion, they would be smaller.) When Menzel submitted his report to the Air Force soon afterwards, he was clearly puzzled. But when he recounted the story four years later, in the first of three anti-UFO books he would write over two decades, he had it solved, even though he grudgingly acknowledged that "I cannot explain the phenomenon in every detail." He wrote, "It was merely a reflection of the moon.... A layer of haze, perhaps disturbed and tilted by the moving car, probably caused the trick reflections of the moon." The situation was comparable to "that of a person riding in a fast motorboat. He might see the moon reflected in the bow wave thrown up by the boat. But the reflection would vanish when the boat stopped." Therefore, he reasoned, the lunar- reflection theory "would also explain why the pair of ghostly attendants faded at the moment we stopped the car; the reflecting bumps would then disappear" (Menzel, 1953). As Sparks has pointed out (his italics): The facts that Menzel so neatly fitted to his moon-reflection hypothesis are exactly wrong. These UFOs that Menzel called "extra moons" in his four-year-old account actually were _one- fourth to one-half_ the apparent size of the moon, according to his original four-_day_-old report. The UFOs did not "fade away," they "suddenly disappeared." And that did not occur when the car stopped, but while the car was _still traveling at 50 mph_. The second UFO vanished at the precise moment that Menzel _asked_ the driver to stop. By then the first UFO was already gone [Sparks, op. cit.]. Menzel had altered the details of his own sighting so that he could "explain" it. There is no mention of this sighting in Menzel's two subsequent UFO books, though in the last of them he would claim his "first encounter" with alleged UFOs was in 1955 (Menzel and Taves, 1977). Menzel, Donald H. Flying Saucers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953. Menzel, Donald H., and Lyle G. Boyd. The World of Flying Saucers: A Scientific Examination of a Major Myth of the Space Age. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1963. Sparks, Brad. Refuting the Skeptics: A Close Look at Donald H. Menzel. Berkeley, CA: The Author, 1977. See also: McDonald, James E. UFOs: Greatest Scientific Problem of Our Times? Tucson, AZ: The Author, 1967. Seymour, Ian. "The Curious Case of Donald Menzel." Astronomy Now 6 (December 1992): 58. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 CPR-Canada News: Updates - Special Research From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:10:16 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:58:40 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Updates - Special Research CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 27, 2000 _____________________________ UPDATES - SPECIAL RESEARCH PROJECTS The Special Research Projects area of the CPR-Canada web site has been updated, as part of a general revamping. Current sections include History of the Phenomenon, The Scientific Evidence and Related Phenomena, which will continue to be added to and updated in the coming weeks and months. http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:28:07 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:01:51 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 07:12:52 -0400 >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:08 +0100 >>>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:00:08 +0100 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings? - Randles >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>With regards to the FT reports in East Anglia, of course I am >>>aware of them. What I said was that I had not personally >>>investigated these reports so could not comment from that >>>perspective. Thats's all. >Hi, Jenny, >Reading your various responses, I can see that you have altered >your intial assertion that the Bacup - Todmorden area (Lancs) >"was the busiest area for *UFO* activity in the entire UK >(possibly in Europe)" by drawing attention to the many claimed >abduction cases (and claimed close encounters) from that >area...In my mind, a diifferent matter entirely. Hi, Not at all. I stand by what I have said throughout this discussion which is: 1: So far as I know there are no league tables to say one area is more active than any other, but I - personally - have not seen evidence of any area more consistently active than the Pennines. 2: Window areas are recognised by their long term activity - in the case of the Pennines we are talking pre UFO age and probably centuries. This is the definition of an active window area. It generates folklore. The Pennines do that as Dr David Clarke, a folklorist who contributes to this list will confirm. He has written books on the matter. There are also localised flaps and waves that occur in areas not long term windows (for instance the Bonnybridge area in Scotland or Gulf Breeze in Florida). But these are different. From what you have said this description best applies to the modern day waves in the south east. 3: The Pennines have many LITS and other types of reports but is particularly hyper active with close encounters. So I haven't changed tack at all. This is what I am reporting and why. >I think it was fair comment on my part to suggest that you have >little or no knowledge of this FT activity, Jenny... which comes >as a surprise to me since you were D. of I. at BUFORA some time >ago. You are in good company as Nick Pope admitted to me during >an 'on-line' conference a couple of years back that he also had >no knowledge of FT overflights of these sites during his tenure >at the MOD. And I have not suggested otherwise. I kept my initial response in this reply (check the top of this message) which says exactly that! I have not investigated them just heard about them. >So what was the point of mentioning the reports you saw as >BUFORA D of I. of "aircraft travelling to Europe... or climbing >out of Stanstead...(Airport)? >You replied: >>This may - or may not - be relevant to your own cases.<< >Completely non-relevant to the FT activity refered to above. I mentioned it because there had been a flap of sightings in the same area you refer to and BUFORA did investigate and found the above cause to apply. Only you know if this is relevant or not, but I don't see why it should be distressing that I made this comment. For that's all it was. >To add an interesting element to this discussion why not tells >us what you mean by "a sheer number of cases"... Tens, hundreds, >thousands? (An approximation will suffice.) I am not sure why what was a perfectly innocent comment in a reply just trying to help another researcher has turned into this. I haven't counted the reports, but we are certainly talking into four figures in the past 25 years - probably well into four figures. Best wishes, Jenny
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:53:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:04:04 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:52:30 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:35:58 +0100 >>>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com> >>>>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:11:48 -0400 >>>>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:59:15 -0400 >>>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Cashman >>>>>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:41:12 +0100 >>>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>>>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>>>I think those are pretty big clues that they are >>>>>not experiencing normal, everyday, waking consciousness. >>With respect, I don't think we are disagreeing very much here. >>I am not attributing the Oz Factor state to some alien mind >>probe. In fact, as I note above, they are collectively and >>repeatedly offering clues to an 'altered state of consciousness' >>- during which some of the stranger aspects of the alleged close >>encounter occur (or seem to occur). >Jenny does seem to be de-escalation the significance of the "Oz >Factor" here, suggesting it is the result of internal >psychological and physiological processes. In some of her >earlier writing on the topic she seems to make it clear that >"Oz" is caused by the intervention of an external force on the >percipients. In the case of Rendlesham she suggests "Oz Factor" >events may have been caused by over-the-horizon radar. Hi, John - if you read the whole message (indeed even read the parts you quote from below!) you'll see that I do no such thing. I argue that the Oz Factor states of dissociation probably result from psychological and phsiological reactions many of wgich probably do result internally. But that we dont actually know as nobody has tested them. But that the witnesses in Rendlesham (and in other CE cases) speak of what they considered a physically real EM field that caused other physiological effects to occur (viz hair standing on end, skin tingling etc). That - yes - I do think these could well be triggered by a physical energy and its inevitable they would envoke Oz Factor states too - such as the dissociation. After all, if merely the fear of thinking you have seen a UFO can do so - as I am not disputing - then close contact with an anomalous energy field creating real physiological effects could surely also be capable of provoking these internal Oz Factor states. So I dont see the contradiction here at all. Unless you wish to dismiss all physical reality from the UFO phenomenon (as I suspect you do) meaning you cannot comprehend any real EM field to trigger real physiological sensations that might also induce Oz Factor psychological responses. But - from my study of the case evidence - I do believe there are physically real UFOs and energy fields and so the way in which these interact with witnesses and produce Oz Factor responses interests me. I learn things from it. And thats all that matters. After all I am applying this term to my own work for my own use and not insisting you use it. Frankly you can call these effects 'all in the mind' or 'proof the witnesses are mad' or 'normal psychological responses' or Rimmers Folly. It diesnt matter. I think the Oz Factor presumes less - not more - because it simply collectively describes these effects without presupposing a psychological, physiological or physical cause for any or all of them. Which is all any of us should do because none of know the truth here. Arguing that these effects MUST be all psychological is creating illusions and making choices that by simply using the phrase Oz Factor I am not. I would hope - if you think about this - you'll see thats true. >Elsewhere ("UFO Reality", Hale, 1983) she suggests that the "Oz >Factor" is "almost suggestive of the witness being transported >temporarily from our world to another, where reality is similar >but slightly different... this effect is so common and important >that I have adopted a name for it, on the basis that if you name >something you are at least on the way to finding out what it >is". Which is cited here to imply what? I am here describing the sensation these witnesses fell - ie the feeling that suggests to them a sense of reality shift (as many do indeed describe it). I am not saying that these people have literally been teleported to the land of Oz or some other dimension. AS you have to reralise from my writings on this subject. Check out my definition of the Oz Factor in 'The Little Giant Encyclopedia of UFOs' (Sterling) ><snip> >>In Rendlesham, as with most cases of the Oz Factor, it is likely >>that some of the feelings described by the witnesses do indeed >>occur because of these psychological and physiological >>sensations within the body. >>The one caveat we have to apply here is that there are countless >>cases where the presence of genuine EM energy fields are >>seemingly related in connection with UFOs. They cause actual >>physical effects - from car stops to tingling skins. >>Some of these were present in the Rendlesham case. Note the >>effects on the light alls. The radio reception static reported. >>And the primary witnesses do not simply report psychological >>states such as dissociation. They very specifically report a >>curtain of electrostatic charge that caused their skins to >>tingle and hair to stand on end. This implies more than stress >>at work to me. >The suggestion here is clearly that some form of electromagnetic >phenomenon caused the Oz effects at Rendlesham, elsewhere it's >down to the Moon, fear or anticipation. A word which covers all >eventualities ceases to have any meaning. It's like describing >any strange phenomenon as a "Dunno" or a "Wotizzit" and saying >that because we have given it a name we are "at least on the way >to finding out what it is". With respect - John - I can define another new word. Twaddle. Like I keep saying, The Oz Factor is a term I yse to help me. It describes a collection of symptoms witnesses report in cases. When they occur they warn me an ASC may be occurring. That I find useful. I can tell another research - they reported the Oz Factor - and they probably know what I mean. The typical Oz Factor symptoms are indeed mostly psychological and physiological and do cross borders and some of them are known from more standard situations by psychologists. But some of them are apparently the consequence of interaction with real energy fields. Whether these are the same effects or different is hard to say (they are quite similar). But I think its evident that both stress and real energy fields are occurring in some close encounters and either or both may precipitate parts of the Oz Factor. I dont wish to presume which at this stage. To me the term is just short hand. I'm not the one turning it into any big deal. Nor am I asking any other person to use it. So why is it such an issue to you? >It is clear from these comments, and the paragraph below, that >the "Oz Factor" is such a vague term and covers such a range of >phenomena, that its use has little value, and we would be better >off describing each experience with the terminology that best >suits it, rather than inventing a phrase which - and someone >here has already mentioned Humpty Dumpty - means just what we >say it means. But dont you see - John. You have predetermined what these effects do mean (they are all stress induced psychological responses) and from that you can - if you choose - deduce that all UFOs can be wished away as illusions. TBH I think thats worse than just using a simple shorthand phrase to indicate when certain consistently described witness descriptions for odd side effects of a close encounter are reported. Especially when I do it without assuming any specific cause for these effects in any particular case. >>Its not yet clear which of these effects are purely Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:18:00 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:07:32 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:12:10 +0100 >Regarding: >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 17:15:42 +0100 >Jenny, >Thank you for the detailed response, it's been of immense help >and there are several issues therein which I believe we can make >meaningful progress with. Hi, I agree - although we really need input from these witnesses and/or anyone who may be in contact with them to truly further this as you and I are merely debating possibilities. And looking for answers with the lights off too! >>So we either have to accept that they did have such an episode >>and simply did not report it as they say. Or they didn't - >>what's in their statements are all that ever happened - and they >>have lied and made up the close encounter. >>That's the stark choice here. >Precisely so and we can expand on this to include the evidence >Penniston has produced more recently, particularly the sketches >claimed to have come from his notebook and drawn at the time he >was examining the small craft. >Either these are profound verification of an aerial vehicle >which is difficult to equate with known, contemporary (or even >since) technology, or, the story has grown to encompass >fabricated evidence. Like I said, I dont intend to answer that because I cannot. I can tell you that in l983 Penniston thought he had seen an opaque craft and so in all contact with his evidence I've had its not adapted that much. The odd one out is his l981 statement and even that implies he saw something more than lights during the close encounter phase. Yes, there are questions to be answered that neither you nor I can answer and if we did we'd just be guessing and no doubt using our own prejudices about the case (we are both bound to have them) to interpret what we see in terms that we prefer to see. For instance, I would say I found Burroughs and Penniston credible. I did. And I certainy wouldnt say that of all witnesses (not even in this case). That would surely effect my judgement. Presumably you havent spoken with them and I guess that will effect your interpretation. Either of us may be right. But the truth is we cannot know. Only they do. >There might now be sufficient witness testimonies available to >reach a firm conclusion. Well there may be when we see what Georgina has. Its rather futile arguing around gaps in the testimony or seeking to resolve unanswered questions and employing guesswork to do so when Georgina might already have the answers that plug the gaps. As shes not likely to tell us anything to help here until November maybe we should wait until then. >One anomaly is that Penniston claims Ed Cabansag did not >participate in the forest adventures, instead he was left >stationed at their vehicle to act as a radio relay due to the >poor communications experienced. Of course, we're now aware >that's not true and it was Chandler who acted as a relay, whilst >Cabansag was very much part of later proceedings. >Nonetheless, by relegating Cabansag to another location, >Penniston effectively 'takes out' Cabansag from the start. >Either this is a gross error in recollection or Cabansag is >thoughtfully being 'protected' as a reluctant witness, or, it's >maybe deemed advantageous to 'discard' Cabansag. If he's >included in Burroughs and Penniston's story, then his >involvement - or perhaps more of a concern, non-involvement - >with the 'close encounter' and aftermath has to somehow be >explained. I discuss all of this in 'The UFOs that Never Were'. Its important that Burroughs doesnt hide the fact that a third man was with them during the CE events. That conflict is brought out by me in the l994 quotes. My reading (supposition only) is that they were seeking to protect Cabansag who clearly hasnt wanted to come forward too far. Halt sensed that too, it seems. Burroughs did this by protecting the identity of the third man. Penniston seems (and I stress seems) to have changed the facts in order to eliminate him from the story. He may have had other reasons - of course. But why did Burroughs not cover up the third man too - then? Like I said we can guess till the cows come home the whys and wherefores, but only they can tell us the real reasons. >In which case, Penniston's account and those crucial drawings of >the craft and its 'insignia' are amongst the foremost evidence >in UFO research. This is pretty much what I was highlighting in >the 'Unopened Files' article, when I had rather more confidence >that might conceivably be the situation. Well they are interesting but calling them significant is not what I would do. The evidence clearly implies they were in an ASC at the time. Which means that whatever these men thought they saw at that point should not necessarily be taken at face value. I have many close up drawings of the inside of a UFO done by abductees who 'saw' this during visions, dreams, via hypnosis etc. I wouldnt be inclined to treat these as evidence of world shattering importance either! Whats interesting to me is that the postings on the photo of an alien - which if this isnt a hoax really is the case that could change the world - are non existent. Yet this case is exercising the entire list. In truth Pennistons sketches are no more than drawings of something he thinks he saw during a period when both he and Burroughs admit their senses were under seige. >>>in 'UFO Crash Landing?', you wrote: >>>"Burroughs (who had lived locally for 18 months and was >>>familiar with the woods) said he saw the lighthouse as well as >>>the UFO that night but never mentioned it because it was, 'just >>>sitting there as always'." >>>Given what we've learned since, how can this be anything other >>>than untrue! >>There are ways. For instance, if John saw the lightship and >>thought that it was the lighthouse he could be telling the >>truth. >I'm not sure I follow this reasoning. >As Burroughs confirmed in his statement that he eventually >realised the beacon light was coming from "a lighthouse", he >presumably didn't think the source was anything else. We are going round in circles here. I have never argued that there are no big questions to answer by these men. Indeed - as you know - my decision to significantly reappraise this case was largely due to precisely this implication coming from those statements. In essence you argue here that Burroughs never mentioned the lighthouse because he knew what it was. You say his statement shows this is untrue. He saw the lighthouse and didnt recognise it later that night and so he lied when he spoke to me saying he'd seen and identified it. Well think of this possibility. Burroughs saw the Shipwash lightship during the UFO sighting. It was off to his right. He did not mention it because - like he told me - it was just sitting there (as nobody has ever suggested it was not). If you picnicked by the Forestry Commission offices - as he did - you'd be less likely to see the Orford lighthouse and far more likely to see the Shipwash light. But he might have assumed this lightship was actually the lighthouse and lived under that impression for some time. Its a very easy conclusion to have reached. So when the Orford lighthouse was raised as the solution to the case - he might honestly say - no it wasnt that. I saw it. IT just sat there. In fact he actually saw the lightship but he'd always mistakenly assumed that was the Orford lighthouse because he may not have known there were two lighthouses (the lightship behaved just like a lighthouse and I couldnt have said it was a lightship either in the dark.) This raises the question of the light he saw that night that he thought was the UFO. Was it in reality the Orford lighthouse? It could be. But if so he'd still be honest (just mistaken) in what he told me because he genuinely didnt know about the OTHER lighthouse. Yes, this begs the question of the beacon light he saw and mistook that same night. But he may well have got disorientated and then worked out it was just a flashing lighthouse and - because he still thought there was only one lighthouse to be seen - ascribed this to the same lighthouse (ie the lightship) that had just been sitting there all night. In fact we are even guessing that their subsequent chase through the woods was in pursuit of the Orford lighthouse - which I agree its most probable that it was. But they could here have briefly pursued the lightship. In which case Burroughs view that he had only seen one light (what to him was the lighthouse) PLUS the UFO would still be true. Yes, he would hide the fact that he was briefly fooled by this light at one point. But if he had indeed seen this lighthoyse all the time before that night, and assumed that BOTH these observations were of the one and only lighthouse he thought was out there, then this does make sense. But I repeat these speculations are all just that. And this convoluted explanation probably means little to 99% on this list . All thats important is that it is not out of the question that Burroughs was largely being honest even though it looks otherwise from the way his statements are being here put together. >Whether he subsequently claimed the lighthouse was a well known >landmark and should be dismissed as such, knowing this wasn't >true, or whether he has largely forgotten about the abortive two >mile chase and retrospectively believes the lighthouse didn't >feature that night, we can't say. However, in either respect we >surely have proof that his later accounts must be regarded with >considerable caution. On the face of it yes. But like I said it might not be that clear cut. No way that you look at this will completely explain the discrepancy. I am just trying to point out it doesnt have to be as clear cut or damning as it seems. >Although I might be mistaken and due apologies if I am, have you >perhaps overlooked that Burroughs did say the beacon was from "a >lighthouse"? Your reasoning seems to be that he might have seen >the Shipwash lightship beacon and thought this was the >lighthouse, therefore the 'lighthouse' [although in fact the >lightship], was 'sitting there'. >Obviously, this isn't sustainable if, as confirmed in his >statement, he later knew the beacon was from a lighthouse, >however, until they went in search of an explanation they didn't >realise what it was at all. Not quite so. You have to appreciate where they were, how they may have become disorientated (as indeed their close encounter phase testimony says that they did) (see my quote from Burroughs yesterday about how they came to in a different part of the forest). Say he had seen the lightship all the time (thinking it was the lighthouse). Say he now 'comes to' staring at a light from an unfamiliar location elsewhere in the forest and in a daze walks off towards it puzzled to discover its just the lighthouse (or what he thinks is just the lighthouse - ie the lighthship - because he'd long assumed the lightship WAS the lighthouse). To him its just the same light hes seen all night and routinely identified and now here briefly misperceived because of his disorientation. So by not bringing this out in later interviews hes guilty of omission but not exactly deception because he genuinely believes hes just seen the same lighthouse hes seen earlier when the UFO was also in view. This may not be at all what happened. But its a reasonable possibility from these facts and if thats what happened it substantially mitigates this situation. >Airman >Chris Armold, who has recently provided me with a statement in >which he confirms: >There was absolutely nothing in the woods. We could see lights >in the distance and it appeared unusual as it was a sweeping >light, (we did not know about the lighthouse on the coast at the >time). We also saw some strange colored lights in the distance >but were unable to determine what they were. [End] >As Armold's call was apparently logged after 4.00 a.m., this >must have been subsequent to Burroughs having any 'close >encounter'. In Buran's statement, he wrote: >"They continued to look further, to no avail. At approximately >0354 hours, I terminated the investigation and ordered all units >back to their normal duties". [End] >According to this timeline, Armold must have driven to see >Burroughs after Burroughs had returned to duty and was back at >Apparently, Burroughs returned to the logging/access road with >Armold and all they could see was the sweeping beam (not the >beacon) from Orford Ness. >There is of course one other thing which Armold claims they >observed - "some strange colored lights in the distance". >What could they have been? This testimony is indeed fascinating. And it actually supports what I say above. The sweeping beam visible from here clearly is the Orford Ness lighthouse - which was the only thing visible. You cannot see the lightship here. If Burroughs and Armold didnt recognise it - firstly I am stunned. It was so obvious to me sweeping over the trees. If either men had been there before they would surely have seen it. But this suggests the object Burroughs thought was the lighthouse was in fact the lightship - otherwise he'd know what this beam was. This makes sense because at that time the lighship looked more like what you'd expect a lighthouse to look like, as I have noted. I do suspect this is going to turn out to be a key here. The lighthship was thought to be the lighthouse and the real lighthouse (when sporadically seen later) was the trigger for the UFO events. Burroughs honestly thinks - even now - that the light he later identified as the beacon was the lighthouse - the same lighthouse hed seen earlier that was in reality the lightship! All this is very speculative. But Armolds story is consistent with it. As for the other lights? Recall that at 4.11 am the base commander was in the forest with the police looking at the area and seeing the lighthouse and recognising it as such. If Burroughs and Armold were then on the edge of the forest maybe they didnt know this was occurring a few hundred yards away and were unaware of any vehicle lights that were accompanying the police/ base commander trip to the landing site (then ahead of where Burroughs and Armold were but lost in the darkness of the forest). Again supposition. Nothing more. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 27 Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and From: Fran Walton <LWalton55@cs.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:28:34 EDT Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:10:32 -0400 Subject: Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and >From: Debra Carpenter <Debra88207@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:44:20 EDT >Subject: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and Gary Hart, et al. >To: geehart@frontiernet.net > Mrs. Carpenter, >Please be advised that any further communications regarding the >above subject matter should be addressed to the following: >Attorney... If the subject matter at hand were not so serious, your message would be comical. I must admit I read it several times before finally deciding to respond. Not because you instilled any fear; rather because I was trying to phrase my reply politely. The best I can do is, "You've GOT to be kidding?" Do you really think that by posting such a mundane form letter type missive that the subject will now die a quiet death? Do you believe that insinuating threats is going to change the facts of this issue? Do you really believe that a public posting on a website list such as this is going to dissuade people from speaking out for ethics and morality? Think again. Just as you have the freedom to state your feelings and position in this matter, so do others. In that this issue has become focused on, "He said, She said, They said," the _main_ issue seems to be going by the wayside. What of those 120 families/individuals who may not know their files have been passed along? I do not know MO. law so I cannot speak with any authority as to whether JC broke the "letter" of any laws or not. However, in my opinion, he has danced around and played with the "spirit" of the law, hiding behind the word "hobby." It is human nature for people to believe that when a person is degreed in a particular field, and promote that fact, that when an individual seeks the guidance of that person, it is with the belief that they are bound by a code of confidentiality. For the "professional" to then cry, "oops, I wasn't working under the shield of my profession" is garbage. Every time credentialed individuals hold themselves out to be same, they are bound by the ethics and morality dictated by their professions, the law, and society in general. What makes this particular issue all the more vile, is that there are innocent children involved whose parents may still not know that their children may possibly now be fodder for the tabloid mill one day in their future. When that happens, it will be too late to protect their innocence; they will have been stripped of it, their right to privacy violated without ever having known--until it is too late. Those children, as well as the others whose files are in question, have a right to know what is going on. _That_ is what is important; not who said what about whom. Bruised egos are easily fixed. Broken spirits are not. Fran Walton
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:04:49 EDT Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:04:53 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:43 -0400 >Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:48:02 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:50:42 -0400 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>I note Duke's claim that the light house beams out toward the >>sea (no need to shine inland) with, he claims, three colors. I >>don't recall anyone reporting 3 colors being visible to someone >>in the woods near Rendlsham forest,. It has been my impression >>that the references to the witnesses seeing the lighthouse >>refer to observing a flashing white light. If this is true then >>the lighthouse did shine inland. But were there any other >>colors? >There's no question it beams out to sea..... >ORFORDNESS main light is white, flashing 0.1 sec, dark 4.9 sec, >with a visibility of 25 miles (prob. nautical ones but I didn't >think to ask this at the time). >There are also two fixed (non-flashing lights), one green, and >the other red. >The green light has a range of 15 mi, and can be seen in an arc >from the shore to 047 degrees bearing. >The red light has a range of 14 miles, and is visible from 038 >degrees to 047 degrees, and from shore to 210 degrees. ("Shore" >here must mean the southern flank of the headland.) > POSITION 52* 05'.0 N 01* 34'.6 E > Location: Suffolk Coast between Aldeburgh and Felixstowe > No. On Admiralty List of Lights: 2258 > Present Tower Built: 1792 > Tower Composition: Ashlar stone > Height of tower: 99 ft (30.18 m) (to top of lantern) > Focal height of light: 93 ft (28.35 m) above mean tide level > Builders: Local Construction tradesmen > for Lord Braybrooke of Audley End > Designer: William Wilkins > First Lit: August 1792 > Automated: 6th July 1964 > In 1888 major alterations took place at the great light > or high light as it was now known. The light was > made occulting and red and green shades were fitted to > form sector lights. > Further alterations were made in 1914 when a new revolving > lens was installed, it is this lens which is still > in operation. Three vertical circular lenses are mounted on > a circular platform which floats on a trough of > mercury. The lens revolves around the lamp at a speed which > appears as a flash every five seconds. At the > same time as this light was installed another light was > brought into operation half way up the tower. This is > the sector light which is a fixed light showing through red > and green windows facing south east and a red > window facing north east. These lenses and all other lenses > fitted over the years were installed by the firm of > Stone-Chance. >SHIPWASH is now a buoy. The guy I spoke to actually closed the >former light vessel down in about 1993. He recalls the light >being white, with a 360-degree arc. The only other light on any >LV would be a red riding light at the bow; only if it dragged >anchor would more lights come on (red ones on the mast). Thank you for a serious post (for a change). If I may summarize: 1. The main navigation lights at both Shipwash and the Orford Ness lighthouse are rotating. Therefore they would both regularly flash landward, or westward as well as out to sea, or eastward. 2. The red/green, constant lights at Orford Ness are fixed and shine seaward only. Therefore they cannot be seen several miles inland, except possibly _indirectly_ as _dim_, scattered light off of dust particles or mist/fog. Thus the red/green lighthouse lights being involved in the 1980 incident are nothing but red/green herrings. <......> >Nor is it necessary to be in the path of the beam to be aware of >the light. As a lad, I saw loads of lighthouse beams shining >from below the horizon, and identified them from their flash >patterns (the old OS maps used to give these), from inland on >cloudless nights. I don't know the technical name for the >effect, which is presumably the same as those cones of light you >can see coming out headlights. Or searchlights or flashlights. Some of the light scatters off of small particles of dust or water droplets in the air, usually _dimly_ highlighting the beam. There is a world of difference between being "aware" of the dim beam and having the main beam pointed directly at your eyes. This sort of slippery talk and handwaving, however, seems to be all too common in the skeptical camp. >And having spent many months >living a mile or so from one of the most powerful lights in the >Cyclades (40-nm range) I can confirm that such a beam is visible >in clear air and in fog, tho' the lens may not be. (The Serifos >pharos operates with revolving shutters as I recall.) Possibly >all this demonstrates the Irish physicist de Selby's thesis that >"night" is merely an accretion of "black air"? >Granted that fog would dim the light. I am assuming (from >investigations on the case printed here & there) that said fog >was around or beyond the lighthouse, not in the woods - coastal >mist is nothing special, after all - and would be reflecting the >colored lights. All this would produce would be a diffuse scattering of the red and green lights. A dense fog would make for more scatter and a more confined light source. But it will also absorb the scattered light before it travels very far. Inland, the red/green light would be very dim, if it were visible at all. A light mist would absorb less light, but it will also backscatter less light. Again, the red/green lights are not going to be particularly noticable several miles inland. At best, all that would be visble would be a dim, diffuse glow, not a bright, confined colored light (as I understand the witness testimony). This is hardly the sort of stuff to cause people to freak out. Anything in the air that scatters the light also absorbs it. The more coastal fog you want to hypothesize to scatter the light inland, the less likely it is to be seen, not more likely. You can't have it both ways. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:33:42 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:06:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:49:04 +0100 >Nice plug of his book on your website. A bit mystified here? Your objection to advertising Chris Martin's book on my web site is what exactly? Cheers me dears! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:35:02 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:25:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Goldstein >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >>Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Dear All >Hi Terry, welcome to UpDates, >>Having been interested by the news that Chris Martin has put >>some of his footage on his Lost Haven website I decided to have >>a look. >>Firstly the link to the footage seems to be faulty. I certainly >>couldn't get to download the footage anyway. > >I tried it, the link works fine, I suggest you check your >computer setup, this is quite often the problem. >>Secondly we hear that he has more footage, but of the alien >>visitors themselves! Is this footage on the website? No, we're >>asked to talk to Chris at the Leeds conference if we want to see >>it. Nice plug Chris. >Footage of alien visitors? >Terry, I respectfully ask where on Earth did you hear of such a >thing? Please reply to this question as I am always interested >in how these fantasies are started. <snip> >Dave Bowden. Howdy Dave, Say pard, How come after four attempts I can't get onto your site? Yesterday I got to see the still phots of lights in the sky. It froze up and I could go no further. Tonight it freezes (3 times) when it is downloading. I never got this on a site during years on the web. Please give it some further attention. Thanks, Josh
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:14:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:27:42 -0400 Subject: Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and >From: Fran Walton <LWalton55@cs.com> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:28:34 EDT >Subject: Re: John Carpenter, et ux., v. Elizabeth Cavez and Gary Hart, et... >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >Bruised egos are easily fixed. Broken spirits are not. >Fran Walton Unless this really gets out of hand, I doubt that anyone will file a libel suit unless it can be shown that there's a lot of money to be made. As a general rule, lawyers don't carry libel cases too far unless there's real money involved. But if a libel case was filed it would at least get this matter into a legal forum where it belongs. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:31:14 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:28:47 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox - Fleming >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 11:56:45 -0600 >From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> >Subject: Re: 'The Irish Times' On Fermi's Paradox >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >... The mediocrity principal is >that, with no evidence to go on, it's safest to assume that a >given instance of a group is about average in any property that >can be quantified. People use this principal all the time. For >example, if you selected a person at random off the street, the >chances are that he or she would be about average in >mathematical abilities: neither a genius who understands >advanced mathematics nor a dunce who can't count to ten. Um, I meant the mediocrity "principle," not "principal." I've just given an unintended illustration of the principle of mediocrity at work in the area of spelling abilities. <g>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:32:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:30:20 -0400 Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Stacy >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:21:55 EDT >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? >To: updates@sympatico.ca <snip> >I don't think the striking similarity between the effects of the >AF weapon and those described from old UFO close encounters is >simple coincidence. In fact, I think it is a striking example >of how UFOs CAN and HAVE been studied scientifically behind the >scenes and some of their technology retro-engineered. >David Rudiak David, Stupid Earthlings! Are you seriously suggesting that terrestrial military and civilian scientists wouldn't have been investigating these same areas w/o the stimulus of some UFO reports and/or a few crash retrievals? These were the same scientists, mind, who had already invented the radio, television, radar, and the atomic bomb _prior_ to 1947. And they wouldn't have normally been messing around with this sort of stuff in the middle of a raging Cold War w/o UFO input? Simple coincidence? Lord have mercy! Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:38:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:34:49 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:10:43 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith - The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> If I understand your map and the information you sent correctly we have 3 kW white light with a rotating lens 93 ft above ground forming a white beam of 5 sec rotation, 0.1 sec flash duraation and red and green lights covering a sector toward the southeast green light that covers a sector toward the northeast both of these are about 45 ft above ground and do not flash I gather from what you wrote that there are some other lights around not associated with the lighthouse itself. You map shows the air base about 6 milez north-northwest of the lighthouse. This being so it is my considered opinion that the red and gree sector lights would have been nearly if not completely invisible to the witnesses despite any mist there might have been. If there were any red and green visible it would have been a very dim glow, in great contrast to the beacon light itself. One can get a crude estimate of the brightness or "luminosity of the beacon by noting that 3 kW (assumed incandescent) light might put out around 75,000 lumens. Radiating into a sphere this would be 75,000/4 pi = about 6000 lm/st (lumens per steradian or candle). But the light is radiated into a beam. Taking the 0.1 sec flash in 5 sec revolution at face value this means the beam width is(0 .1/5) x 360 = 7 degrees. The "solid angle" in steradians of a 7 degree beam is about 0.05 st. So, 75,000 lm radiated into a 7 degree beam is a candlepower of about 75000/,05 = 1.5 million cp. It's rated range of 25 miles is therefore reasonable. By way of comparison I would guess that any red or green light from the sector lights and reflected by the mist around the lighthouse would be, in the direction of the witnesses, a few cp or less. It seems to me that in the documentary featuring Ian Ridpath which I seem to recall from year ago there is film/video of the beacon light as seen through the trees. Perhaps careful analysis of this would turn up more information on what the witnesses could have seen besides the flashing white 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:49:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:37:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso - >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Voice Stress Analysis Of Col. Philip Corso >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:29:36 -0700 >I agree that Voice Stress Analysis is only a tool, and should be >combined it with other investigatorial techniques. But once >used, the results VSA generate should be given serious >examination. Ed, you're not addressing the point I made in my post, which was that the Corso VSA was performed with a freeware computer program described by its own creator as little more than "a toy." VSA may or may not be a useful analytical tool, but there's another question here -- can we trust the software used in the Corso VSA? In good faith, I asked your analyst for a link to the software he used. I wanted to learn more about this issue. The software turns out to be a small Windows program, available free to anyone who wants to download it. Along with the program, you get a small Help file, describing how it works. And in that Help file, the program's own creator tells us not to put much weight on the results his software gives us. Would you address that issue, please? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 28 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 01:32:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:40:05 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:11:02 -0400 >From: Peter The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:37:06 -0700 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Hello Duke, This one is without my compliments. I will try not to loose too much of my time on my reply. >Frankly, the literature is a pile of crap generated by a therapy >industry (part of victim culture at large) trying to turn a >perfectly ordinary reaction into an illness in order to hoover >up bucks from a gullible health insurance industry. >Of course people react "badly" to traumatic events. That is >normal. Post-traumatic stress is just that -- not a "disorder". >It's part of the process of recovery. Is grief a mental illness, >or a normal reaction to loss? Give me a break. Please show me your references. You know... just a few of those letters and words put one after the other in the pure tradition of Mr. Gutenberg that would prevent me from thinking that your are full of it. <snip> >(But would like to thank Kevin Randle for filling the gap, now >I've seen his post. And if you, Serge, want to find out how >"alien abductions" and consequent stress are created by yet more >mental events flitting between investigator and investigated, go >read Kevin's book, which -- despite an irritating lack of >references -- ought to be an embarrassment and a salutary >experience to anyone who takes "abduction" at face value!) <snip> Ahem. Well, Peter, please read the following: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m27-009.shtml (my response to Kevin Randle) and: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m27-044.shtml (Kevin Randle's reply) Guess your 7-liner just happens to be a cold fart. >3. There is however a huge literature on psychomatic symptoms. >Keith Thompson has some fascinating cases in his "Angels and >Aliens" (is it?), including one of a man suffering from a >phantom pregnancy if I recall aright. He's one of the few people >to have addressed this question from a ufological/abduction >point of view. You throw away my references and I have to kneel before yours? Consider the following: http://www.google.com/search?q=PTSD That's the Google search engine for PTSD. Gives you 66,500 hits. Of course, I believe there are less then a 100 good sites on the subject. I would wish you happy reading if I didn't suspect you're evident _intellectual dishonesty_ (will this be censored?) to kill any hope of discussion. >In other words, since mental events can create physical >reactions, I see no reason to suppose they may not create >further mental reactions as well. Like everyone else in the >world, I imagine, I've been utterly terrified by nightmares on >occasion, and I certainly know people who've developed phobias >to real-life items that first distressed them in such dreams -- >pickled gherkins, in one instance. >If the above is not sane in your eyes... Hmmmmmmm. Ahahahahahahahah....!!!! Tears. Sorry Peter, but... I have a 7 year old daughter. One of her favorite shows on TV was "The Adventures Of Rupert The Bear", an animated cartoon designed in Edinburgh, Scotland. I'll make it short: in one episode, one of Rupert's friend is unable to sleep because of a horrible recurring nightmare. The subject of his nightmare: a giant pickled gherkin!!!! Ahahahahahahahah....!!!! Of all the people... You... constantly accusing others of being just loonies, you throw in pickled gherkins nightmares like gospel after sweeping away all the research on PTSD, taking for reality a childhood cartoon you forgot... Should we lend the same credibility to the rest of your discourse? I know, life's a bitch. You've made my day. Can I have your post laminated? Ahahahahahahahah....!!!! Serge Salvaille P.S. If you still have problems with pickled gherkins nightmares, I believe Rupert's friend solved his problem by putting the monster between two pieces of rye bread.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Alternative 3 - Redux From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:25:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:25:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Alternative 3 - Redux >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Alternative 3 - Redux >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:33:01 +0100 >For anyone still interested in the Alternative 3 saga, the >following website is featuring the actual TV documentary that >caused all the fuss back in the seventies. It was interesting to >see this after all these years. When I spoke to Anglia TV back >in the early nineties they told me the reel of film was missing >from their files. I later learnt that it was in the hands of >researchers. Anyway, for fans of Alt 3 it's a gem of a site. >http://www.thule.org/alt3.html >If you want the up to date story please read my feature on >http://www.ufocity.com/f-bruni/gb-05.cfm >I investigated this case many years ago, but updated it in the >early nineties and later for this feature. Details of the book >are also available on this site. >It's amazing that after all this time I still receive several >enquiries a year about this case. >Leslie Watkins, who wrote the book "Alternative 3", which was a >follow-up to the programme, is apparently writing another book >on the subject revealing the harassment he received and the >countless enquiries from people who believed it was for real. >Enjoy >Georgina Bruni The following came from the IUFO List. The original transcript appears to have come from a fax. It was in the form of speech notes - all caps and had some words missing from the right-hand side of the page. I've reformatted and replaced what I think are the missing words... ebk ===== Leslie Watkins - Alt 3 lecture 1/2 http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg13515.shtml Leslie Watkins - Alt 3 lecture 2/2 http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/media/mailing/archive/iufo/msg13516.shtml From: "Nicky Molloy" Subject: IUFO: Leslie Watkins - Alt 3 lecture 1/2 + 2/2 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 23:04:46 +1300 This is a talk by Leslie Watkins, the author of the fiction book Alternative 3, given in Auckland, New Zealand approx May 1999. He can be contacted where he now lives at: PO Box 201, Orewa, Auckland, New Zealand. Ph/fax (09) 426 8399 He is not on the net, but if you want to send a note to him you can email me and I'll fax it to him. I'm also in Auckland.. Les is writing a followup book called Backlash to Alternative 3 as he would like anyone to contact him if they can give him some of the missing T-Chest of information he got stolen en route to Australia, back in the 70's. He found out that he stumbled upon the truth accidently and received letters from all around the world confirming this. http://ufos.about.com/culture/ufos/library/weekly/aa051099.htm?rnk=r&terms=alter native+3 Info on Alternative 3. This contains the on-line book. Nicky ===== Date: Friday, 30 July 1999 21:49 Subject: Les' Talk Let me get two things straight right away... I am not - and never have been - employed by The CIA. I was 15 when Adolf Hitler died IN 1945 and I've never worked for him or for members of his Nazi Party, both those accusations ... crazy as they may sound.. have been thrown at me because I happened to write a novel called ALTERNATIVE 3. As a result of that novel... I've also been called a conman and a liar. I've seen accused of trying to stir up terror. I've also been praised around the world - quite unjustifiably - for my courage in daring to tell the truth. All of this because of a book of fiction. I'll come to those strange reactions later. but, first, let me give you some insight ino the book which has caused such widespread controversy. ALTERNATIVE 3 is a novel which I initially refused to write. To explain why let me give you a capsuled history of ALTERNATIVE 3. It began life, as many of you will be aware, as a joke, a hoax dcoumentary, on British TV. I'd heard about it in advance but I didn't even bother to watch it. I had no interest in Science Fiction, Science Fact Or UFOs it simply wasn't my scene and, quite frankly, it sounded corny and boring. So when I was invited to expand it immensely into a full-length novel, I refused. partly because I wasn't interested and partly bcause I was busy writing another book and with my work as a Fleet Street journalist. Murray Pollinger, who was then my agent in London, had to work hard to get me to change my mind. And I'm glad he did because it has turned out to be one of the most remarkable pieces of work I've done in 50 years as a professional writer. It was originally published in Britain In 1978 and eventually went into more than a dozen languages - including Japanese and Greek. Before long, I was being inundated by angry protests. Vast numbers of readers started denouncing me for "irresponsible scaremongering". I also received an even greater number of messages praising me for exposing a nightmare conspiracy involving the governments of America, Russia and Britain. Both reactions astonished me. I'd written a work of fiction yet vast numbers of readers were insistant it was fact. "Insistant is the right word. The basic premise of ALTERNATIVE 3 is that our planet is doomed - because of The Greenhouse Warming - and that America and Russia, having secretly co-operated in space research for decades, had secretly colonised Mars for superior humans - to ensure the survival of the human race. to service the needs of these people, Designated Movers as I called them, batches of unimportant, ordinary, people were snatched, becoming zombie slaves. Then they were taken to Mars - in what I called batch consignments - where they were allowed to live until they were too old to be useful. and then they were, as I put it, disposed of. They were, to put it bluntly, killed because they were not necessary and were merely using food and othe precious supplies on Mars. The Moon was being used as a transit camp for the superior selected peope, the so-called Designated Movers, and the thousands of brain-washed slaves. The whole concept, I thought, was too way-out, too ridiculous, for anyone to believe. I was totally wrong. The publication of ALTERNATIVE 3 and how, in order to have it published, I'd had to make a certain concession - in fact, I said I'd been forced into a "reluctant compromise." which means that on the back cover - under the blurb - we had the word describing the book ... "Fiction." Okay, so it was a double con which I'd put into the manuscript. Unfortunately, the original publishers, Sphere Books, embellished that double con, without my knowledge, in a way I felt was irresponsible - and which did cause a great deal of anxiety across the world. The company's Editorial Director, Nick Austin, had changed the word "fiction" to "speculation." he felt this was no more than a slice of harmless fun because, like me, he didn't believe anyone would not realise this was a work of fiction. Unfortunately... a devil of a lot of people did not realise that and they saw the word "Speculation" coupled with my reference to a "Reluctant Compromise" as proof that this was fact. Suddenly Sphere was getting complaints from politicians - and not only those in london - and from Trading Standards officers who actually threatened legal action. For subsequent editions the word "Speculation" was replaced by the word "Fiction". Nick Austin confirmed all this in an article he wrote for the April Issue of Fortean Times when he wrote: A first indication of this came when I had a phone call from a man who introduced himself as "CLANCARTY". He was actually The Earl Of Clancarty who, under the name Brinsley De La Poer Trench had written extensively about UFOs. He congratulated me on my "Fearless Expose" of the "Disgraceful Truth" and said: "we've known a little about this for some time, of course, but it wasn't until I read your book that I realised how deeply involved Her Majesty'S Government Is in this disgraceful conspiracy. I intend to raise this shameful matter in The House Of Lords." Now my immediate feeling was that this was marvellous! What fantastic publicity for my book! But then I had second thoughts. The Earl Of Clancarty sounded a decent sort of fellow and he'd look at absolute idiot if he raised this in The House Of Lords. So I tried to assure him it was merely a work of fiction and I begged him not to bring it up publicly in any attack on the British and American Governments. He refused to believe me but did promise, at my insistance, not to raise this "Conspiracy" in The Lords. For years afterwards, however, he kept pestering me to tell him how I'd discovered my facts. "My dear fellow ... We know each other well enough now, surely, so you can tell me ..." Other readers, hundreds of them from around the world, took similar line. I was denounced as a coward and a liar when I explained that I'd dreamed up the controversial scenario. One of America's more respected researchers, Mae Brussell, told her weekly radio audience she'd "had the shakes for about a week" after reading A3 which she described as "the most important book I've read in many, many years." And I was dismayed to realised that I had, inadvertently, put fear - terror in fact - into vast numbers of ordinary readers. That became obvious one night when I had a phone call at my home in Devon from a man in the North Of England. He started off on the same tack as The Earl Of Clancarty... about how impressed he was with my amazing investigation. I tried to explain that it was fiction but he refused to believe me. Did he have the book there? Yes! Look at the back cover... Does it say "Fiction"? "Yes, but you had to put that there because, otherwise you couldn't get the book published." That was partly because of a double con which i'd built into this work of fiction. I'd described how certain politicians - who, in fact, did not exist - had sought an injunction to ban it. "My main attempt to enter, personally, into the spirit of things backfired badly and reflects absolutely no credit on me." I must stress here that nick is a very talented editor and a thoroughly decent man. It was just that, on this occasion, he did get carried away. So, when I asked this caller from the North Of England if his copy of the book had the word "Fiction" on the back cover, I was hoping he did not have the first edition. Fortunately, he didn't. his copy had the word "Fiction." But that didn't satisfy him. He still preferred to believe my double-con and he went on: "WHen you wrote this book," he said, "You had the courage to tell the truth. But now you're frightened to admit it's the truth. You're frightened because you've been got at by The CIA and British Intelligence." This was quite strange really because because it has since been suggested by at least one well-known American, that I may have been paid by the CIA to write this book. I'll come back to him shortly. I then discovered my caller had a particular reason for being so taken with my book. A cousin of his had disappeared without trace and now, having read ALTERNATIVE 3, he was convinced that his cousin had been snatched and was now condemned to spend the rest of his life as a slave on Mars. As I say, I did my best to reassure him. It was fiction, fiction, fiction. Then he said: "What about Brian Pendlebury?" He threw me for a moment. "Pendlebury ? Oh ... you mean the electronics expert from Manchester who now lives on Mars." "Yes -about him." "Don't worry about him. He doesn't exist. He never has existed. He's just a figment of my imagination." "Right... now I know you're lying. I've spoken to his father. I've spoken to Brian Pendlebury'S father." "What?" I Asked, "How did you find his father?" "You say in the book that his father is a retired milkman called Dennis Pendlebury and that he lives in one of the shabbier suburbs of Manchester..." "Well... yes." "There's only one Dennis Pendlebury in the Manchester Telephone Directory. So I rang him up. I spoke to Brian Pendlebury's father." Now I was totally intrigued. "And what did he say?" "It were disgusting... you're frightened... I can tell that by your voice. But that man... that man is so frightened he won't even admit he's gone a son called Brian." I learned later that for months poor Mr Pendlebury was then plagued by this idiot - determined to wear him down until he told the truth. "You've got to tell what about your son Brian who lives on Mars." This caller was typical, as I say, of an amazing number of people who wrote or telephoned from all around the world. I had never intended anyone to think of this book as being anything but a work of fiction. But there were a number op reasons why so many readers did consider it to be the nightmare truth then I began to realise, to my astonishment, that there were disturbing elements of truth in what I had written. Certain events which I had imagined had, in fact, really happened. That seemed obvious from evidence supplied to me by a vast number of highly intelligent people. They included scientists, airline pilots, ufo researchers of repute. and, having read their accounts - particularly about flying saucer cover-ups - and interviewed many at length, I became convinced and I still am totally convinced that, without realising it I had accidentally trespassed into a range of top-level truths. Facts were - and are - being suppressed by governments. I'll be elaborating on that thought later. Another reason so many readers believe my book was fact was the style in which it is written - as a serious journalistic investigation. It opens with these words: "No newspaper has yet secured the truth behind the operation known as ALTERNATIVE 3. Investigations by journalists have been blocked - by governments on both sides of the Iron Curtain. America and Russia are ruthlessly obsessed with guarding their shared secret and this obsession, as we can now prove, has made them partners in murder. "However, despite this intensive security, fragments of information have been made public. often they are released inadvertently - by experts who do not appreciate their sinister significance - and these fragments, in isolation, mean little. but when jigsawed together they form a definite pattern - a pattern which appears to emphasise the enormity of this conspiracy of silence. Another reason was that I used a technique which is quite common in fiction - mixing internationally-known facts with imaginary material. I used imaginary quotes from imaginary politicians, scientists and astronauts and mixed in them with genuine quotes from genuine politicians, scientists and astronauts. For instance, many of you may remember that Jimmy Carter, in 1973 when he was Governor of Georgia, filed two reports on his UFO sightings - one to the InternationaL UFO Bureau and the other to The National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena. He said "I don't laugh at people any more " when they say they've seen UFOs because I've seen one myself." But by the time he was President Of The United States, he refused to admit he'd seen a UFO and said: "I think it was a light beckoning me to run in the CAlifornia Primary Election." Why, I asked, this change of attitude? Because by then he had been briefed on ALTERNATIVE 3? Some of you, similarly, may recall Buzz Aldrin, after his Moon walk, complaining bitterly that he'd been used as a travelling salesman. I used that comment and the fact that that he was later admitted to hospital with "emotional depression". "Travelling Salesman"? That's an odd choice of words isn't it? What, in Aldrin's view were the NASA authorities trying to sell? Were they using him - and others like him - to sell the "official" version of The Truth to ordinary people such as us? Were they doing so in order to hide the Real Truth at the time I wrote this book I'd have said no. Now I am not so sure. A devil of a lot has been kept hidden from us. Jim Keith said "For the debunker, ALTERNATIVE 3 is a sitting duck." very soon, after quoting from early parts of my novel - and I stress the word "novel - - Keith says : 'While Watkins is unable to substantiate these suspicions, he is able to insist that they are true." a few pages further on he confuses me - the sole author of this book - with the writers of the original TV hoax documentary. He did so because he didn't bother to check - or even to remember a private letter of mine which he presents elsewhere in his books. That letter, which I wrote to an individual enquirer in America and which Keith didn't bother to follow up on, stresses that I wrote the book and the names of the original TV people - David Ambrose and Christopher Miles - appeared on the book for contractual reasons. but when you're in the debunking business, apparently, who cares about accuracy? Keith goes on to make this astonishing statement about the "authors" - not the plural there - the authors of ALTERNATIVE 3: "Apparently They thought that if they repeatedly insisted that their statements were not fictional, if phony transcripts were proved with other phony transcripts, that the public, that befuddled slight-attentioned creature, would buy their story, lock, stock and batch consignment." He also states: "What ALTERNATIVE 3 entirely lacks is a single piece of evidence proving the conspiracy." Then consider this slice of nonsense from page 16 of his updated book: "Unbelievable 'Secret Documents' are quoted at length in the book, without copies being reproduced..." Why on earth should copies be reproduced? I've made it clear repeatedly, as Jim Keith should know, that this was a work of fiction. He even accuses me of making up the names of scientists. From my book he lifts a list of them and says: "So far as I can determine, these individuals and their disappearances were all invented for ALTERNATIVE 3." Well done Mr Keith! You are actually intelligent enough to recognise that characters in a work of fiction may really be fictional. To make his findings even more ridiculous, a few pages earlier Keith quotes in full a private letter I wrote to an enquirer in America in which I say, in which I describe ALTERNATIVE 3 as a "High dive into fictLon." In answer to specific queries, I gave these answers which Keith quotes in both his bookS. 1) I said: There is no Astronaut named Grodin. (This is interesting because Keith, with astonishing perception, describes an argument between the fictional Grodin and his fictional girlfriend as "Obviously a set-up intended to depict Grodin's deteriorating condition. Amazing, eh?) 2) I said: There is no Sceptre Television and the reporter Benson is also fictional. (this is also interesting because Keith, despite having used my letter in his books, seems to believe there is a television station of that name. He writes: "Actually, this may be one of the factual portions of the book ... considering the nature of the show, I can understand station execs not wanting to have anything at all to do with it. the author... (By this time, you'll note, I'm a singular author again)... The author presents examples of office wrangling as proof of a cover-up but my guess is that if studio or station executives did object to the program it was simply because they thought it hare-brained and a dangerous prank." But it's rather like saying Charles Dickens was a liar when he reported that Oliver Twist asked for morE. In fact, Dickens was a double liar because Oliver Twist did not even exist when Julius Caesar was being stabbed to death in the year 44 BC did he really say "ET TU BRUTUS"? Had Caesar really had a fever when he was in Spain which, in the words of Cassius, 'Make him cry out like a sick girl'? Were these details true? Or did Shakespeare... naughty man... take the liberty of making them up? It would have been easy, wouldn't it, for his writings to be debunked by someone such as Jim Keith. Except that even Keith, I'm sure, would recognise that Dickens and Shakespeare had written fiction. So what the devil is he on about here? He suggests that my book may have been written as "grey" disinformation - presumably because I was paid by the CIA - which, in his words, was "calculated to confuse and defuse the issues of elitist control, genocide, and secret space programmes, by revealing yet secretly concealing these truths." Did you ever hear such rubbish? He goes on: "It wouldn't be the first instance of the government (in either its overt or covert manifestations) using disinformation vectors to confuse, pacify or stampede the populace in directions of its choosing." 'Disinformation Vectors." Sounds impresssive, doesn't it. but how many people really know what a Vector is ? I do... But only because I looked it up in Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary. Vector means... and I quote ... "A directed quantity, as a straight line in space, involving both its direction and magnitude." It also means ... and again I quote "A carrier of disease or infection." It is also "the course of an aircraft, missile, etc." That, my friends, is a Vector. I am not, I assure you, A Directed Quantity or A Straight Line In Space ... I am not A Carrier Of Disease - at least, not as far as I know - and I am not The Course Of An Aircraft. In fact, I am not a Vector. However, if Jim Keith had really wanted the truth about me, if he'd bothered to write to me or telephone me, as hundreds of others have done he wouldn't have made such an ass of himself in describing me as one. Following through the possibility, as he sees it, that I am a pawn of The American Government, he goes on: "Along this line, Leslie Watkins' background as a writer is interesting. His books, in order of publication, are The Sleepwalk Killers, a non-fiction study of somnabulistic violence, "The Killing Of Idi Amin", about Watkins' experiences when imprisoned by the Amin regime, The Unexploded Man, characterised as a "Thriller" although the title sounds as if it might be on the Manchurian Candidate mind control theme, ALTERNATIVE 3, The Real Exorcists, a nonfiction book about exorcism, Private Opinions, Nnonfiction about public opinion polls, Billion Dollar Miracle, a book about the New Zealand Travel Industry, and The Story Of Money, commissioned by Barclays Bank." He apparently wasn't interested in reading any of these books, although three were big sellers when published by major publishers in his country - America - and doesn't seem to have a clue what they are about. As a serious researcher, he prefered to guess what they might be about. And he guessed wrongly. The Killing Of Idi Amin, for instance, is not about my experiences when I was imprisoned in Uganda, although I was imprisoned there. The Unexploded Man has absolutely nothing in common with The Manchurian Candidate. Private Opinions... Well there he's even got the title wrong. yet his complete ignorance of these books doesn't inhibit him from stating: "Altogether an interesting mix of topics, with a predominant theme that might be termed manipulative psychology." What Prepostorous Garbage! Then, in case no-one believes his suggestion that I've been hired by The American Government to hoodwink the world by writing this novel, he makes yet another bizarre statement. He says there is a "possibility" that ALTERNATIVE 3 is what he calls "An expression of Nazi Occult Doctrine." Then he goes on to link me and my book with Adolf Hitler! I was 15 when Hitler died in 1945 but Keith isn't one to let common sense - or truth - get in the way. Among the many peculiar claims he makes in his book - only tenuously related to his theme is that during World War II German V-2s were responsible for the death for seven Thousand BRITISH citizens."... In fact, the first V2 rocket fell on London on September 8 1944 - about eight months before Gemany surrendered... that was on May 7 1945... and the total of fatalities from these rockets quoted by Keith - seven thousand - is almost certainly widely inaccurate. but let's not quibble about that because his recital of so-called facts gets sillier and sillier... then he goes on: "However, through false reports channelled through Abwehr agents British intelligence was able to re-target the missiles from falling mostly on upper class neighbourhoods into the working class neighbourhoods of South London!" At that time I was a pupil at Luton Grammar School - 45 kilometres north of London - and I can assure the Luton area, well away from South London, had its share of V2 rockets... There is so much daft material in the Keith books that, as I say, I wouldn't have be wasting time even mentioning them if were not for one disturbing fact. By suggesting that certain selected parts of my book are true, he has done readers a grave disservice because he has fanned fears such as those I mentioned at the beginning of this talk. If I trim some of his excessive verbiage, here is what he actually says on pages 226 and 227: "ALTERNATIVE 3 points to ... the deadly alignment of technology and elitist control ...(and) it is right on the mark." He goes on: "I do know that ALTERNATIVE 3, in its worst and most gruesome vision, is absolutely inevitable." In other words, he is telling readers who are already anxious ... be frightened, be very frightened, because some of what Watkins has written - some of this "gruesome vision" is absolutely inevitable. That, my friends, is grossly irresponsible. **** Now let us, at last, get down to some sense. I mentioned earlier that, thanks largely to material I received after the book was published, I have become convinced that the Superpowers have been - and still are - co-operating in a conspiracy of silence. But it is not the evil, baleful, one people believe I presented in my novel ALTERNATIVE 3. I had planned to write a follow-up book - Backlash To ALTERNATIVE 3 - using much of the material supplied by readers to examine the real truth of this conspiracy. But when I Moved from London To Sydney to take a new post there as a senior editor with Reader's Digest. My goods and furniture went by sea. And, unfortunately, a chest containing all the material for the new book - the letters, the transcripts of interviews, the lot - were mysteriously lost in transit. Consequently, I was unable to write that book. Tonight I want to put the record straight. Many people may find it impossible to believe that there could have been secret co-operation between America and Russia. The fallacy of that belief was exposed, as many of you will know, by Major George Racey Jordan who for two years - May 1942 to June 1944 - was America's top liaison man with the Russians over lease-lend. His diaries - Major Jordan's diaries, as they're known - show that Top-Secret information and material to make nuclear weapons was then being furtively supplied to the Russians, and this, according to Major Jordan, was not just a wartime practice. It was known to have continued after it became public knowledge, thanks largely to his courageous expose, until December 13 1949. That was three years after Winston Churchill coined the memorable phrase about an "Iron Curtain" having descended across Europe. The Cold War, as it became known, began in earnest in February 1948 when the Russian dictator, Joseph Stalin blockaded Berlin - forcing the Western powers to supply Berliners with food and other essentials by air. So, even at the height of the Cold War, there apparently was secret co-operation. Russia and America - why should they secretly co-operate to hide the truth about UFOS? Now that is the key question. Despite all the evidence that flying saucers are a reality, NASA and other organisations keep denying their existence. A major investigation into them, initiated only because of mounting pressure from the public, was launched in 'the sixties by a team headed by a Professor of Astrophysics, Dr Edward Condon. He had a budget of half a million American dollars which, thirty years ago, was a great heap of money. His eventual report denied the existence of flying saucers and a panel of the AMerican National Academy Of Sciences endorsed the conclusion that: "Further extensive study probably cannot be justified." Yet Condon's joint principal investigator, physicist Dr James Macdonald derided The Condon Report. He said: "No matter how long it is, what it includes, how it is said, or what it recommends, it will lack the essential element of credibility." It will lack the essential element of credibility this helped confirm the belief that the condon so-called investigation was merely part of an elaborate cover-up. The reason for that cover-up, however, was to avoid mass panic. Mass panic over facts which were well-known to top government officials around the world. 1. Space craft from at least one other planet had investigated this world. 2. Travellers from some of those craft had landed and were among us - studying us as if we were strange creatures in a zoo, maybe transporting some of us to their home planets as exhibits. That is what the men in black are reported to have described. Most of you, I'm sure, will be familiar with the accounts of meetings with the men in black. One of the earliest and - to my mind - most convincing came from American researcher Albert Bender of The International Flying Saucer Bureau. He was among the thousands of people around the world who, in March 1953, took part in what they called 'C... for Contact ... Day At precisely the same synchronised time - 6:0OPM USA Eastern Time, 11.0 PM London Time, 11.0 AM New Zealand Time - They all concentrated on trying to send an agreed telepathic message to the 99 occupants of interplanetary craft that have been observing our planet earth." The message ended with these words: "Be responsible for creating a miracle here on our planet to wake up the ignorant ones to reality. Let us hear from you. we are your friends." Later, Bender claimed, he was visited on a number of occasions by three men. He said: "Their clothing was made of a black material which reminded me of cloth used in the attire of clergymen. It was well-pressed and appeared almost new. All the other apparel such as ties, shirts, stockings and shoes were also black. They wore hats, of homburg style also black." They also wore black gloves, he added, and their faces were unpleasant to look at. We should not assume for one moment that this is what the aliens would normallly have looked like. this is what they chose to look like in order to make the right impression on Bender. Psychic researchers know that discarnate spirits, manipulating elemental forces, can appear in the form of flesh and blood. During the nearly two years I spent investigating exorcism for one of my other books - I came across a number of reliable witnesses who'd seen such appearances. The discarnate spirits ... or entities or whatever you like to call them ... can choose how they wish to be seen. It may be in some extremely horrific form if they wish to terrify. Or, if their intentions are benevolent, they can appear in a beautiful and reassuring form. All this has been known, of course, for generations. after all, isn't this precisely how the spirit of Jesus Christ manifested itself in living human form to his disciples - and to people such as Mary Magdalene - after his physical death? So let's get back to Bender's visitors. They told him they had a life span five times that of the average human but that some of their species live even longer. They told him that many other planets were far more advanced than this one and said: "Earth will constantly be under surveillance by these systems... " Did they intend to harm humans? Here, according to Bender, was the reply: "We have found it necessary to frighten many, but we also have had to resort to graver action, in some cases which involved deaths among your fellow Earthmen. We have carried off many of your people to our own planet for means of experimentation and also to place some of them on exhibit for our own people to see. We have specimens of people from many planets." They stressed their intentions were friendly but they also gave this warning: "With the push of a small button in our space laboratory we can detonate every bomb you have in your stockpiles all over the globe, causing almost total destruction to your planet." Why would they consider doing that? They would do, Bender was told, "only if we were discovered and your people tried to stop us with whatever means they had at their disposal." This type of information - and much more - I am convinced was known in The White House and The Kremlin. And governments have been desperate to suppress it, to vigorously deny its existence, because the world leaders know it could create horrendous panic. That Conspiracy Of Silence is the real conspiracy. not the fictional one which, in my original innocence and ignorance, I Created for the book ALTERNATIVE 3. I do not consider for one moment that there is any real reason to fear the intentions of the visitors who, I am sure, have come here from other planets and are still here. Their intentions are nowhere near as evil as, say, those of the Yugoslavian Dictator Slobodan Milosevic. They are curious. They are interested. But they mean us no harm. Finally, I am deeply sorry that my novel, ALTERNATIVE 3, should have caused such anxiety. But if it has made many readers think more deeply - and more intelligently - on this subject of UFOs and space travel - then I feel it has done some good. Thank you. Les Watkins.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 New Items on the PJ-47 and Sign Historical Group From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:05:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:27:44 -0400 Subject: New Items on the PJ-47 and Sign Historical Group Greetings All We now have several new additions by Barry Greenwood to the web pages of the Sign Historical Group (SHG) and Project 1947. First in the Forum section of the Project 1947 website is Barry Greenwood's UFOs: Government Involvement, Secrecy, and Documents http://www.project1947.com/bg/ufogov.htm This article is a brief history of US government involvement with UFOs and the attempt to obtain access to government UFO records over the years. The general nature of this article means that it is suitable for beginners and people outside the field. The detailed twists and turns are left to other articles on the website. Joining Barry's catalogue of UFO articles at SHG at http://www.project1947.com/shg/bgbib.htm are his inventory of government file folders and topical file folder collection. One of the original agenda items for the Chicago UFO History Conference in 1999 was a complete inventory of government documents. The participants were asked to bring the documents they had found, and a master set would be constructed. This idea was far too ambitious for a two day meeting. Although this task was set aside, a number of other important tasks and ideas were discussed and adopted. Detail are in the Sign Historical Group Proceedings http://www.project1947.com/shg/proceed.htm The task of assembling a master set of document has continued. An inventory of files in individual collections is the first step in this direction. Barry Greenwood's inventory is now on the SHG site, others will follow. Government File Folder Headings http://www.project1947.com/shg/govintro.htm "This listing of government file folder headings represents 25 years of research into official interest in the UFO phenomena. The great majority of them are the result of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) actions against official agencies in the U.S., and by similar legal actions abroad." Barry's inventory of topical file folders of various UFO subjects and background data is found here. Topical File Folder Headings http://www.project1947.com/shg/topfiles.htm "'Topical' files are those which are difficult to fit into other general categories. They are informational records, often found as 'Vertical Files' in libraries, which provide background on a broad range of issues. Often when controversies arise, they are known by popularized nicknames, much in the way that 'Watergate,' 'Whitewater,' or 'Teapot Dome' have become known in political circles. These names become the way the event is remembered. Opinion polls, book and encyclopedia extracts, movie and TV reviews, indices and catalogues, administrative organizational data, general investigative issues, and collectibles are among other kinds of topics falling under the topical file umbrella." SHG is please to present such inventories, they indicate the depth and quality of research. Such extensive holdings demonstrate that this is not a marginal subject, but one that deserves wider investigation. Jan Aldrich Vice Chairman Sign Historical Group http:www.project1947.com/shg/ P. O. Box 40 Scotland, CT 06264, USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.28.00 From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 06:49:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:29:45 -0400 Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 8.28.00 TMP NEWS The E-News Service of The Millennium Project http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews http://persweb.direct.ca/psa August 28, 2000 _____________________________ WEEKLY BRIEFING A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports 8.28.00 STUDY YIELDS STRONGEST EVIDENCE YET OF AN OCEAN ON EUROPA Magnetic readings of Europa, a moon of Jupiter, strongly suggest that it has an ocean of liquid water covered by ice, a finding that strengthens the possibility for the presence of life, experts say... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/25/europa.water.ap/index.html WATERWORLD? GALILEO REVEALS COMPELLING EVIDENCE OF OCEAN ON EUROPA Data collected earlier this year by the Galileo spacecraft has now generated what some scientists are calling virtually undeniable evidence that Jupiter's moon Europa has a significant water ocean churning beneath its icy surface - a possibility that has extraterrestrial life-seekers reeling with excitement... http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/europa_ocean_000824.html GALAXY EXPERIMENT COULD ANSWER SOME BIG QUESTIONS It is a question that's plagued scientists for centuries, but one that is nagging University of Oregon astronomer Greg Bothun in particular: What is the universe made of?... http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/08/25/galaxy.test.ap/index.html 'MYSTERY MISSLES' OVER PAKISTAN Scores of people reported seeing several flaming objects flying in formation over a large area of Pakistan last week with no satisfactory explanation coming from the government... http://www.brecorder.com/story/S00DD/SDH21/SDH21220.htm CNN REVIEW: 'WAITING FOR THE UFOs' A critical review of the new book by Kevin Randle and Russ Estes as well as an online public poll... http://www.cnn.com/2000/books/reviews/08/25/review.spaceship/index.html _____________________________ TMP News is the e-news service of The Millennium Project, a future studies research organization, providing a Weekly Briefing of the latest news and reports relating to the most phenomenal, enigmatic and controversial issues of our time in science and technology, as well as periodic information and updates on TMP-related news and events. TMP News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by TMP, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: tmpnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the TMP News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews See the TMP web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa _____________________________ � The Millennium Project, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:00:06 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:32:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >From: Dave Bowden >grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >> >Footage of alien visitors? >Terry, I respectfully ask where on Earth did you hear of such a >thing? Please reply to this question as I am always interested >in how these fantasies are started. I'm glad you agree that this type of talk is nonsense. Well, I read it on the Lost Haven website. The phrase used was "Chris has actual footage of the alien visitors". Following my original message on Updates this phrase was deleted and the sentence rewritten. Now you have your source from where the fantasy started. One can only assume that either the webmaster was under the impression that "actual footage of the alien visitors" existed and was corrected, or that the webmaster believed the UFOs were from another planet but worded it all wrong. Either way we all deserve some sort of explanation. What do you believe this footage shows? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 CPR-Canada News: Update #3 - Oro-Medonte Township, From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:18:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:35:39 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #3 - Oro-Medonte Township, CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 28, 2000 _____________________________ UPDATE #3 - ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP, ONTARIO CROP CIRCLES Following is another ground report, from Drew Gauley, Ontario director for CPR-Canada, as well as an article from The Packet & Times newspaper (Orillia, Ontario). Additional ground photos and video footage also taken. Aerial photo and previous reports are on the CPR-Canada web site. Paul Anderson _____________________________ On Friday August 18, 2000, myself and Henry McKay (previous MUFON Canadian Director and more recently, a self motivated consultant of Accultural Studies) visited the Horne family farm to witness the crop circles for ourselves. Upon our arrival, the Horne's weren't home, but a neighbour pointed us in the direction of the field. From the road we could see some indentations in the field and some pathways leading in. Closer inspection revealed no pattern to the fallen crop. We found out later that there had been so many visitors that this area had been trampled by people looking in the wrong spot! After picking up two articles from the Orillia Packet we noticed some details in the aerial photo and realised we had looked in the wrong part of the field. So back we went! Fortunately, one of the Horne's was in the field talking with a couple from Toronto. We greeted them as they left and introduced ourselves to ____ Horne (an older brother to Garnet who is also a farmer). He told us that he estimated over 1000 visitors to the field by that point. Combined with a some additional facts (it had been over a week since the formations appearance, there had been rain recently and it was beginning to rain as we spoke) we proceeded with a general inspection. We decided that the basic info had been gathered (dates, measurements, orientation, etc) so I tried to keep my video camera dry as we got a guided tour from Mr. Horne. The circles themselves all had a neat rotation, with a tighter whorl in the centre where the crop was almost "weaved" together as a result. The edges were well defined and all were "perfect" circles. No samples were collected although Mr. Horne did mention some people had previously taken some. The field is in close proximity to a number of towers, both electrical and radio transmitter/cell phone.(?) Although the circles are close to the edge of the field and forest border, nothing unusual was noted on nearby trees. Of note is his retelling of the strange bang his brother and son experienced in their truck the night of the formation. Mike Bird of the TSPC spoke with Garnet Horne who recounted the story and he passed it to me. I believe Garnet tends to the field and was driving up the service path that runs east/west adjacent to the field when he noticed the formation. He went back home to get his son to show him. They headed back at around 9 o'clock when on the same path they heard what sounded like a large "wallop" hit the truck. At first they thought it was a branch hitting the side or undercarriage of the truck and then it occured to them that it could also be a gunshot. Garnets son did up his window and they got out of there ASAP. Back home, they checked the truck and there was no sign of any impact. Needless to say it caused them quite an inexplicable scare. I spoke with Nancy Talbott yesterday and she is interested in receiving plant samples regardless of the time that has passed and the weather. I'm unable to visit again any time soon, so I have sent out a request to interested folk who could do the collecting. Apart from awaiting a response to this question, I'm also hoping to hear back from the Horne's as to whether harvesting has taken place yet. Drew Gauley CROP CIRCLES NO HOAX: EXPERT By Joelle Kovach The Packet & Times After a weekend visit, a paranormal phenomena expert says the crop circles at a local family farm were not created by humans. "I don't think they're a deliberate hoax," said Henry McKay, a one-time Canadian director of the Mutual Unidentified Flying Objects Network (MUFON) and crop circle researcher since 1965. Had human pranksters tromped the circles, it's likely they would have chosen a site visible from the roadway, McKay said. But the circles at the Garnet Horne family farm, on the edge of Orillia, are concealed from the road. McKay also studied circles discovered in a farmer's field near Bass Lake in 1993. He attributed the Bass Lake circles to wind damage. He says the ones in Horne's fields are far more precise in their dimensions and placement. The three circles are exactly 23, 15 and 12 metres in diameter. Drew Gauley, the Ontario director for Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, accompanied McKay from Toronto to Simcoe County to see the crop circles. Gauley said it would have been preferable to view the circles soon after they first appeared on Aug. 10. As a result, he reserved judgment on how they were created. "It's important to be there before rainfall, before 1,000 visitors," said Gauley. Horne estimates that 1,000 visitors have stopped by to see the circles in about 10 days. Some of the curious have come from as far away as New York, Kitchener and Ottawa. And they were still coming Sunday; someone had even erected a roadside sign to indicate the location of the circles. "I can't get over the people who have come," Horne said. Among those who visited on the weekend was Clynt King. Circles cropped up in his wheat field near Hagersville last summer, and he has taken an avid interest in the topic since. Equipped with what looked like a measuring wheel, King set out to take the dimensions of the circles. While the circles in his field were transpersed with symbols resembling runes, there were three circles off to one side that were similar to those in Horne's field. King has no doubt of the circles' origins. "People from other planets put them there," he said matter-of-factly. "They use microwave energy from the Earth." Gauley said he had visited King's circles in July, 1999, and they displayed a more intricate pattern. "It was more of a pictograph." Canada's prairie provinces are famous for crop circles, Gauley said. But in more than 30 years of study, McKay has only seen 10 crop circle fields in Ontario. Most of them occurred a few years back, he said. He said he didn't come across any bits of evidence in Horne's field to merit further study of the circles. In 1971, he said he found depressions in the earth in a crop circle field in Trenton, Ont. They suggested to him the presence of a tripod undercarriage. _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:24:33 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:37:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:49:04 +0100 >It was also interesting to see in another Update message, >>>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >>>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>>Absolutely, that's why I sent the mails in the first place... >>>all I've had so far is support from Roy Hale, nothing from the >>>others and of course the inevitable silly mail from the likes of >>>yourself. >Of course all this has nothing to do with the fact you designed >the front cover for Chris Martin's book would it. Hi Rory, I did indeed create the cover for Chris Martin's book, no secrets there. I've known Chris for a few years and knowing I work as a 3D artist he asked if I would do a cover for him. More recently I offered to do some high res screen grabs and avi's for him since he doesn't have the equipment or software, from these I created smaller optimized for web images which I passed on to Roy to put on his site. That's all there is to it, read into it what you will. Anyway the offer still stands, any 'researcher' interested please mail me. When you get to see some of Chris's footage at Leeds I would be very interested in your explanation. All the best, Dave Bowden.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:10:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:04:50 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:01:05 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >>Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 07:12:52 -0400 >>From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Is there any news on your Project FT web site being >re-established on the www yet? Hallo Roy and all other interested List Members, After a long absence, I understand from Tony Spurrier, Project FT's 'Field Officer' that our web pages can be accessed via: homepages.ntl/sue.addison (Note: This is a Compuserve address) This is probably only a temporary address, as efforts are in hand to obtain a more suitable domain name... Thank you for your interest Victor J.Kean Project FT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:10:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:08:54 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:28:07 +0100 Jenny, On August 2nd in reply to Diane Harrison, you made the assertion that the Bacup (Lancs) area:- >is actually the busiest area for UFO activity in the UK >(possible in Europe)..... This assertion 'crux' of my response to you, as I suggested that the South-East corner of the UK with its many FT overflights was possibly even more active. Since then you have avoided repeating the phrase above and are now refering to other phenomenon such as 'abductions and aliens', etc You also repeat: >1: So far as I know there are no league tables to say one area >is more active than any other..... Having introduced the concept of a non-existent "league table" and you are now defending *that* statement. Who'se arguing ??? Regarding your introduction into this discussion of "Aircraft from Stanstead... and travelling to Europe. You wrote: >I mentioned it because there had been a flap of sightings in >the same area you refer to and BUFORA did investigate and found >the above cause to apply. Only you know if this is relevant or >not, but I don't see why it should be distressing that I made >this comment. No, No, Jenny... Stansted Airport and the normal commercial flight paths to Europe have no connection with FT sighting reports from experienced observers in close proximity to the 'sensitive sites'... And they are *not* in the "same area" by any stretch of the imagination... BTW no one is "distressed" by this particular comment of yours... only puzzled. You also wrote: >>I am not sure why what was a perfectly innocent comment in a >>reply just trying to help another researcher has turned into >>this. I can only ask you, once again, to focus on the 'crux' of my original query, (Repeated above) of UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) in the UK. Kind regards, Victor J.Kean Project FT \___________________________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 19:42:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:11:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness - Maccabee >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Donald H. Menzel, Unreliable Witness >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:27:29 -0500 >Listfolk: >Few people in the history of the UFO controversy have played so >destructive or dishonorable a role as the late Harvard >astronomer and obsessed UFO trasher Donald Howard Menzel <snip> >On May 12, 1949, Menzel had a personal encounter with the UFO >phenomenon. His private description of the event and his later >public one differed markedly. His initial account of the >incident did not come to light until the 1970s, when researcher >Brad Sparks managed to uncover the report, sent to the Air Force >and marked "CONFIDENTIAL." (Sparks, 1977). >Menzel related that at 9:30 that evening he and a driver left >Holloman Air Force Base on their way to Alamogordo, New Mexico. >As they traveled along Highway 70, heading east-northeast, >Menzel, in the backseat, admired the full moon ascending in the >southeast and noted the presence of the reddish star Antares >just below and to the left of the moon. >A minute or two later he saw another object in the sky, this one >nearer the horizon and farther to the left. As he told the Air >Force, "The star had a fuzzy appearance, caused, I thought, by >low-level atmospheric haze. As I watched, I noted, within half a >minute, a second star about three degrees to the South of the >first." Thinking at first that these were the stars Castor and >Pollux, he watched them for another minute as they gradually >became brighter. >Suddenly he realized that "the two stars had to be something >else." They were too big, and Castor and Pollux were in the >western, not the east-southeastern sky. The objects, he related, >were "very nearly identical in diameter, nearly one-half the >size of the full moon." The drawing accompanying his report >shows two small circles. >Quickly determining that these were not reflections on his >bifocals or on the car window, he continued to observe the >"ghostly objects" for another four minutes. They were white, >almost as bright as the brightest stars, and level with each >other. Then the object on the right "suddenly disappeared." >Convinced that what he was seeing was "exceptional," he ordered >the driver to stop immediately, but the very moment he was >speaking, the second object vanished instantly.> >Menzel calculated that if the objects were truly motionless, as >they seemed to be, they were at least "180 miles away" and about >"3/4 of a mile" in size. (If they were closer and in motion, >they would be smaller.) >When Menzel submitted his report to the Air Force soon >afterwards, he was clearly puzzled. But when he recounted the >story four years later, in the first of three anti-UFO books he >grudgingly acknowledged that "I cannot explain the phenomenon in >every detail." He wrote, "It was merely a reflection of the >moon.... A layer of haze, perhaps disturbed and tilted by the >moving car, probably caused the trick reflections of the moon." >The situation was comparable to "that of a person riding in a >fast motorboat. He might see the moon reflected in the bow wave >thrown up by the boat. But the reflection would vanish when the >boat stopped." Therefore, he reasoned, the lunar- reflection >theory "would also explain why the pair of ghostly attendants >faded at the moment we stopped the car; the reflecting bumps > >would then disappear" (Menzel, 1953). As Sparks has pointed out >(his italics): Debunker Rule #1: Any explanation is better than none. This is an excellent example of inventing an explanation which, upon examination, makes no sense. It would require a fantastic tilted mirage in the atmosphere (atmospheric beam bending of light from the moon), or actually two mirages. Menzel invented a similar bizarre mirage theory to explain the "best" (his characterization) sighting of th early years, that of C.B. Moore (recently of Roswell Mogul fame). Menzel may have been a credible observer (his sighting was rated as good or credible by the Air Force) but he was a non-credible analyst.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Jacques Vallee? - Cecchini From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 20:28:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:14:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Jacques Vallee? - Cecchini >From: David Hancock <sftree@flash.net> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:36:54 -0700 >Subject: Jacques Vallee? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >I had always been a big fan of Jacques Vallee and had the good >fortune to see him speak. I of course have every book he has >written. >I haven't heard anything about him recently, does anyone know >how he's doing and if he's up to anything more in ufology? To answer your question: no, I don't. But by all public appearances it looks like he's trying to create a little bit of distance between himself and modern ufology. From my bookmarks: 1990 & 1995 http://home.flash.net/~joerit/docs/vallee01.html "The following interview occurred in 1990. On November 17, 1993, Vallee reportedly sent a letter regarding Ufology to James Moseley who quoted from it in his April 15, 1995 issue of the newsletter "Saucer Smear". Part of this reads: 'My decision to withdraw from the (UFO) field is consistent with the observation that serious, constructive scientific work is impossible in present conditions. Over the last few years ufology has squandered close to one million dollars... in absurd, unscientific procedures centered on abduction 'research,' the Roswell fiasco... and various field investigations of the Roswell and Gulf Breeze type. I cannot afford to remain associated with any of this, so it is time to go away quietly.'" 1996 Dr. JACQUES VALLEE ISSUES WARNING TO UFO RESEARCHERS http://www.debshome.com/Vallee_Warnings.html (heh, I wonder what the Greer camp had to say about some of that...) 1993 Dr. Jacques Vallee Reveals What Is Behind Forbidden Science http://www.21stcenturyradio.com/ForbiddenScience.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith From: Peter Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 21:38:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:16:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments: >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:54:50 EDT >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >>Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:06:01 -0400 >But if the person truly believed in his or her combat >experiences, then don't we have an example of PTSD as >an outgrowth of fantasy? Now here is an irony. Since replying to Serge on this thread I've read a bit further into Kevin et al's book. Pages 269-77 deal with the appalling breakdown of a woman named "Janet" under the influence of therapists who convinced her first that she suffered multiple personality disorder, then that she'd been abused as a child and then (a fresh set of therapists) that she'd been a victim of ritual satanic abuse. She finally solved her problems with a shotgun. William P. Cone, one of Kevin's co-authors, treated Janet for a while and found no reason to give any credence to any of these "diagnoses" (and explains very clearly why). Early in this sad saga Janet joined an MPD-oriented support/therapy group, whereupon her previously improving condition deteriorated. Randle, Estes & Cone write (p270): "Within two weeks of joining the group, Janet began to exhibit the symptoms of multiple personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and child abuse." When you read the whole story, this seems a pretty clear case of PTSD generated by fantasies. best wishes Pyewackit D. Manxcat Saying Cheese In Cheshire
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Filer's Files #34 -- 2000 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 22:38:15 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:19:07 -0400 Subject: Filer's Files #34 -- 2000 Filer's Files #34 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern August 28, 2000, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, C. Warren Webmaster. Web site http://www.filersfiles.com.- Majorstar@aol.com, NATIONAL POLICY OF DEBUNKING UFOs BEGAN WITH ROBERTSON PANEL Jeff Challender who is doing excellent work with the NASA Shuttle footage wrote, "Have you ever thought of doing a story on the now little known Robertson Panel of January, 1953? This is the origin of the official policy, of ridicule and debunking at all costs, against those of "credible stature" who might dare to report UFOs or "uncorrelated targets". Yet few in the public are aware of this Panel and its' recommendations. People should know about this. IF there is "nothing" to the UFO phenomenon, it doesn't make sense to create a policy of aggressive attacks on witnesses. Why work so hard, expend so much energy and time, and spend so much tax dollars to counter "NOTHING"? Well Jeff. there really is a national policy to ridicule UFO reports. The US government's own historical documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act explain why it became US government's policy to debunk, mock, and discredit anyone who provides good evidence for UFOs. In the late 1940s early 1950s, the numerous reports from high quality witnesses was putting the government in a precarious and embarrassing position. Leading the revelations were Major Donald Keyhoe and Vice Admiral Roscoe Hillenkotter the third director of the CIA (1947 to 1950) who declared UFOs were real. UFOs were reported in headlines buzzing Washington DC and flying at will over our military bases. The Cold War with the Soviets and Communist countries was heating up. Strange craft were reported all over our skies, and the news media was critical of government's explanations. Many thought the craft belonged to the Soviet Union or perhaps aliens bent on invasion. There was fear the Soviets could use UFO propaganda to discredit the US government. There was genuine concern that a national panic could occur. Whether UFOs were real or not, the situation made the president nervous, the military and the various intelligence agencies look bad. Plenty of good reports were leaking out and thousands of military aircraft were crashing. Stories started leaking out these aircraft were crashing while chasing UFOs. The crashes were explained has training accidents and mechanical failures but the news media was starting to tie the two types of reports together. Best selling books were claiming the UFOs were real and might signal a Soviet or alien invasion. The situation whether real or unreal was deteriorating. The Robertson Panel was formed at the request of the White House to quell the situation. It was not unlike the Warren Commission or Waco Hearings where the public wanted answers. So powerful forces in the CIA, Air Force and the scientific establishment came together to cool the UFO state of affairs. CIA documents reveal five members of the Scientific Advisory Panel who were known skeptics were given several poor UFO cases to examine and came to the conclusion that "there was no evidence of a direct threat to national security in the objects sighted. Flying saucer reports were overloading emergency reporting channels with false information, clogging up communication lines, causing alarm, and realistically even if they were real there was little we could do about them. Further the government was losing the confidence of the people. Our science and aircraft seemed to be confronted by far superior technology. The Robertson Panel discussions and recommendations centered around the main problem of eradicating belief in these unidentified flying objects. Ways of bringing in the news media, and movies were discussed. CIA documents reveal, one of the panel's recommendations was that a policy of debunking UFO reports should be instigated. This would result in reduction in public interest in flying saucers which today evokes a strong psychological reaction. This 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 is the case of continuing 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 there susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda." The CIA reports reveal a national policy of debunking UFO reports. Like was instigated and the power of the government was set in motion to debunk the field. The panel discussed the various insidious methods that could be implemented to execute such a program: It was felt strongly that psychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature and extent of the program. These national programs resulted in the National Policy became to debunk any valid sighting even if it resulted the embarrassment of pilots and government employees. UFO reports were denied, debunked and those who see them ridiculed. Timothy Good in his book Above Top Secret writes: Another sinister recommendation of the panel was that civilian UFO groups should be watched "because of their potentially great influence on mass thinking if widespread sighting s should occur. The apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for subversive purposes should be kept in mind." The panel concluded that "the continued emphasis on the reporting these phenomena does, in these parlous times, result in a threat to the orderly functioning of the protective organs of the body politic," and recommended: a. That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired. b. That the national security agencies institute policies on intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize most promptly and to react most effectively to true indications of hostile intent or action. P. 338 Shortly thereafter every effort of the government went into debunking UFOs even if it would mean embarrassing its own people. It soon became known the best way to destroy your military career was to report a UFO. Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, Chief of the Aerial Phenomena Branch at the Air Technical Intelligence Center, said that the CIA ordered the Air Force to debunk sightings and debunk witnesses. "We're ordered to hide sightings when possible," he told Major Keyhole, but if a strong report does get out we have to publish a fast explanation--make up something to kill the report in a hurry, and also ridicule the witness, especially if we can't figure out a plausible answer. even have to discredit our own pilots." P.339 The millions of dollars spent by the Air Force to debunk the Roswell report show this policy is still strongly in effect. It's an uphill climb to bring out the reality of the situation. If a group of military people observe a UFO and the case has merit, they are quickly transferred or retired to keep the observers from talking and told to keep quiet with various threats. Every time I see a strong debunking article that tears at the reputation of a courageous UFO researcher, I wonder who the debunker is working for? If you study Ufology, you soon discover in almost every important case there will be an attempt to ridicule those who bring the pro UFO evidence forward. The better the case the stronger criticism. Frequently this is led by a small but ferocious group who seem to claim every sighting is the planet Venus or a hoax. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they usually attack the researcher rather than the data. The attacks are vindictive towards the person rather than his research or sighting. I always wonder if the attackers are paid to conduct these character assassinations? One favorite tactic is to attack the person for any attempt to obtain a financial reward for researching UFOs. Some how in every other field its all right to make a living accept in Ufology. I'm happy to stand up in court to testify or debate anyone on the reality of UFOs. The Cold War is over, so now many who were once government employees are questioning these methods. The intensity of the government actions tend to prove UFOs exist. Perhaps the policy needs review. Almost fifty years have gone by since these debunking methods and ridicule became national policy. I feel its time for a change. INVISIBLE RESIDENTS It should be realized that about half of UFO reports involve oceans, lakes and rivers. UFOs are frequently seen going to and from water, entering and leaving the water or traveling under the water. For example, Ivan T. Sanderson writes, "The trawler Star of Freedom (70 tons) from Fleetwood, Lancashire, struck an unidentified object in the early hours of February 3, 1965. She was steaming at the time at nine knots in 80 fathoms, 15 miles E.S.E. of Barra, Scotland. The crash lifted the bow out of the water. A distress call was sent out, and the crew manned the pumps. Eventually the badly holed trawler was beached in Castlebay harbor. Skipper George Wood is convinced that he hit a surfacing submarine, but both British and American naval authorities denied that any of the their submarines had been involved. "Invisible Residents" The book has hundreds of accounts of underwater craft not believed to be operated by humans. It is interesting to note that the Russian Navy and government is still insisting that the most likely cause of the Kursk sub disaster was a collision with a foreign submarine. The Norwegian Seismic Institute indicates that explosions were detected at 11.28 AM and 11.39 AM Russian time on August 12, in the vicinity of the sub. The second was a powerful explosion that registered 3.5 on the Richter scale. It is possible that some type of underwater collision could have caused events that led up to the second large explosion that apparently blew a hole in the front of the sub. The Russians claim the last contact with the vessel was on August 11, when the Kirsch's commander Gennady Lyachin, successfully test-fired a missile during a military exercise. He asked permission to fire again on Saturday morning. The missile that may have exploded in its launch tube is a rocket-propelled anti-submarine weapon an SSN15 or an SSN16. The missile is fired like a torpedo but its rocket launches it to the target area where it reenters the water and destroys the enemy sub. This offensive action may have caused the unknown foreign sub to respond by taking offensive action against the Kursk. If the sub accidentally hit an underwater object the torpedo rocket may have exploded causing heavy damage to the sub. We may never know what exactly caused the accident in relatively shallow water not much deeper than the length of a football field. We should not forget almost three quarters of the Earth is covered by water that averages two miles in depth. That is 280 million cubic miles of water. Most of this area has never been explored by humans. We know that life forms lived in the oceans hundreds of millions of years before life came to land. Human embryos go through development that infers we were fishlike at one time in the distant past. It is possible a civilization millions perhaps a billion years older than our own developed with intelligent aquatic creatures. I'm writing this story from the New Jersey shore whereas far as I can see is the ocean. I went swimming this morning and found strange creatures in the water. At least they were strange to me. One I photographed had the shape of a disc and was made of a type of a hard clear plastic like substance. Apparently it was from the jelly fish family but enlarged hundreds of times this material could be made into a unique underwater city. It could withstand tremendous pressure without collapsing. Close by was a small crab with pinchers holding a small fish. Porpoises and whales are said to possess intelligence equal to man. Equipped with pinchers or fingers they would have the ability to manufacture objects. Those who live under the sea may be either air breathing or liquid breathing. Looking at these creatures from the ocean I wondered if over millions of years an underwater civilization could have advanced to build flying objects. UFOs may be from this planet or from somewhere in space but they are frequently seen plunging through our atmosphere and diving into the ocean. We actually know very little about what is beneath the sea and if someone lives there they may not want to be found. PENNSYLVANIA TWO UFOs PHOTOGRAPHED GETTYSBURG -- Marilyn J. Ruben writes: "I thought you would enjoy seeing the UFO photo I took Sunday afternoon August 20, 2000, at 3:09 PM. while our family was on vacation in Gettysburg. We were driving the route through the Civil War battlefields of Gettysburg and periodically got out of the car to take pictures. I was using the Sony digital still camera. The photo is a close-up of what is known as the "Copse of Trees" (meaning clump of trees). It is in the middle of a large field in Gettysburg in an area where 20,000 confederates charged across this field to attack union soldiers hiding in the "copse of trees." About one-third of the Confederate soldiers were killed here in July of 1863. Pickett's Charge was a turning point in the Civil War. I found the battleground to be as moving an experience. After reviewing the photos today, I was surprised to discover two UFOs hovering in on either side of the "Copse of Trees." The two UFOs were not there when I took the picture, since I had been watching he skies continuously for UFOs. It seemed as if the UFOs were watching over Gettysburg. The photos can be seen at the Alien Abduction Experience and Research web site http://www.abduct.com/. Editors Note: The objects are rather small, but enlarged they appear to be discs with domes. GEORGIA UNUSUAL AIRCRAFT SPOTTED RINGGOLD - On August 15, 2000, I was driving down one of the major roads that connects Ft Oglethorpe to Ringgold at 01:50 AM. I noticed a ball of light moving across the sky that was too fast and low to be a plane, and too slow to be a falling star. The light moved across the sky and started to disappear behind some tree tops, but made a huge U-turn back toward me. As it turned, I noticed it had two lights on it, but as it came closer I saw three white colored lights. Two larger ones were on the sides, and other was in the middle. Higher up was a small red flashing light in between the three white ones. It was hovering in the air above a house while I was stopped. I then decided to hightail it home. I kept looking back for the object but I didn't see it. As I neared my home, I put my turn signal on and saw the aircraft was directly above my driveway. I could clearly see the three lights and the flashing light. The craft had some kind of blue and red reflective checkerboard pattern on the bottom. I stopped my car at the top of my driveway and watched the craft as it made it's way across the sky and slowly flew over the top of my car, and crept off over my house until it disappeared into the darkness. I waited in my car for a few minutes to make sure it was gone, and ran inside. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC www.ufocenter.com MINNESOTA LIGHTS MINNESOTA RIVER - MUFON's William I. McNeff reports that a witness observed lights while night fishing on August 5, 2000, at 11:45 to 12:10 PM three miles east of Le Sueur. The witness says, "I was watching the catfish lines and the frequent falling stars, when I looked north to the lowest part of the spoon in the Big Dipper constellation. I watched a light become bright as it moved in what would become a southerly direction. I assumed, that the increase in light intensity was due to the sun's reflection on a satellite. I noticed that it was a slower speed than any of the other six satellites I had observed earlier that evening. I saw another light appear behind it that was maybe 1/2" at arm's-length. From the time I saw the first, until the second appeared, was 20 seconds. The speed of one was erratic at best. Using the stars in the background, I was able to verify that they traveled less a trajectory, but rather in a meandering direction, neither holding a constant speed. The second never passed the first. Then, as they were at a point I would describe as 11 O'clock, I saw the third. They seemed to "inch-worm" across the sky, all wavering slightly in direction, in a loose formation. The second seemed to act as a "chase-plane", like the Tigers that follow the Shuttle's entry. Sometimes, the second would slow to alongside the third, making equilateral triangle, sometimes drop behind, but not for long. It seemed intent on trying to hold its own position in the formation. I watched them for 5 minutes, as they crossed the arc of the sky. They faded out of light in the S-SE, as would a satellite re-entering the Earth's shadow. That's one of the reasons I say their altitude was orbit-level. Thanks to Jeffrey Pekarna. Le Sueur and MUFON's William I. McNeff WASHINGTON LIGHTS SEATTLE -- I saw Linda Lull's report Filer's Files #32 that remind me of the sighting I had on July 23, 2000, around 4:30 PM., I was driving north on Interstate 5, near the Shorline district of Seattle. The sky in front of me was crystal clear blue. Looking up I saw a very bright light in the north west sky that was 1/16 of an inch held at arm's length. My impression is that the object was metallic and the brightness was caused by the reflecting sunlight. The object appeared to be stationary although since I was in a moving vehicle that can't be confirmed. I watched the object for perhaps two minutes when it suddenly just vanished or "winked out" as it is sometimes described. I probably would not have made the report to NUFORC if it hadn't been for the unusual fact that it just vanished before my eyes after being so prominently in view. Thanks to Gary Val Tenut at CodeUFO@aol.com SCOTLAND UFO REPORT FROM THE YEAR 1767 Ilias Chrissochoidis writes, "As a doctoral student in the Humanities, I've been spending much time reading 18th-century British periodicals. In one of them I have found a report of an unexplained phenomenon. I leave it to your judgment and experience to decide its merits as a UFO sighting. Extract of a letter from Edinburgh, Sept. 8, 1767 follows: "We hear from Perthsire, that an uncommon phaenomenon was observed on the water of Isla, near Cupor Angus, preceded by a thick dark smoke, which soon dispelled, and discovered a large luminous body, like a house on fire, but presently after took a form something pyramidal, and rolled forwards with impetuosity till it came to the water of Erick, up which river it took its direction, with great rapidity, and disappeared a little above Blairgowrie. The effects were as extraordinary as the appearance. In its passage, it carried a large cart many yards over a field of grass; a man riding along the high road was carried from his horse, and so stunned with the fall, as to remain senseless a considerable time. It destroyed one half of a house, and left the other behind, undermined and destroyed an arch of the new bridge building at Blairgowrie, immediately after which it disappeared. As few appearances of this kind ever were attended with like consequences, various conjectures have been formed concerning it. Thanks to Ilias Chrissochoidis Ph.D. candidate Stanford University PAKISTAN UFO RECOVERED DERA GHAZI KHAN -- On August 26, 2000, law enforcement agencies on Friday visited Khumbi Thalang in Tuman Gorchani tribal area of Rajanpur district where an unidentified flying object (UFO) crashed a few days ago. The Bahawalpur corps commander reportedly visited the site on Thursday. He along with other army officers inspected the 10-foot long piece of metal. The wreckage was taken away to unknown place in a covered container. The UFO was spotted flying over Balochistan on August 15. It was seen flying over Rajanpur, Loralai, Barkhan and Fort Munro area last week. It crashed some 20 kilometers away from Farid Air Base used by the Pakistan Air Force for exercises. According to local tribesmen, when it crashed at Khumbi Thalang, sky remained illuminated for about one minute. Editor's Note: The shape of the object would indicate it is some type of missile. GREEN METEORITE FIREBALLS Michael O'Connor writes, The numerous stop-light green meteorites, fireballs or spheres seen in our skies are space ships. The drive inductor sucks in gravity in the front and pushes it out the back, propelling the craft. Elements in the air are caught in this flow and tend to build-up on the front of the craft. Gravity, now flowing through this build-up, induces a great friction creating a tremendous heat. The now molten build- up migrates under the craft and drips off, lending itself to the ancients description of a "Fiery Chariot". The molten and still glowing drippings were the "Burning Lamps" that fell from the sky. This "Coating" must be dispersed or else the functionality of the ship is impaired. It is blocking up the intake! The drippings cool as they fall through the air and when they hit the ground, they flatten a little, but still maintain their rounded edges. These drippings provide ample, but as yet unrecognized, evidence of extraterrestrial space craft. People fall over them daily. Some are used as garden ornaments. Kids try to skip them over water, but they are commonly referred to as River Rocks. Scientists reveal that River Rocks are formed by tumbling or by the action of water, but have you ever seen a half formed River Rock? No. Why? Because they do not exist. These drippings were also responsible for the Chico mystery, where warm rounded rocks rained down on an old warehouse just outside of town. This phenomenon lasted for two years from 1921 through 1923. Are you interested in these things? Thanks to: Michael O'Connor bluescarecrow@hotmail.com (Michael O'Connor) MARS CYDONIA I asked LAN Fleming, "Do you have any thoughts about my comments that there seems to be a road, passageway, or canal between various sights at Cydonia?" The face, pyramid, and fort all seem connected. They also remind me of similar sites in Egypt and Mexico. One artifact can be explained away, but not the whole site. Lan Fleming writes, "Yes, it's been noticed by other people that there are features that look like they could have been roads near some of the landforms, like the "Fort." Of course, they aren't definite enough to be totally sure they're not of geologic origin, but as you say, it's the totality of features in Cydonia that is compelling. Rather than monotonous repetitions of the same basic forms with minor random variations as is seen in most purely natural landscapes, there is a variety of puzzling features of sharply different form that seem to be related to each other in various ways, all in a very small region of the planet. We probably won't be certain what meaning, if any, is behind these apparent relationships until Cydonia is excavated in the way that Egyptian and Mayan ruins have been. I'm afraid that won't happen in our life time, though. CYNTHIA HIND DIES With sadness and regret, I am passing along the news that extraordinary South African UFO researcher Cynthia Hind has passed on after a lengthy illness. She was a totally marvelous person who was a great asset to the field of Ufology with her dignity and grace and solid intellect. We all will miss her. BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT All real estate agents are not the same? Some real estate agents or sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced. Others are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities. When you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest investments! Remember, the majority of people do not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems. Picking the right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find out, " What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs. To get a free copy of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com. We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and US. PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO shots available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham Bethune.. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055 MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention I recommended you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2000 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the files on their Web Sites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item appeared. Send your letters to Majorstar@aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Footprint On Mars? From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:39:02 +1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:20:41 -0400 Subject: Footprint On Mars? Hi everyone Can anyone have a look at this page and tell me what you think about the photos. Thank you in advance Got some info off the newsgroups about 'Footprints on Mars'... I'm attaching the URL's here .. Is this something ??? http://ksshow.t2u.com/ http://www.io.com/~stephens/Mars/Footprints/footprint.html NASA photographs find Martian footprints The photographs, when subjected to computer analysis, surprised everyone at NASA. They revealed the footprints of a three-toed creature, which mission director Golembek named "ET" after the popular movie character who also had three toes. "NASA scientists debated the photographic evidence for more than a day before deciding the evidence was unavoidable. Something left its footprints on the Martian surface," said my own source at NASA, who insists on remaining anonymous. Computer enhancement of the object labelled ETL-02 shows clear indications that it was a footprint left by a creature with three-digits, or "toes." NASA scientists believe this is the most startling evidence of extra-terrstrial life ever produced. Even though the pictures became available on July 14, they were not released until this weekend, when "they would have passed through enough hands to keep suspicion from landing on me," he added. Regards Diane Harrison Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network Australian Skywatch 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 'UFO' Wreckage Said Recovered By Pakistan Air Force From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:44:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:22:12 -0400 Subject: 'UFO' Wreckage Said Recovered By Pakistan Air Force Another Unidentified Flying Object lands in D.G. Khan By Tariq Birmani 28 August 2000, Monday Source: English daily published from Karachi, Pakistan URL location: http://www.dawn.com/2000/08/28/top10.htm DERA GHAZI KHAN, Aug 27: An unidentified flying object (UFO) which came from the west side landed in the tribal area of Dera Ghazi Khan on Sunday night, reports reaching here said. The UFO which was seen flying over Fort Munro and Rakhi Gaaj towns of the tribal area hit the ground between Baghalchor and Rounghin, some 80km from here, at 8.30pm. Sources in the Border Military Police (BMP) quoted tribesmen living in Rounghin area as saying the unidentified flying object had come from the West, Balochistan. "It was nose-diving and after a few moments the sky was lit up," the tribesmen said. Sources ruled out the possibility of casualties because the area where the UFO probably landed was deserted. Uranium-rich Baghalchor is out of bound area whereas Rounghin has a scattered and thin population. Sources in the office of the tribal area political assistant confirmed receiving the report and said a team had been sent to the area to ascertain the facts. It was the second UFO which landed in the tribal area of southern Punjab in the last two weeks. Earlier, an object which was also seen flying over several towns of Balochistan had landed near a PAF air base in the tribal area of Rajanpur district on Aug 15. Its wreckage was removed by members of sensitive agencies a few days ago. The divisional administration is tight-lipped over the issue. End of article -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/ufo/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Another UFO Sighted Over Pakistan From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 06:18:24 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:23:01 -0400 Subject: Another UFO Sighted Over Pakistan Source: DPA (Deutsche Presse-Agentur, German Press Agency) via The Times Of India, http://www.timesofindia.com/today/29nbrs8.htm Stig *** Tuesday, 29 August 2000 UFO over Pakistan ** ISLAMABAD: An unidentified flying object (UFO) was sighted over Pakistan's Dera Ghazi Khan frontier area Sunday night, reports said Monday. It was the second UFO sighting reported from the uranium-rich area in two weeks, according to the newspaper Dawn. It came from a westerly direction and after flying over the towns of Fort Munro and Rakhi Ganj it hit the ground between Baghalchor and Roughin. "It was nose-diving and after a few moments the sky was lit up,'' border military police sources told the newspaper, quoting local tribesmen. Authorities in Islamabad denied reports that the objects were test missiles, saying they could be meteorites. Uranium is excavated in Baghalchor and unauthorised visitors are not allowed into the area. On August 15, a UFO was sighted near an air force base in Rajanpur district, Dawn reported. Several UFO sightings have followed the widely observed phenomenon of six fire-emitting objects that crossed the Western Baluchistan province in a row on that date. (DPA) ** Copyright � 2000 Times Internet Limited. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 'UFO Ireland' Asks Farmers To Report Crop Circles From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 06:44:55 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:24:05 -0400 Subject: 'UFO Ireland' Asks Farmers To Report Crop Circles Source: The Irish Times, http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2000/0828/hom5.htm Stig *** Monday, August 28, 2000 Group seeks reports of crop circles By Sean MacConnell, Agriculture Correspondent ** Farmers have been asked to watch for and report any crop circles which they may find in their fields this harvest. The appeal has come from a new group, UFO Ireland, which was formed to collate information from Ireland and to analyse whether there is any extra-terrestrial activity here. The central co-ordinator of the group, Mr Lorcan McGrane, said yesterday he and his colleagues would adopt a sceptical approach to all reports in the hope of discovering a genuine site. "We would ask farmers not to report unusual patterns in their crops which may have been the work of drunken or other hoaxers. We are looking for the real thing," he said. Mr McGrane, a Dublin-based media studies student, said crop circles have been a growing phenomenon in the UK and had received a lot of media attention. "The whole idea is to try and find out how many crop circles appear in Ireland and how they relate to those abroad. The creation of a central database is important," he said. He did not think the group's work was in any way weakened by an appeal to the public to report UFO sightings as well. "We have noted a number of UFO sightings from Ireland on websites in the USA and some of them were really over the top," he said. Mr McGrane said that reports of crop circles and other sightings of UFOs would be published in Six Mag magazine, which hosts the UFO website. He said sightings could be reported to him at 087-6556245 or on e-mail: ufo@ireland.com ** � 2000 ireland.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 08:24:39 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:25:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:33:42 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >A bit mystified here? Your objection to advertising Chris >Martin's book on my web site is what exactly? No objections Roy, just interested as to why you are giving this book so much attention and not any others. Also, in all the excitement, you forgot to answer my previous questions. Cheers Rory Lushman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 08:40:06 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:26:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:24:33 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >That's all there is to it, read into it what you will. It just seems those so keen on promoting Chris's new book are the ones on the defensive. Are we not allowed to ask any questions? >Anyway the offer still stands, any 'researcher' interested >please mail me. Yes I would be interested, how can you help me? >When you get to see some of Chris's footage at Leeds I >would be very interested in your explanation. I've got no problem with that. Has any of this footage been analysed independently and if so by who? Cheers, Rory Lushman
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Pakistan: UFO 'Wreckage' Removed By 'Sensitive From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 08:23:18 GMT Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:29:31 -0400 Subject: Pakistan: UFO 'Wreckage' Removed By 'Sensitive Source: Dawn (Karachi, Pakistan), the Internet Edition, http://www.dawn.com/2000/08/28/top11.htm Stig *** 28 August 2000 Monday 27 Jamadi-ul-Awwal 1421 Another Unidentified Flying Object lands in D.G. Khan By Tariq Birmani ** DERA GHAZI KHAN, Aug 27: An unidentified flying object (UFO) which came from the west side landed in the tribal area of Dera Ghazi Khan on Sunday night, reports reaching here said. The UFO which was seen flying over Fort Munro and Rakhi Gaaj towns of the tribal area hit the ground between Baghalchor and Rounghin, some 80km from here, at 8.30pm. Sources in the Border Military Police (BMP) quoted tribesmen living in Rounghin area as saying the unidentified flying object had come from the West, Balochistan. "It was nose-diving and after a few moments the sky was lit up," the tribesmen said. Sources ruled out the possibility of casualties because the area where the UFO probably landed was deserted. Uranium-rich Baghalchor is out of bound area whereas Rounghin has a scattered and thin population. Sources in the office of the tribal area political assistant confirmed receiving the report and said a team had been sent to the area to ascertain the facts. It was the second UFO which landed in the tribal area of southern Punjab in the last two weeks. Earlier, an object which was also seen flying over several towns of Balochistan had landed near a PAF air base in the tribal area of Rajanpur district on Aug 15. Its wreckage was removed by members of sensitive agencies a few days ago. The divisional administration is tight-lipped over the issue. ** � The DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Richard Hall's Site From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 07:31:34 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:31:01 -0400 Subject: Richard Hall's Site I would like to announce the introduction of a new web site for UFO researcher Richard Hall, which has gone on line this past weekend. The URL for this site is www.hallrichard.com and concentrates more on Richard and his family than it does the phenomenon. It should be noted that the study of UFOs is only one of Richard's many interests, and he is also well known for his writings related to the U.S. Civil War. 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 12:04:52 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:33:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:35:02 +0100 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>>From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >>>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:33:09 EDT >>>Subject: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>>Having been interested by the news that Chris Martin has put >>>some of his footage on his Lost Haven website I decided to have >>>a look. >>>Firstly the link to the footage seems to be faulty. I certainly >>>couldn't get to download the footage anyway. >>I tried it, the link works fine, I suggest you check your >>computer setup, this is quite often the problem. >>>Secondly we hear that he has more footage, but of the alien >>>visitors themselves! Is this footage on the website? No, we're >>>asked to talk to Chris at the Leeds conference if we want to see >>>it. Nice plug Chris. >>Footage of alien visitors? >>Terry, I respectfully ask where on Earth did you hear of such a >>thing? Please reply to this question as I am always interested >>in how these fantasies are started. ><snip> >Say pard, How come after four attempts I can't get onto your >site? Yesterday I got to see the still phots of lights in the >sky. It froze up and I could go no further. Tonight it freezes >(3 times) when it is downloading. I never got this on a site Howdy Josh, You got me beat on that one pardner, I've just been back to Roys site and downloaded the small zipped AVI, (takes about 2 minutes on a 56k modem). If you're still having problems let me know and I'll forward the file on to you. All the best, Dave Bowden
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:11:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:35:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com> >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:00:06 EDT >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >To: updates@sympatico.ca >>Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 23:37:35 +0100 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@sympatico.ca> >>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >>Footage of alien visitors? >>Terry, I respectfully ask where on Earth did you hear of such a >>thing? Please reply to this question as I am always interested >>in how these fantasies are started. >I'm glad you agree that this type of talk is nonsense. Well, I >read it on the Lost Haven website. The phrase used was "Chris >has actual footage of the alien visitors". Following my original >message on Updates this phrase was deleted and the sentence >rewritten. >Now you have your source from where the fantasy started. >One can only assume that either the webmaster was under the >impression that "actual footage of the alien visitors" existed >and was corrected, or that the webmaster believed the UFOs were >from another planet but worded it all wrong. Either way we all >deserve some sort of explanation. Hi Terry, Thanks for the info, when I checked Roys site there was no mention of "actual footage of the alien visitors". Perhaps you should take this up with Roy, if he was guilty of jumping the gun a bit it would be understandable since the recent footage is very interesting. >What do you believe this footage shows? So glad you asked. Over time it has become almost a standard procedure that when Chris has taken some new footage he contacts me and arranges to come over. We connect his camera to my computer and we spend the day examining very closely what he has taken. About a year or so ago he had video of what was thought to be an 'FT' (flying triangle for all those who thought I was talking about the Financial Times) taken in Wiltshire at night. After hi-res imaging and enhancement it was clearly shown to be a military helicopter. An easy mistake that could be made by anyone. Having said that, I later saw 'UFO's the best evidence caught on tape, part 2' hosted by Jonathan (commander Riker) Frakes. The helicopter footage was shown and described as something like 'also this mysterious video taken in southern England showing a triangular craft'. It wouldn't have been of any interest had it been described as, 'thought to be an alien spacecraft but turned out to be a helicopter'. Chris is annoyed about this because they used his footage without his consent and I am annoyed because they used it without an explanation of what it actually was, just going for the big sale I suppose, sensationalism. Anyway that is just one case, there have been others that turn out to be balloons but I won't bore you with all that. Cutting to the chase however, we have other stuff which just doesn't fit any category. You asked 'What do you believe this footage shows?'. Well, see above, I can explain some of it but some of Chris's footage I am un-able to pigeon hole or label, they remain an unknown for the time being. All the best, Dave Bowden.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:40:50 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:37:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk> >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:24:33 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden >Anyway the offer still stands, any 'researcher' interested >please mail me. Hi Dave, Just out of interest, how many researchers have asked for the above data? And have any of those who have been shouting out loud on here, approached you for it yet? Only one would assume from some of the mails, they couldn't wait to get the real hard, sharp and very clear data, for their own investigations? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:10:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:55:15 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jones >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:45:23 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' Hi John >>>>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>>>a number of times. >Shock horrr. A ufologist changes her mind! Never been heard of >before, of course, but I always thought being able to change >your mind in the face of new evidnce was regarded as a good >thing in the world outside ufology. Well John, all I can say is that you have not been paying attention to what was posted. Because if you had you would have noticed it's not so much Jenny changing her mind as changing it so often. >>Yes the debunkers are doing a good job of dissecting this case. >>I wish they would hurry up and explain how a white lighthouse >>light could be seen as a _red_ pulsing light seen within the >>forest. >Refraction? Could you either expand on that or read: Bruce Maccabee's posting on Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:32:12 -0400 >Lighthouse beam spread by refraction... I doubt it. Noticeable >refraction... which also causes mirage... is so weak that it >requires many miles of distance though the atmosphere to be >visible unless there is a considerable temperature gradient near >the ground. Anyway, the "spreading" you mention might be caused >by mist/fog... which, however wuld also reduce the intensity. >Perhaps the drawing itself is not perfectly accurate. Or you are >ascribing the UFO in the drawing to the lighthouse and arguing >that therefore the lighthouse beam must have been spread. >(Actually the beam going outward away from the light house does >spread. What we are really talking about here is the appearance >of the beacon when viewed by a person looking at it. The >apparent size of a few foot sized beacon light seen from a >distance of, say, 4 miles is determined more by the optics of a >person's eye... inability to form a perfect image of a small or >"point" source... than by atmospheric effects.) -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: 1970's UK Sightings From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 18:40:29 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:58:42 -0400 Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:10:52 -0400 >From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I can only ask you, once again, to focus on the 'crux' of my >original query, (Repeated above) of UFO (Unidentified Flying >Objects) in the UK. >Kind regards, >Victor J.Kean >Project FT Hi, Victor. What is up with you? I have - I trust - very patiently and completely answered your questions and have not changed the goalposts as you seem to be (yet again) alleging. I said that IMO the Pennine area is the most active for UFO sighting activity. It has a track record dating back centuries. And it has a very high level of close encounters reported within it too. I acknowledged that in recent years the area of the SE that you refer to has had an active flap of activity. Are you now going to ask me to suggest that the sun is purple or something else equally impossible to do? Otherwise I really don't see the point of continuing this bizarre hounding for me to say what I have actually already said about three times. I cannot do more than tell you the truth I'm afraid. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Footprint On Mars? - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 11:43:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:00:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Footprint On Mars? - Fleming >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:39:02 +1000 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> >Subject: Footprint On Mars? >Hi everyone >Can anyone have a look at this page and tell me what you think >about the photos. I think it's a hoax. No, let me put it another way: I _know_ it's a hoax. There are no references to NASA image numbers anywhere on this page. If you go up another level, you'll find things like a cross-section of a "monolith" photographed by Pathfinder that looks amazingly like the Allen Hills meteorite, mostly because it _is_ a picture of a cross-section of the Allen Hills meteorite. Looks to me like the Martian Big Foot is a fake.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:52:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:02:44 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza persists in presenting his compliments; one who cannot remain a gentleman in the face of adversity is no gentleman at all. >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 01:32:10 -0400 Serge, is this a rib? Is this one of the boys in the office? You want *references* for an *opinion*?? But if you're serious, have a look at Mark Pendergrast's "Victims of Memory", Ofshe & Watters' "Making Monsters", Showaters' "Hystories", and sundry other critics of the RSA/recovered memory scandals (including the devastating chapter on RSA in Randle et al, "The Abduction Engima"), and you will at least see how I arrived at that conclusion and why it is a considered one. >you throw in pickled gherkins nightmares like >gospel after sweeping away all the research on PTSD "All the research" on anything -- like RSA? there's plenty of "research" out there on that -- means doodly-squat if it's based on false premises. The pickled gherkin problem, incidentally, was suffered by my eldest niece when she was about three. No doubt Google will give you plenty to read on psychosomatic disorders, too. Why ask me? Next time I remark that the sky is blue I must remember to cite my sources. Buddy Holly's "Raining In My Heart" will have to do, tho' it is possible the phenomenon may have been observed by other recognized authorities before 1957 or so. best wishes Possibly D. Mented Honest As The Night Is Long
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith From: Peter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:52:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:04:14 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:04:49 EDT >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >To: updates@sympatico.ca >1. The main navigation lights at both Shipwash and the Orford >Ness lighthouse are rotating. Therefore they would both >regularly flash landward, or westward as well as out to sea, or >eastward. What is the word "therefore" doing in that sentence? The Orfordness light is in fact masked to the landward side. See: http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/locator/42.jpg However, there is a point from within R'sham Forest where the main beam can be seen directly. Ian Ridpath's photie of this point, with the lighthouse just visible as a white blob in a notch on the horizon, is viewable at http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/ridpath2.jpg >There is a world of difference >between being "aware" of the dim beam and having the main beam >pointed directly at your eyes. Yes, of course. Nonetheless the loom of the light is clearly visible. Go there and see. Drop in on my sister on the Butley road while you're there. She's a hospitable soul. >This sort of slippery talk and handwaving, however, seems >to be all too common in the skeptical camp. And very slippery it was too to dump all this in public and send Bruce a map so he could tell us what he made of it, and him an expert too. And look at me all in a lather over his analysis. Next time I must remember to stick strictly to what I can make up as I go along. Maybe toss in an alien or two, or a mind-control experiment for a garnish. >This is hardly the sort of stuff to cause people to freak out. For various reasons, some of them posted here by James Easton, along with some things I know and others I suspect, I rather doubt anyone did actually freak out. It's nonetheless to the purpose to find out as best one can what was visible at the time, on which someone might build a more or less plausible fantasy, and that appear to confirm their fancy tales. Look, Dave, I'm an NWO disinformation agent, remember? Of course everything Larry Warren wrote is true, but I can't admit that to you. The aliens are here, aaiiieeeee!, and boy do they pay well. best wishes Polyglot D. Miscegenation Colored 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:48:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:06:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & That was supposed to be a long one. It's gonna be short. Kevin Randle rejects the reality of the abduction phenomena. Greg Sandow _believes_ in it. Peter Brookesmith more than often suffers from the Peanut Butter Sandwich Syndrome. PBSS has it that cultivation is like a peanut butter sandwich: the less you've got, the more you spread it; if you put too much in the sandwich, it sticks to your palate and nobody understands what you are uttering. Greg Sandow has obviously turned his back on the psychological aspects of alien abduction. Someone played a prank on Peter and put some crazy glue in the nearly empty peanut butter jar. As for Kevin Randle (I'll pass on the unacceptable poker face falsely self-explicative references originally thrown in), he has asked me a question that is not really a question but a justification of his stance towards the abduction enigma: "But if the person truly believed in his or her combat experiences, then don't we have an example of PTSD as an outgrowth of fantasy?" I don't know you people, but I am not a full time ufologist. I work 60 to 70 hours a week in computer systems development and what have you. Why should i do your freaking homework? For all of you interested, and _before_ any discussion on the reality of abduction takes place, the following is a _must_ read: http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml "Memory, Abuse, and Science: Questioning Claims about the False Memory Syndrome Epidemic is the award address for the American Psychological Association's Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public Service delivered at the 103rd Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New York, NY. August 1995." A taste of it: "How should we, as psychologists, respond to these recent claims? How do we test their validity? To reject them reflexively--that is to say, without examining their logic and evidence--is dogmatic, pseudoscientific, and downright wrong. But to accept them reflectively--without examining their logic and evidence--is also an anti-scientific stance and a terrible blunder. My approach is not to provide a simplified set of supposed answers or support a sense of certitude but rather to suggest that our essential task as psychologists is careful, informed, and comprehensive questioning. We must question our own assumptions, biases, and perspectives, not just once during initial training, but throughout our careers. We must also question claims about scientific discoveries, evidence, and conclusions, no matter how prestigious or popular the source." Welcome to reality. The question is: do you want to know? Read it. Then we talk. Regards, 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 13 Year Russian UFO Study From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:49:01 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:08:57 -0400 Subject: 13 Year Russian UFO Study Hi Errol, All I had this forwarded to me by someone I know who works at JPL. >-----Original Message----- From: JamesOberg@aol.com [mailto:JamesOberg@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 8:37 PM To: Recipient List Suppressed Subject: Russ Gov't Concludes Most UFOs Space/Rocket Events Report on results of 13-yr Russian government UFO study, just released, concludes most were caused by rocket/space events, summarized by me (Jim O.) at: www.space.com/sciencefiction/phenomena/russian_ufo_report_000808.html -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Scientists Claim Light Speed Barrier Broken From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:59:29 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:10:52 -0400 Subject: Scientists Claim Light Speed Barrier Broken Hi Errol, All Another email that was forwarded to me. ---- Scientists Claim Light Speed Barrier Broken Jonathan Leake, Science Editor at the Sunday Times is reporting that a group of American particle physicists claim to have shown that light pulses can be accelerated to speeds of up to 300 times as fast as the standard speed of light, 300,000 kilometres (186,000 miles) per second. The exact details of the experiment are unfortunately not yet known, as they have been submitted to the science journal 'Nature' prior to possible publication. However, Dr. Lijun Wang, head of the experiment at Princeton's NEC research institute, said that the experiment consisted of transmitting a pulse of light towards a chamber filled with specially treated cesium gas. During the experiment, it was observed that, before the pulse had fully entered the chamber, it had also already gone through it and travelled 60 feet further. In effect, it existed in two places, which according to Wang happened because it travelled at 300 times the speed of light. The results still have to be confirmed, but if they prove to be valid, they will likely cause a great controversy among physicists. Einstein's theory of relativity, for instance, which depends largely on the speed of light being unbreachable, would suddenly find itself shattered. It would appear the warp drive has come a step closer again. Light Speed Breakthrough; Follow-Up Salvador Nogueira, science journalist for the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S.Paulo, sent in the following note about the recent story on TrekToday about scientists claiming they had broken the light speed barrier: "I would like to comment the story about the light barrier being broken. This story was already published, being discovered first by "The New York Times". I read it at this source, and became clear this doesn't open the possibility of a warp drive, or even, travel faster than light. That's because they've accelerated the light, which has no matter at all. With matter, light speed continues to be the ultimate barrier, because of the mass increase during acceleration (which was tested experimentally already). So, the best way to associate the story with Star Trek would be to point out the creation of a "subspace radio", however the scientists also point out this technique wouldn't allow communication faster than light. -- In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 National UFO Reports Line From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:05:34 EDT Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:12:42 -0400 Subject: National UFO Reports Line Dear Campers, The National UFO Reports Line, the UK's new sightings and reports HQ, is up and running and receiving a great many calls. Set up just weeks ago by members of the British UFO Studies Centre, former NUFORA members (the active membership has now thrown its weight behind NUFORL after polite requests for NUFORA to change its name given confusion with BUFORA!!), Lancashire UFO Society, MAPIT and other individual researchers around the country. Further announcements on this will be made at the Strange But True get together at Ellesmere Port on Saturday 16th September - the independent alternative to the other event taking place that weekend. Reports from Rugby in the Midlands, Nottingham, Havant and Bognor Regis (South Coast), Lancashire, Cheshire, Holland and North Wales have come in not only as a result of local publicity surrounding NUFORL but because of our improved media profile - the target of so much complaint in these forums recently - but because the public gets such poor service from the MOD and "established" groups. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of reports appear, at this early stage, to have prosaic solutions and the South Coast sightings are perhaps the result of testing and evaluation of a new Navy helicopter system which, we are told, is quite radical and being filmed and photographed by the MOD. In addition, a military X has been taking place in and around RAF Boscombe Down reports "Navy News" this week. Eric Morris of BUFOSC rang the MOD to check out the details and also spoke with "Navy News" reporters to confirm the details. There appears to be an increase in the number of sightings reported to us collectively this year after a very dull 12 months in 1999. It has been speculated that the rise in sightings over the last few days is the result of British TV Channel 5's coverage of alien and UFO stories this week. Nevertheless, psycho-social theorising is, as ever, convenient and unproven. Several independent and new researchers have offered to assist us in this endeavour and comes against the background of our renewed efforts to pin down the cause of UFO and Paranormal events in the North West through The Cheshire Project. We have heard some dire reports of other research grouplets taking 10-14 days to send out a report form and we have guaranteed to send report forms and supporting information by return of post. We welcome your support and look forward to receiving your constructive feedback. Tim Matthews, Propagandist and Press Officer, British UFO Studies Centre.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Neil Morris' Phone Number? From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 21:26:45 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:18:08 -0400 Subject: Neil Morris' Phone Number? Dear colleagues, Could anyone supply me with the home telephone number of Neil Morris. Neil has worked on the Fort Worth (Ramey) photo's (Roswell l947) at Manchester University. I would appreciate it if anyone having his home phone number could e-mail me direct at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com Many thanks, Philip. -- Philip Mantle, 1 Woodhall Drive, Batley, West Yorkshire, England, WF17 7SW. Tele: 01924 444049. E-mail: pmquest@dial.pipex.com www.beyondroswell.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Colm Kelleher on Coast to Coast AM Tonight From: Colm Kelleher - NIDS <nids@earthlink.net> Date: 29 Aug 2000 22:39:04 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:22:48 -0400 Subject: Colm Kelleher on Coast to Coast AM Tonight National Institute for Discovery Science - http://www.nidsci.org NIDS Deputy Administrator Dr. Colm Kelleher will be appearing on Coast to Coast AM with Mike Siegel from 10pm to midnight Pacific Time tonight (Tuesday, August 29, 2000). See http://www.coasttocoastam.com/stations.html for a list of radio station affiliates. See http://www.coasttocoastam.com/audio.html to listen to the interview on 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 29 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 17:37:23 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:24:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 21:38:08 -0400 >From: Peter Brookesmith <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Now here is an irony. Since replying to Serge on this thread >I've read a bit further into Kevin et al's book. Pages 269-77 >deal with the appalling breakdown of a woman named "Janet" under >the influence of therapists who convinced her first that she >suffered multiple personality disorder, then that she'd been >abused as a child and then (a fresh set of therapists) that >she'd been a victim of ritual satanic abuse. She finally solved >her problems with a shotgun. >William P. Cone, one of Kevin's co-authors, treated Janet for a >while and found no reason to give any credence to any of these >"diagnoses" (and explains very clearly why). Early in this sad >saga Janet joined an MPD-oriented support/therapy group, >whereupon her previously improving condition deteriorated. >Randle, Estes & Cone write (p270): >"Within two weeks of joining the group, Janet began to exhibit >the symptoms of multiple personality disorder, post-traumatic >stress disorder, and child abuse." >When you read the whole story, this seems a pretty clear case of >PTSD generated by fantasies. I can't resist tweaking my friend Peter, as follows: If this were an anecdotal account that seemed to support the reality of alien abductions, I bet you'd be skeptical of it. What scientific foundation does it have? But since it's an anecdotal account that supports something you'd like to believe, you appear to accept it, without even one word of caution. What do you know about this case, other than what Cone, in the Randle et al book, has told you? What do you know about Cone? Has this case study been published in a peer-reviewed journal? Shouldn't you go to the professional psychology literature rather than to an anecdotal book for support of your belief? And aren't these very like the criticisms you make of pro-abduction writing? 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: Footprint On Mars? - Cornet From: Bruce Cornet <bcornet@monmouth.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:14:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 02:32:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Footprint On Mars? - Cornet >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:39:02 +1000 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> >Subject: Footprint On Mars? >Hi everyone >Can anyone have a look at this page and tell me what you think >about the photos. >Thank you in advance >Got some info off the newsgroups about 'Footprints on Mars'... >I'm attaching the URL's here .. Is this something ??? >http://ksshow.t2u.com/ >http://www.io.com/~stephens/Mars/Footprints/footprint.html >NASA photographs find Martian footprints >The photographs, when subjected to computer analysis, surprised >everyone at NASA. They revealed the footprints of a three-toed >creature, which mission director Golembek named "ET" after the >popular movie character who also had three toes. >"NASA scientists debated the photographic evidence for more than >a day before deciding the evidence was unavoidable. Something >left its footprints on the Martian surface," said my own source >at NASA, who insists on remaining anonymous. >Computer enhancement of the object labelled ETL-02 shows clear >indications that it was a footprint left by a creature with >three-digits, or "toes." NASA scientists believe this is the >most startling evidence of extra-terrstrial life ever produced. >Even though the pictures became available on July 14, they were >not released until this weekend, when "they would have passed >through enough hands to keep suspicion from landing on me," he >added. Dear Sam, That photo is so clearly a fake, I am having trouble containing my laughter. The image shows perspective, but the prints do not. They seem to have been laid on the image using some sort of bossing technique coupled with float controls. Also, the ripples in the sand are not disturbed by the footprints, indicating that they can't be real. Nice try, but no cigar. Bruce
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 01:34:27 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 02:47:34 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:10:10 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:45:23 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Hi John >>>>>1) Jenny Randles has changed her opinion of what the "cause" is >>>>>a number of times. >>Shock horrr. A ufologist changes her mind! Never been heard of >>before, of course, but I always thought being able to change >>your mind in the face of new evidnce was regarded as a good >>thing in the world outside ufology. >Well John, all I can say is that you have not been paying >attention to what was posted. Because if you had you would have >noticed it's not so much Jenny changing her mind as changing it >so often. Hi, Perhaps you would explain what you mean by this? Are you saying that the right approach to ufology is to decide what the answer to a case is, and come what may believe that this IS the answer - never letting inconvenient things (like facts, research, new testimony etc) get in the way? Or to investigate, suggest ideas, test those ideas against the evidence and always take on board whatever new data appears that causes the case to require reassessment? I think I know what constitutes science and what constitutes blind belief and bluster? The only significant way I have 'changed my mind' here - so far as I can see - is from arguing that the lighthouse theory was interesting and initially persuasive but one that did not work compared with the witness testimony (as in 'From out of the blue') to my position (expressed often on this List over the past week) that modifies this to say that the new evidence means we have to take the lighthouse theory more seriously, but not without recognising the problems that remain. A significant shift induced by the hard evidence that has emerged in the past two years. And one any honest researcher would have made I trust... But hardly turning apples into oranges unless you can explain otherwise. Best wishes, Jenny Randles
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Moosomin, From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:04:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:27:24 -0400 Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Moosomin, CPR-CANADA NEWS The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada August 29, 2000 _____________________________ UPDATE #1 - MOOSOMIN, SASKATCHEWAN CROP FORMATION Attached are two photos of the Moosomin, Saskatchewan crop formation, found August 20, 2000. Approx. 220' in length, in wheat. Aerial: � Marshall McLeod, The World-Spectator, Moosomin (moosomin00a.jpg) Ground: � Kevin Weedmark, The World-Spectator, Moosomin (moosomin00b.jpg) Beautiful simplicity describes this one well, I think. Additional images to be posted on the web site soon, plus further field reports. On a related (?) note, the night before Nancy Talbott called about the Moosomin formation, I had a dream of looking down on a couple circles in a field (connected together or not I don't remember), and the whole "picture" looked sort of like an infra-red photo - all reddish orange, like a soft glow. The circles had glowing "bands" or "streamers" of energy (?) moving inside them, like maybe inches from the ground... maybe coincidence, maybe not, although I've this same kind of experience several times now over the last few years. If anyone has had any similar kinds of experiences, please let me know. Paul Anderson _____________________________ CPR-Canada News is the e-news service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, an affiliate of Circles Phenomenon Research International, a leading crop circle investigative organization, providing periodic e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada and around the world, as well as information on CPR-Canada-related news and events. CPR-Canada News is edited by Paul Anderson and published by CPR-Canada, and is available free by subscription. To subscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-subscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe, send your e-mail address to: cprcanadanews-unsubscribe@egroups.com You can also subscribe, unsubscribe, custom modify your subscription or browse the online archive of past issues on the CPR-Canada News eGroups web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews See the CPR-Canada web site for complete listings of news stories, reports and related information and links: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada For further information, submissions or inquiries, forward all correspondence to: CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA Circles Phenomenon Research International MAIN OFFICE Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1J4 Canada Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522 Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454 E-Mail: psa@direct.ca Web: http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada REPORTING HOTLINE 604.731.8522 _____________________________ � Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 2000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith From: Pter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:19:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:28:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith The Duke salutes Greg Tweaker: >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 17:37:23 -0700 <much snipperoo> >And aren't these very like the criticisms you make of >pro-abduction writing? No. best wishes PeanutbuttersoImtold D. Mangochutneysarnie High Protein
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: Footprint On Mars? - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 03:56:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:54:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Footprint On Mars? - Goldstein >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:39:02 +1000 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au> >Subject: Footprint On Mars? >Hi everyone >Can anyone have a look at this page and tell me what you think >about the photos. >Thank you in advance <snip> Hello Diane, Hmm, I womder if this is Alternative 4? Did the person who posted this site believe in Alternative 3? That human looking print was from a Bruno Magli shoe. How did that get on Mars? Last year a Bruno Magli store near me had a sale on their shoes, so for the first time I went inside, thinking I might be able to get a pair for under $500.00. When I asked for a pair of O.J.s the manager turned beet red and stammered that they are no longer available. Is this part of the coverup of things beyond human cognition? Josh Goldstein Yes, I _can_ have it both ways!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:20:51 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:57:37 -0400 Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition - Gates >Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:30:31 -0700 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: The MUFON-NIDS Coalition >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >I am not calling anyone names. I just want to know. Is the >following true or untrue? >John Carpenter sold 140 abductees' files to the NIDS. 139 were >redacted. 1 was not: his ex-wife's file. >Regards, >Serge Salvaille Hi Serge, I sent an email to NIDS requesting a simple yes or no answer without getting into privacy issues. The question was were the files in fact redacted. Interestingly, to date they have not commented. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:27:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:58:56 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Stacy >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 10:52:30 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' John, Am in receipt of Magonia #71. Congratulations on the slick paper covers! That said, sorry to see an old chestnut repeated. On page 8 of same ("Matter of Debate") Gareth Medway attributes the dictum "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" to CSICOP's Kendrick Frazier. I guess this is a step up (or down) as same quote is usually attributed to Carl Sagan. But as Jerry Clark has repeatedly posted here (and stated elsewhere) the authorship of same actaully lies with Marcello Truzzi, an honorable CSICOP resignee, if that's a word. Guess librarians make misteaks, too! Dennis Stacy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:32:27 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:00:37 -0400 Subject: Re: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary - Gates >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:39:20 EDT >Subject: MUFON - NIDS Connection - A Commentary >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> <snip> >Hey, wasn't my words. Now, given the situation in hand and >basing it on that evidence only, would you proceed to hang >Carpenter or wait for a fair hearing? And have you all noticed >that ANYONE or any org which is in a position to either >investigate or refute what Carpenter said, is anathema? Has >anyone said anything about MUFON, NIDS, or Bigelow which may be >construed as wearing a white hat? I find that fascinating. >"Agree with me or you are instantly wrong - and it's personal >too." As to NIDS, I sent an email to them, also to this List requesting a simple yes no answer as to if the files were redacted or not. Thus far the silence has been deafening. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:03:41 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak >From: Peter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com> >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:52:37 -0400 >Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:04:14 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> >>Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:04:49 EDT >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >>To: updates@sympatico.ca >>1. The main navigation lights at both Shipwash and the Orford >>Ness lighthouse are rotating. Therefore they would both >>regularly flash landward, or westward as well as out to sea, or >>eastward. >What is the word "therefore" doing in that sentence? >The Orfordness light is in fact masked to the landward side. See: >http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/locator/42.jpg >However, there is a point from within R'sham Forest where the >main beam can be seen directly. Ian Ridpath's photie of this >point, with the lighthouse just visible as a white blob in a >notch on the horizon, is viewable at >http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/ridpath2.jpg OK. Let's review. The Orfordness light is "masked to the landward side." So if it's masked, how can the beam be "seen _directly_" 3 miles inland? You can see hopefully how some of us find your wording confusing. As to Ridpath's photo, the _tip_ of the lighthouse is indeed _"just visible"_ in a "notch on the horizon." This raises several more issues: 1. It is obvious that the lighthouse tip would NOT be visible from a number of nearby vantage points. Move a few steps left and the lighthouse disappears behind some trees to the left of the narrow notch. Move a greater distance to the right, and the tip disappears to the notch's right. Move down 100 yards or so into the field in the foreground, and it looks again like that lighthouse would disappear behind the trees near the farmhouse. The fact that Ridpath can find one small area in all of Rendlesham forest where the lighthouse is barely visible through a small gap hardly explains how an obscured lighthouse elsewhere with a main beam "masked to the landward side" can lead some men on a _2-mile_ chase through the woods. 2. Where exactly were Col. Robin Halt and his band of merry men in relation to Ridpath's narrow spot of visibility in the farm field -- exactly where Ridpath took his photo or somewhere else? Again, if they were to the side or further down in the field, the tip of the lighthouse is obscured, even if the main "masked" lighthouse beam were flashing in their direction. 3. How do those red/green navigation lights on the lighthouse figure into all of this? I notice throughout your entire post, you deftly avoid mentioning anything about them, even though it was YOU who first raised the possibility that they might explain the "red sun-like light.... seen through the trees" that "moved about and pulsed", as mentioned in Col. Halt's memo. First of all, from your own posted data, they clearly face only out to sea and are obviously invisible landward. Second of all, according to you, they are constant lights and don't "pulse." And thirdly, according to Bruce Maccabee's post, they are halfway down the lighthouse (again based on your own data). Therefore, even through that narrow gap at "Ridpath's point", they would be obviously be below the horizon. >>There is a world of difference >>between being "aware" of the dim beam and having the main beam >>pointed directly at your eyes. >Yes, of course. Nonetheless the loom of the light is clearly >visible. Go there and see. Drop in on my sister on the Butley >road while you're there. She's a hospitable soul. Again, would you please explain _exactly_ what you mean here? Can the main beam be seen _directly_, as in pointed directly in your face? Or can it only be seen _indirectly_ by scattered light? Again, according to you, it is "masked to the landward side." So it would seem to us ignorant Yanks that only the scattered, faint, indirect beam pointed out to sea would be visible from 3 miles inland. >>This sort of slippery talk and handwaving, however, seems >>to be all too common in the skeptical camp. >And very slippery it was too to dump all this in public and send >Bruce a map so he could tell us what he made of it, and him an >expert too. Yes, definitely a bad move on your part. Get half-way serious and provide a little factual information instead of aristocratic British buffoonery and look where it gets you! I notice, based on your map and data, that Bruce came to exactly the same conclusion as I did -- the red/green lights would not have been visible. You do remember those invisible red/green lights, don't you, the ones you suggested might explain the colored lights, in particular Halt's "red sun-like light?" Gosh, if I didn't know better, I might think you were being slippery again by dodging any mention of them. >And look at me all in a lather over his analysis. No wonder. Your own data is the undoing of your own theory -- you know, the one you keep forgetting to mention? >Next time I must remember to stick strictly to what I can make >up as I go along. Good plan. You only end up tripping over your own facts, so you may as well retreat to your usual Klass Klown routine. >Maybe toss in an alien or two, or a >mind-control experiment for a garnish. There you go Peter -- you're back into your Kourt Jester groove. Nonetheless, I would honestly appreciate a response to the points I raised above. I think you're up to it. E.g., how can a lighthouse beam "masked to the landward side" be "directly" visible? Seriously, I would like an answer. I haven't been there and maybe I'm missing something. >>This is hardly the sort of stuff to cause people to freak out. >For various reasons, some of them posted here by James Easton, >along with some things I know and others I suspect, I rather >doubt anyone did actually freak out. I greatly doubt Halt, the Deputy Base Commander, would put his AF career in jeopardy with his famous memo, unless he felt he had witnessed something highly unusual. Obviously Halt took this very seriously, even if he somehow mistook a white lighthouse beam "masked to the landward side" for a "red sun-like light." >It's nonetheless to the >purpose to find out as best one can what was visible at the >time, on which someone might build a more or less plausible >fantasy, and that appear to confirm their fancy tales. I have no problems with that. Just show us "what was visible at the time" or rather how it could be visible? How can a white lighthouse main beam "masked to the landward side" be directly visible from land so as to appear "red and sun-like?" Or how can red/green lights on the lighthouse clearly below the horizon and pointed out to sea account for bright colored lights visible from land? >Look, Dave, I'm an NWO disinformation agent, remember? Yes, we all know that Peter. What else is new? >Of course >everything Larry Warren wrote is true, but I can't admit that to >you. The aliens are here, aaiiieeeee!, and boy do they pay well. At the moment, I don't care a piffle for what Larry Warren wrote. I do, however, care about _you_ wrote, namely your various lighthouse statements. Please answer the questions above simply and directly. Demonstrate for us the direct visibility of the various lighthouse lights so that we can all appreciate as "best as one can what was visible at the time on which someone might build a more or less plausible fantasy, and that appear to confirm their fancy tales." >best wishes >Polyglot D. Miscegenation >Colored Light David Rudiak The one who is trying to address Halt's "red sun-like" "Colored Light", the one Polygot keeps forgetting to mention
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 00:08:24 EDT Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:07:56 -0400 Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com> >Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 06:05:43 -0400 >Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:44:10 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >Hi Jerry, >Thanks again for your illuminating response to, and denial of, >factual information. <snip> >Whilst we're still on the subject of radical misperception, the >myth of the credible witness and the trained observer (trained >as Rimmer man rightly says, to observe what they are trained to >observe). Here's another couple of examples, not from the UFO >field but just as - more in fact - relevant. Please bear with >me..... >The first concerns one of America's very own. General George >Custer. According to the book 'Son Of the Morning Star', whilst >waiting to attack an Indian camp Custer and his men saw >something: >'slowly and majestically it continued to rise above the crest of >the hill, first appearing as a small brilliant flaming globe of >bright golden hue. As it ascended still higher it seemed to >increase in size, to move more slowly, while its colours rapidly >changed from one to the other exhibiting in turn the most >beautiful combinations of prismatic tints.' >They thought it was an alarm rocket fired by Sioux Indians - >in fact it was Venus. >As the biographer say -'How they could mistake a planet for a >rocket is hard to understand... Nonetheless they did.' As the biographer _also_ wrote in the sentence immediately before this: "And suddenly the morning star emerged from a ground fog, rising with such brilliance that _at first_ the astonished men mistook it for a rocket." Notice the "at first." >Trained Indian fighters, hardened outdoor men and Indian scouts >all misperceiving Venus as a rocket? Radical misperception if >ever there was such a thing. No temporary misidentification and later proper identification. Custer supposedly got one of his nicknames from this incident. (The Battle of the Washita, Nov. 27, 1868) If you want a clue as to what the end of this story was, note that the book is called "Son of the Morning Star," not "Son of the Radical Misperception." Custer and his men were confused "at first", but obviously not forever. Another sentence Roberts left out was the end of the quote to "Slowly and majestically it continued to rise above the crest of the hill...." The quote ends with "There seemed to be not the shadow of a doubt that we were discovered." Custer and his men were worried about being discovered by the Cheyanne before they could attack. Therefore _at first_ they mistook Venus for a signal from the Indians. <snip> >You can argue against it Jerry, but it's futile. The 'myth of >the credible observer' is just that. The application of what we >know about witness perception and testimony has been used time >and time again to solve UFO cases from the simple to the >massively complex. You can argue against it Andy, but it's futile. There is an enormous difference between a misidentification (which in Custer's case was temporary) and your "radical misperception." I have also been _temporarily_ confused about the identity of something strange that I've seen in the sky. But after a few seconds or minutes, I'm usually able to figure it out. In the English language, misidentification or confusion is not synonomous with misperception. Sheesh! 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Flying saucers or Pakistan Gauri Missiles? From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 02:18:29 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:10:38 -0400 Subject: Flying saucers or Pakistan Gauri Missiles? Source: The Hindu, http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/08/29/stories/03290009.htm Stig *** The Hindu Online edition of India's National Newspaper on indiaserver.com Tuesday, August 29, 2000 Flying saucers or Pakistan Gauri missiles? By B. Muralidhar Reddy ** ISLAMABAD, AUG. 28. Yet another 'mysterious' Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) has been sighted over the skies of the Pakistani territory, this time in the tribal-dominated North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The mysterious UFO was reportedly seen on Sunday night. Last week, papers here had reported similar sightings in the Quetta region in Balochistan and Stratfor, a U.S. Intelligence consulting company, had said the UFOs were possibly the Ghauri- III test missiles. A day after the company report, the military issued a statement denouncing it as 'baseless and ridiculous.' However, the military spokesperson confirmed the appearance of the objects and said they were probably 'comet fragments.' The UFO seen over the skies of NWFP had come from the west of Balochistan and was flying over Fort Murno and Rakhi Gaaj towns of the tribal area and hit the ground between Baghalchor and Rounghin around 8.30 p.m. "It was nosediving and after a few moments the sky lit up," the papers quoted the locals as saying. No casualties were reported, possibly because the area where the UFO landed, was deserted. Uranium-rich Baghalchor in NWFP is out- of-bound area and Rounghin has a scattered and thin population. ** Copyrights � 2000 The Hindu & Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu & Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. indiaserver.com Copyright � 2000 Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. All rights reserved worldwide. Indiaserver is a trademark of Tribeca Internet Initiatives 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 SETI: ET Quest And Tech Billionaires From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 03:18:12 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:12:14 -0400 Subject: SETI: ET Quest And Tech Billionaires Source: USA TODAY, http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000829/2591766s.htm Stig *** Page 1D Hello? Is anybody out there? Tech billionaires lift their eyes and ears to the stars By Marco R. della Cava USA TODAY ORINDA, Calif. -- The recent news that two high-tech titans have donated $12.5 million to energize the hunt for extraterrestrial intelligence invites cynicism. To the world at large, Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and former chief technology officer Nathan Myhrvold might appear to be two men gripped by midlife crises of the billionaire kind. Allen, 47, just tossed millions at Seattle's Experience Music Project, while Myhrvold, 40, indulges in dinosaur hunts. In that light, donations of $11.5 million and $1 million respectively to SETI, the 30-year-old Mountain View, Calif.-based Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence Institute, seem par for this rarefied course. So far, their money hasn't bought any shiny new gizmos reminiscent of the movie Contact. In fact, a visit to the seven-dish prototype of the (Paul) Allen Telescope Array squatting here on a tree sanctuary just east of San Francisco, furrows the brow. Far from space age or futuristic, the site looks like a bunch of backyard TV dishes. But, as with many things scientific, appearances can be deceptive. The dishes actually represent a quantum leap in the specialized realm of radio astronomy, and in particular for the oft-underfunded SETI project. SETI's network of radio telescopes collects all manner of radio signals that bombard Earth from outer space. Its astronomers are searching for a narrow-band signal that remains at a fixed point on the radio telescope dial. The fixed nature of the noise implies it was transmitted from a foreign source, unlike other radio noise, such as that made by pulsars and quasars, which wander over the radio spectrum. Allen's and Myhrvold's interest in SETI combines childhood passions for science fiction with a sense of responsibility toward funding research in an age when government and industry scan not the heavens but the bottom line. They're not alone in such thinking. Nor are they the first. SETI is a 15-year-old non-profit research organization that relies on outside funding for its $4 million to $5 million annual budget. When the government cut NASA's funding for the project in 1993, Silicon Valley legends Bill Hewlett and David Packard chipped in $13 million. Another well-known donor was Intel co-founder Gordon Moore. Space quest, tech minds "There are a bunch of people in the tech business that have resources, skills and money and are interested in this problem," says Myhrvold, co-president of a new investment and philanthropic firm, Intellectual Ventures. "We realize that if we don't do it, it simply won't get done." The SETI project is more than just a hunt for E.T. It may well represent a blueprint for the future of scientific exploration, one that leans on the minds and wallets of New Economy stars. A quick look at SETI's scientific advisory board reveals names from Silicon Valley companies such as Sun Microsystems, Agilent (formerly part of Hewlett-Packard), Intel and Interval Research. "Any of these leaders in our tech industry understand the basics of science and physics, and the possibility that life exists elsewhere," says Tom Pierson, SETI's CEO. There is a beauty in this union of space quest and tech minds. Exponential leaps in the digital realm, specifically computing power, benefit projects like SETI, which at its heart requires a colossal amount of data crunching. Besides, the silicon brain trust, for whom finding the New New Thing is no longer so wildly exciting, now has a different challenge. "Much of the Valley today is about marketing and advertising, and less about hard science," says David Kaplan, author of The Silicon Boys and their Valley of Dreams, a history of the recent tech boom. "It doesn't surprise me at all that scientifically curious people are jumping into this ripe area," he says. "What's a donation like that to them? It's jet fuel for a few transcontinental trips." Greg Papadopoulos, 42, grew up in tiny Lafayette, Calif., a few hills away from where the current Allen Telescope Array prototype now sits. As a child of "the Apollo age," he spent many nights stargazing through a homemade telescope. "I wanted to be a physicist," says Papadopoulos, who became an engineer and is chief technology officer at Sun Microsystems. Both the peers SETI attracted and the questions it asks lured him to the project; now he's on the board. "The search for extraterrestrial life is as deeply philosophical as our continued exploration of the atom or DNA," he says. Finding someone else out there "won't cure our problems, but I think it would sure change our way of thinking." Papadopoulos is particularly intrigued by the sustainability of a high-tech society that threatens its own existence through war. Since signals from even the nearest stars would take thousands of years to get to Earth, he says receiving them would mean another technological civilization had managed to keep itself alive for many centuries. "Finding another advanced society that's managed to stick around would be good news," he says. Physicist and SETI adviser Len Cutler, 72, semi-retired from Agilent, says he's "more interested in the technical aspects of SETI than in perhaps contacting other intelligent life forms in the cosmos." Cutler is helping to ensure that the dishes of the new Allen Array all stay synchronized at the same point. He also is challenged by the fact that the array would be listening for a specific sort of radio signal in a sea of stellar static. "There's just not a lot of that sort of science going on in the commercial field," he says, or even by government. And that, Myhrvold says, is a tragedy. "Think about it -- we are all now beneficiaries of this incredible high-tech economy that has its roots in the Internet." The Net, he notes, got 25 years of federal funding when few thought it would ever be more than a military communications network. Myhrvold grows animated on the subject of SETI, where, unlike his former boss, Allen, he plays a hands-on role. His interest in astronomy includes the almost requisite childhood passions for "the planetarium and Star Trek." They later blossomed into postdoctoral work with the renowned cosmologist Stephen Hawking. Myhrvold bemoans the fact that the U.S. government has gone on "a jihad against all SETI-like projects." "An unfortunate combination of a sci-fi culture and UFO fanatics makes it easy to laugh stuff like SETI off," he says. "But it's highly scientific. We are carefully scanning the sky for whatever we may find." In a recent article in Science magazine, he noted that society's heightened awareness of asteroids stems directly from research on the fate of dinosaurs. And yet, "the entire cost of funding dinosaur paleontology, from its inception in 1841 to the present, is less than the production cost of the film Jurassic Park. Paradoxes like this abound." Myhrvold, with his passion for SETI, is no lone voice in the void. Just a few weeks ago, an anonymous donation in the millions was announced by SETI@home. The 15-month-old project based at the University of California at Berkeley (not connected to SETI itself) uses idle home computers loaded with special screensavers to process signals received by a giant radio telescope in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. Interest is booming. More than 2 million people have SETI@home screensavers; 3,000 join daily. "SETI@home certainly has raised our visibility, and it speaks to a broader interest in this type of science and technology," says Greg Klerkx, SETI head of development. Klerkx and SETI have high hopes for the Allen Array, which ultimately would consist of between 500 and 1,000 12-foot-diameter dishes planted on two acres at the University of California's Hat Creek Observatory, near Mount Lassen, 250 miles north of San Francisco. The plan is to spend the Allen-Myhrvold donation over the next two years, refining the hardware and software for the seven-dish prototype at the university-owned Russell Reservation. The final version would be installed by 2005 and would require an additional $13 million to erect and operate. Two things make SETI's new radio telescope unique: * It is the project's first radio telescope; until now, officials have had contracts for only 20 listening days a year at Arecibo and Jodrell Bank Observatory in England. The Allen Array would operate 365 days a year in SETI's service. * The electronic guts of the array -- both the dishes themselves and the programs used to sort through cosmic noise -- will be upgraded to keep up with progress in both areas. Until now, radio telescopes ''were like kit cars,'' says Klerkx, "one-of-a-kind things that could not be altered." Better chance of finding E.T. The result of both a SETI-dedicated telescope and upgradable technology means significantly improved chances (if still remote) of picking up E.T.'s dial tone. In the past five years, SETI has scrutinized radio frequencies from 500 stars. In its first year, the Allen Array would target 100,000 stars, with a goal of 1 million a year. "With the Milky Way Galaxy being home to around 400 billion stars, SETI really is a numbers game," Klerkx says. The issue boils down to finding innovative ways to listen to and rule out potential stellar sites of extraterrestrial intelligence -- as quickly as possible. To digital pioneers, that's an irresistible challenge. "I see this and think, 'That's a cool problem -- and I know how to solve it,' " says Myhrvold, who helped make Microsoft a household name. "We use our current high-tech gains to make someone's Web site go faster," Myhrvold says. "So why not use it for science, and toward making what would be one of the greatest discoveries in history?" ** � Copyright 2000 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. has been sighted over the skies of the Pakistani territory, this time in the tribal-dominated North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The mysterious UFO was reportedly seen on Sunday night. Last week, papers here had reported similar sightings in the Quetta region in Balochistan and Stratfor, a U.S. Intelligence consulting company, had said the UFOs were possibly the Ghauri- III test missiles. A day after the company report, the military issued a statement denouncing it as 'baseless and ridiculous.' However, the military spokesperson confirmed the appearance of the objects and said they were probably 'comet fragments.' The UFO seen over the skies of NWFP had come from the west of Balochistan and was flying over Fort Murno and Rakhi Gaaj towns of the tribal area and hit the ground between Baghalchor and Rounghin around 8.30 p.m. "It was nosediving and after a few moments the sky lit up," the papers quoted the locals as saying. No casualties were reported, possibly because the area where the UFO landed, was deserted. Uranium-rich Baghalchor in NWFP is out- of-bound area and Rounghin has a scattered and thin population. ** Copyrights � 2000 The Hindu & Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu & Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. indiaserver.com Copyright � 2000 Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. All rights reserved worldwide. Indiaserver is a trademark of Tribeca Internet Initiatives 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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997 From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 04:27:47 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:14:05 -0400 Subject: COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997 Interesting, though the post doesn't prove unambiguously that the timing is anything, but coincidence, and it is not true, that no major Western news media have mentioned COMETA's report. French media and articles in the Boston Globe and the Irish Times have discussed it thoroughly. Stig *** Subject: Strange Timing: Intel Agency and COMETA Report//Very curious indeed! Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:11:04 -0700 From: "Sir Arthur Wholeflaffer A.S.A." <smcqueen@cyberhighway.net> Organization: Progressive Concerned Ufologists [PCU] Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo, alt.ufo.reports, alt.alien.visitors, alt.alien.research CIA VS. COMETA -- OPPOSING VIEWS, STRANGE TIMING The public release in mid-July of a strongly pro-UFO assessment from a committee of high ranking French military officers and scientists, reported in the August 1 edition of CNI News, has been met with deafening silence from the U.S. government, military and news media. But the French committee, known as COMETA, included members of such impressive rank and authority that its UFO assessment can hardly be ignored as the work of crackpots or mere enthusiasts. According to Bernard Thouanel, editor at VSD magazine, which published the public edition of the report, COMETA originally directed their assessment only to the top level of the French government, and only afterward consented to a public release. Thouanel said he was not at liberty to say more at this time, but that he had very high confidence in the information he had received. He said he assumed it would be some months before the French government made a formal, visible response to the COMETA recommendations. A strong response would seem warranted, given COMETA's findings. Their assessment unequivocally states that some UFOs appear to represent physical technology of unknown origin; that the extraterrestrial hypothesis may be the best explanation in some cases and must not be dismissed; and that UFOs represent a matter of serious international security concern demanding coordinated global monitoring, study and response. No major news media in the United States, Britain or other western nations outside France have reported COMETA's findings. But a possibly related story appeared on August 17, 1999 in the British publication Electronic Telegraph. Headlined "X-Files version of history is backed by CIA report," the story summarized a recent historical review of UFO studies undertaken by the CIA during the period 1947 to 1990. The CIA report, written by the agency's then-historian Gerald K. Haines, was originally released following its completion in 1997. At the time, it drew fire from several UFO researchers including Stanton Friedman and Bruce Maccabee, who were quick to note numerous inaccuracies and questionable claims -- for example, the claim that more than half of all U.S. UFO reports of the late 1950s and 1960s could be accounted for as sightings of the then top-secret reconnaissance planes U-2 and SR-71. But after a brief round of controversy, the report faded into obscurity. Now, according to Electronic Telegraph writer Michael Smith, Haines' CIA report has resurfaced, this time at the request of a British academic journal, "Intelligence and National Security," which is publishing the full text in their current summer edition. As a possible exercise in low-key spin control, the timing of this republication may be more than coincidental. In the words of Michael Smith, Haines' "highly critical report describes often bitter debates between real-life X-Files investigators who believed that 'the truth is out there' and their sceptical bosses. It records tales of bumbling undercover agents whose activities fuelled a widespread belief that the government was covering up what the agency described as 'extra-terrestrial visitations by intelligent beings'.... While the CIA investigations eventually concluded that all the sightings could be explained, the report concludes that 'misguided' attempts to keep them secret led to widespread belief of a government cover-up," Smith says. Haines himself states that his historical review of the CIA's UFO involvement was commissioned at the end of 1993 by then-Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) R. James Woolsey. In Haines' words, "In September 1993 John Peterson, an acquaintance of Woolsey's, first approached the DCI with a package of heavily sanitized CIA material on UFOs released to UFOlogist Stanton T. Friedman. Peterson and Friedman wanted to know the reasons for the redactions. Woolsey agreed to look into the matter." (It is likely that the man Haines calls Peterson is John Petersen, a noted futurist who has occasionally written on the potentially huge impact of human contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. See, for example, his book "Out of the Blue," Arlington Institute 1997, p. 44f.) Also influencing Woolsey's action may have been his private meeting at about the same time with CSETI's Dr. Steven Greer. The resulting report by Haines shows that the CIA took the UFO subject very seriously during the period 1947 through the early 1950s, and thereafter maintained a moderate and somewhat sporadic interest in the subject at least through the end of the 1980s (and very probably to the present moment). At the same time, however, Haines says that CIA officials were adamant about keeping the public unaware of any agency interest in the UFO controversy. "Air Force and CIA officials agreed that outside knowledge of Agency interest in UFOs would make the problem more serious. This concealment of CIA interest contributed greatly to later charges of a CIA conspiracy and coverup." The full text of Haines' study can be seen at http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclas/ufo.html. The differences between COMETA's new UFO assessment and Haines' chronicle of CIA shenanigans are so stark, and the resurfacing of Haines' report is so neatly juxtaposed with COMETA's release, that one can only wonder if more than coincidence is at work. On one hand, COMETA earnestly insists that UFOs are a serious matter demanding international attention. Not incidentally, COMETA calls attention to the strong appearance of official U.S. government disinformation with regard to some alleged UFO incidents, notably Roswell. On the other hand, Gerald K. Haines paints an "official" historical picture of CIA bungling and dissension within the agency on how to handle the UFO problem. This long-running pattern of confusion and obfuscation naturally led to public suspicions of cover-up, he concedes. But behind it all, UFOs were repeatedly and unanimously found to represent nothing of security concern; nor were they judged to be scientifically inexplicable; nor likely to be of off-planet origin. From 1953 on, the CIA was far more concerned about public hysteria over UFOs than about the UFO phenomenon itself -- or so goes the official story. In other words, bungling aside, the CIA's alleged assessment of UFOs is in complete contradiction with that of COMETA.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:12:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:19:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:40:50 -0700 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Just out of interest, how many researchers have asked for the >above data? And have any of those who have been shouting out >loud on here, approached you for it yet? Well I stated I was interested and as yet have heard nothing. Also Roy, I don't seem to have had any answers to my questions yet. Now where have I heard that before? Cheers Rory Lushman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:37:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:24:21 -0400 Subject: UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition UFOIN announce abduction research competition The UFO Investigators Network - UFOIN - has decided to initiate a debate on the best ways to further investigation and research into alleged 'alien abduction' cases. This has become the subject of intense discussion and considerable debate, with many people seeking to determine the best means to further investigation. As such we thought it would be a good idea to see what suggestions for new directions of work might be offered by the UFO community around the world. The policy of the UFOIN team is set out in our Code of Practice (published in full on the web site listed below). This offers protection to the witness at all times. It also includes a total ban on the use of contentious (and in our view risky and scientifically tainted) techniques such as regression hypnosis. But we are not opposed to more objective methods of close encounter investigation and keen to consider new ways that might progress this field beyond where it is today. To this end - and to give an incentive for you all to think this through - we have decided to launch a competition entitled: 'New Directions in Alleged Alien Abduction Investigation and Research'. What we ask you to do is to submit (by e-mail only) a paper with that title. It should set out your own personal ideas on what Ufology could - and should - be doing, but, as yet - seemingly - is not doing, in order to progress investigation and research into alien abduction reports. There is no required bias in terms of any theory that may, or may not, lie behind the proposal. Any projects based on the ETH will be as welcome as those built around psycho-social or sceptical perspectives. The only criteria we require is that the papers be well thought out, objective and amenable to ready scientific implementation. They should also not offer proposed research directions that violate the UFOIN code. The deadline for submission is 30 September 2000. All entries will remain the copyright of the person writing them, but by entering you must accept that these will all be published on receipt by the UFOIN web site. In addition they will be located here so that they may be quoted from, or used by, all other researchers around the world without restriction. Because the purpose of this competition is to stimulate new avenues in research we want your ideas to be widely circulated. Those viewing the papers as they are published on the UFOIN web site can use the contact e mail address there given to pass comment as new entries are posted. Then - during the first week in October - we will ask you to post your nomination for the best submitted paper that has been included on the site. Your votes, plus the votes of the UFOIN team, will in equal proportion determine the winner that is selected. This will be named on the UFOIN site and posted to other major internet lists around 7 October. We are pleased to announce that the prize for this competition is a package of abduction related material. The main part of the package has been generously donated by Dr David Gotlib - who has given his support to this venture and who will read all submitted papers. This is a copy of his invaluable CD ROM collecting all editions (l990 - l994) of his scientifically orientated abduction journal the BAE - Bulletin of Anomalous Experience. This will prove a vital asset to all serious investigators and researchers in this field. The prize package will also include a copy of two books containing abduction related material - 'UFOs and Ufology' - by Peter Brookesmith and Paul Devereux (Blandford, l997) and Jenny Randles' 'The complete book of aliens and abductions' (Piatkus, 2000). Thank you for your time and we look forward to seeing your ideas. Entry Details: All entries should be submitted by e mail (maximum length 1000 words, preferred length approximately 500 words) to: UFOIN Abduction Competition atnufon@currantbun.com The UFO Investigators Network (UFOIN) is a team of 20 experienced UFO investigators who are working together to investigate high strangeness cases to rigourous standards. You can find more about the work of the team on the UFOIN web site at: www.ufoin.org.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 > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:44:35 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:28:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale >From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 08:24:39 +0100 >No objections Roy, just interested as to why you are giving this >book so much attention and not any others. Hello Rory, Anyone wishing to advertise their product on my site, are welcome to approach myself at anytime, obviously this is not a free service as I have to maintain the site myself. As for Chris and his book, I have known Chris for some time, and he is very local to me' so when his book arrived we discussed on how to get it out to the public and the ufo community, the web is just one outlet for this. >Also, in all the excitement, you forgot to answer my previous >questions. Although I have advertised Chris martins book to a degree, I feel that some of your questions concerning Close encounters etc.. would be best answered by Chris himself. Perhaps you may already have these questions in mind for the Leeds Conference. Best for now, Roy.. http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/UFOResearch.html - For your UFO Research Downloads.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 > Aug > Aug 30 'UpDates' Off-Line Until Friday P.M. From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:31:21 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:31:21 -0400 Subject: 'UpDates' Off-Line Until Friday P.M. This is the last message posted until Friday evening [Eastern] Please, don't send 'Have I Been Un-Subscribed?' messages. In fact, please hang on to all responses until Friday evening. Thanks, ebk